Manipulation Nation
April, 2007
 


Who's Manipulating Whom in the News?



"Will and Grace" Financial Manipulation Lawsuit Settled (posted 4-29-07) 
The creators of the "Will and Grace" television show settled a multi-million dollar lawsuit on Friday that they had filed against NBC Studios. The amount of the settlement was not disclosed.

NBC Studios had agreed to provide creators David Kohan and Jason "Max" Mutchnick a profit- sharing agreement as a major portion of their pay for work they did on the series. The lawsuit says that NBC violated its agreement in the following ways (partial list):

1. The contract stated that NBC would pay each of the show's creators at least as much as it would pay anyone else involved with the show.  This turned out not to be the case.
2. Initial production costs were put on the books at $68 million, which was an inflated figure. 
3. NBC Studios' sale of rights for the show to its sister company, the NBC Network, was below fair market value for Seasons 5, 6, & 7.
4. Ratings bonuses for the show's main director were improperly deducted from profit-sharing payments due to Kohan and Mutchnick.

The jury determined that Kohan and Mutchnick were due $48.5 million, but a settlement was reached before the award could be announced.
Yahoo News (4-27-07)
HollywoodReporterEsq.com article by Leslie Simmons (2-7-07)

David_Kohan_and_Max_Mutchnick.jpg
Photo of David Kohan & Max Mutchnick from imdb.com

Former CIA Director Implies Bush Wanted to Attack Iraq (posted on 4-27-07)
Former CIA director George Tenet has charged in a new book that the Bush administration took the nation to war without ever conducting a serious discussion of whether Iraq was an imminent threat. In addition, he stated that, to his knowledge, no alternative views of containing Saddam Hussein besides "regime change" were discussed.

Dick Cheney has said in the past that Tenet's use of the term "slam dunk" to describe whether a case could be made that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction was a significant factor in the president's decision to invade. While acknowledging that he used the term, Tenet said that he used it in expressing his opinion that a White House presentation he saw about the need to invade Iraq could be made more convincingly.
New York Times article by Scott Shane and Mark Mazzetti (4-26-07)

George_Tenet.jpg
Photo of George Tenet from meib.org

Jessica Lynch Says Army Lied in Portraying Her as "Rambo" (posted on 4-25-07) 
Jessica Lynch was a 19-year-old private who was taken prisoner during an ambush in the early days of the US invasion of Iraq. The Army described her as a one-woman killing machine who was captured while firing at the enemy. Instead, she said, in a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing, she was simply riding in a truck at the time.

She said, "I am still confused as to why they chose to lie and tried to make me a legend when the real heroics of my fellow soldiers that day were, in fact, legendary."  
guardian.co.uk article by Ewen MacAskill (4-25-07)

Lynch is apparently unaware that the military is in the advertising and promotion business, selling the war to the American public so that it can attract more funding and recruits.

Jessica_Lynch_1.jpg
Photo of Jessica Lynch from salon.com

Head of US General Services Administration Uses Government Resources to Back Republican Agenda (posted on 4-23-07)
Senators Byron Dorgan (D-ND) and Ron Wyden (D-OR) today publicly called for the resignation of Government Services Administration (GSA) head Lurita Doan. The GSA is in charge of federal government purchasing.  Doan is a political appointee who has allegedly used her office to remove several career negotiators from their positions for not giving a contract to Sun Microsystems, a large Republican donor. She then gave Sun the contract, reportedly at an additional cost of $5 million to the taxpayers.

Doan also dramatically cut the budget for the Office of the GSA Inspector General, which investigates waste, fraud, and abuse.

Twenty-five Democratic senators today signed a letter to White House chief-of-staff Josh Bolten, asking for an explanation for a meeting Doan apparently organized that had a high ranking White House political insider make a presentation to her staff on Republican goals for the 2008 election. At the meeting, she reportedly asked her team what they might do to help get "our candidates elected." Presumably, she was suggesting they give purchasing contracts to Republican donors that weren't the low bidder.
wyden.senate.gov (4-23-07)
tpmmuckraker.com article by Paul Kiel (4-23-07)

Lurita_Doan.jpg
Photo of Lurita Doan from gsa.gov

Alec Baldwin Angrily Disparages Daughter in Voice-Mail Diatribe (posted on 4-21-07)
Actor Alec Baldwin, irritated that his daughter, Ireland, did not answer the telephone when he called at an apparently pre-arranged time, unleashed his rage on her in a several minute long voice-mail in which he called her a "rude, thoughtless little pig."

He also asserted that "You don't have the brains or the decency as a human being--- I don't give a damn that you are 12 or 11 or a child or that your mother is a thoughtless pain in the ass who doesn't care what you do."

In an apology released yesterday, Baldwin said "I'm sorry for losing my temper with my child. I have been driven to the edge by parental alienation for many years now. You have to go through this to understand."

Baldwin and Basinger are engaged in a bitter custody dispute five years after their divorce. Baldwin claims that Basinger has blocked his visitation rights and also his right to speak with his daughter on a number of occasions.
metimes.com (4-21-07)
Yahoo News (4-21-07)
MonstersandCritics.com (10-5-06)

Alec_Baldwin.jpg
Photo of Alec Baldwin from MonstersandCritics.com

Attorney General Provides Lessons on How Not to Fire Employees
(posted on 4-20-07)
Yesterday US Senators on the Judiciary Committee grilled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales on why he fired 8 of the 93 US Attorneys.  Here is what we learned:

1.  Gonzales asked his chief-of-staff, Kyle Sampson, to provide him with a list of names of people to be replaced. 
2.  Gonzales did not lay out a process to be used and Sampson did not manage the project in a formal, organized way.  He kept few notes. 
3   Over a two year period, senior staff at the Department of Justice provided Sampson with complaints they received, which were primarily from Republicans who didn't approve of who the attorneys were prosecuting.
4.  Sampson heard about people's complaints but didn't hear the attorneys' side of the story.
5.  When Sampson provided Gonzales with the list of names to be fired, Gonzales did not ask or learn why the attorneys were put there.  He said he was "not surprised" that most of the names passed onto him were there and so he moved forward without additional input.
6.  Gonzales didn't tell the attorneys that he had concerns about their performance, which would have given them a chance to change how they were doing their jobs to please him.
7.  Gonzales did not call any of them personally to tell them they were fired.  When they were called, none of the attorneys were given reasons.  The majority of them had been given excellent performance evaluations.
8.  At least five of the seven fired on 12/7/06 had investigations going on that the administration was not happy about or had not prosecuted Democrats who the administration wanted prosecuted.
9.  The attorney who was fired prior to 12/7/06 was let go in order to be replaced by a protege of Karl Rove.

Is there irony that the Department of Justice runs based on evidence but that standard was not applied to firing their own employees?
c-span.org (4-19-07)
Alberto_Gonzales.jpg
Photo of Alberto Gonzales from VoltaireNet.org

Bush Nominates Corporate Lobbyist to Head Consumer Product Safety Commission (posted on 4-19-07)
President Bush has nominated Michael Baroody, who has spent the last 13 years lobbying to eliminate product safety laws, to head the Consumer Product Safety Commission.  As executive vice president of the National Association of Manufacturers, Baroody has overseen its efforts to limit medical malpractice awards, make it more difficult for to use class action lawsuits, prevent government agencies from suing companies that engage in illegal activities, and limit companies' liability from unsafe products and practices.

The attempt to hire a person with a background like this to head a federal regulatory agency engaged in helping consumers remain safe likely means that the president (a) wants to hamstring the commission, or (b) he wants to reward a loyal Republican. 
citizen.org (4-07)

Irony for Sale: AT&T and Microsoft Urge Justice Department to Nix Google Acquisition (posted on 4-17-07)
AT&T, whose monopoly was broken up by the federal government in 1984, and Microsoft, which has been investigated and sued by both the US government and the European Commission for anti-competitive practices, are asking the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission to stop Google's purchase of DoubleClick ad agency.

DoubleClick is the nation's leading supplier of digital advertising services and Google has the largest network of advertising partners on whose space ads can be placed. Together, they would have large economies of scale and a unique ability to both create and place ads quickly and easily on the Internet. This would allow Google to create ads that better take advantage of what it has learned about people who click on its sites.
LA Times editorial (4-17-07)
Forbes.com (4-16-07)

LAPD Asks for and Receives $50,000 from Philip Morris for Counterfeit Cigarette Investigation (posted on 4-16-07)
Chief Bill Bratton of the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) recently solicited and received $50,000 from Philip Morris USA to help pay for an investigation into the distribution and sale of some of its brands' counterfeit cigarettes.

There is concern that if corporations provide funding for the police, the city will come to rely on those funds more, and less taxpayer funds become available.  The LAPD has a severe shortage of officers and this opens the door to people and corporations receiving police services like Congress receives lobbyists, where the police provide the best service to those who pay them the most money.
LA Times article by Patrick McGreevy (4-15-07)

William_Bratton.jpg
Photo of Bill Bratton from MilkenInstitute.org

US Attorney in New Mexico Appears to Have Been Fired for Political Reasons (posted on 4-15-07)
New Mexico Senator Pete Domenici was the driving force behind the firing of US Attorney David Iglesias, according to the Albuquerque Journal. Domenici wanted Iglesias to indict a Democrat in a tight New Mexico congressional race prior to the 2006 election, but Iglesias did not think it was proper.

Domenici tried to get Iglesias moved into a different position in the Justice Department, but he wouldn't take it.  Then the Senator asked Alberto Gonzales to fire Iglesias but Gonzales refused. So Domenici went to Karl Rove about the issue and later spoke to President Bush in a telephone meeting.
abqjournal.com article by Mike Gallagher (4-15-07)

Senator Domenici had no business seeking the removal of David Iglesias. Once a US attorney is placed in office, he cannot be removed just because a politician doesn't like who he does and does not choose to prosecute. However, Domenici appears to think differently behind the scenes than he does in public. 

David_Iglesias.jpg
Photo of David Iglesias from ncjrs.gov

Wolfowitz Manipulates World Bank Rules for His Girlfriend's Benefit (posted on 4-13-07) 
President Bush appointed Paul Wolfowitz, one of the key architects of the Iraq War, to be president of the World Back, in spite of his lack of qualifications. Now, Wolfowitz has used his position to secure a higher level job for his girlfriend at the State Department at a higher salary than Condoleeza Rice gets. Shaha Riza had previously worked at the World Bank, but both she and Wolfowitz were violating its rules forbid couples from working together.

This is not the first controversial personnel decision Wolfowitz has made at the World Bank. He violated bank policy by promoting another Bush administration political appointee, Kevin Kellems, to a directorship position and making him a Senor Advisor. Directors at the World Bank report to vice-presidents and never are supposed to serve as Senior Advisors to the president of the Bank. Kellems previously served as Dick Cheney's communications director and spokesman.

Wolfowitz also hired Robin Cleveland, an authoritarian figure who regularly offends people she talks to. Cleveland was a long-time aide to Senator Mitch McConnell, one of George W. Bush's biggest supporters on the War in Iraq.
guardian.co.uk article by Richard Adams (4-13-07)
TheWashingtonNote.com article by Steve Clemons (4-12-07)
TheWashingtonNote.com article by Steve Clemons (1-20-06)

Paul_Wolfowitz_1.jpg
Photo of Paul Wolfowitz from fiscalstudy.com

Imus Finally Gets What He Has Deserved for So Long (posted on 4-12-07)
When Don Imus described the Rutgers women's basketball team as "nappy-headed hos," he thought he was making just one more disparaging characterization of people in the spotlight.

Criticism and judgment are such a large part of his persona that he didn't get that this time he was going too far in making fun of a group of vulnerable young African American women who had over-achieved in ascending to the national stage through hard work. His depiction over the public airwaves of the women as tough, unattractive blacks who were making earning money in the world's oldest profession belied not only their basketball skills, but also their academic and musical talents, which were described at a press conference on Tuesday.

Imus is an example of a man who has made a career of put-downs and criticism and is finally paying for his sins. People will take negativity and judgment for only so long before they finally start fighting back.  And now they're taking him down.

Don_Imus.jpg
Photo of Don Imus from voccoquan.com

Badly Planned Iraq War Stretches Military (posted on 4-11-07)
Four more National Guard brigades (1500-to-3500 troops) have been called up and five regular army brigades may have their one year duty increased by as much as four months. The National Guard brigades won't be sent until December.

As of now, the troop surge ordered by President Bush in January will last through August. The Army has already sent two brigades back into combat without their normal one year respite.
 
When a state's National Guard is sent to Iraq, their vehicles and equipment normally go with them. Florida has about 650 National Guard members in Iraq, along with 500 Humvees, 600 trucks, and needed supplies. If a major hurricane hits the State, there may be less than an adequate number of troops and equipment to save lives.
latimes.com article by Peter Spiegel and Richard Simon (4-10-07) 
latimes.com article by the Associated Press (4-10-07)

Brave Choices
Top Democratic Candidates Choose Not to Debate on Fox "News"
(posted on 4-10-07)
Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have joined John Edwards in making the decision to not participate in any Democratic party debates on Fox "News." In spite of inevitable charges of appearing weak, the trio have concluded that:

--- Fox is significantly more interested in using what the candidates say as material for attacking them than in presenting their viewpoints.
--- If they participate in Democratic party debates on Fox, they legitimize the notion that Fox is "fair and balanced."
--- Their participation attracts more viewers to Fox.
Huffington Post article by Jim Kuhnhenn of the Associated Press (4-9-07)

The Three Largest So. Cal. Supermarket Chains Agree to Band Together in Case of Strike (posted on 4-6-07)
Albertson's, owned by Supervalue, Ralphs, owned by Kroger, and Vons, owned by Safeway, have all agreed to band together if the grocery clerks' union strikes against any one chain in Southern California.  Their agreement means that in case of a strike, all three chains will lockout their workers.  In addition, the chains will aid each other financially if one is hurt, though details were not disclosed.  The lockout by all three chains would significantly affect shoppers who do not want buy from stores whose employees are picketing. 

In 2003-2004, the chains took a hard line in negotiations due to the expected entrance of Wal-Mart into the "marketplace."  However, the threat never materialized.  This time, no reason has been publicly given.
dailynews.com article by Julia M. Scott (4-4-07)
latimes.com article by Alana Semuels (4-5-07)

Bush Appoints $50,000 Donor As Ambassador to Belgium While Senate is on Recess  (posted on 4-5-07)
Sam Fox, 77, whose main qualification appears to have been making a $50,000 donation to "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth," was appointed yesterday while the Senate was on recess as Ambassador to Belgium by President Bush. Bush had previously nominated Fox for the position but withdrew his nomination a week ago after strong opposition from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In 2004, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth worked to discredit John Kerry's military service during the Vietnam War. It's success in doing so contributed significantly to Bush's victory over Kerry. Since the election, the Swift Boaters' claims have been largely discredited.

Fox has donated over $1 million to Republican candidates and causes since 1990.
stltoday.com article by Philip Dine (4-5-07) 
cnn.com (4-4-05)

Sam_Fox.jpg
Photo of Sam Fox from stltoday.com

Bush Is A Little Too Anxious to Fund the War (4-5-07)
At his press conference on Tuesday, President Bush emphasized that it had now been 57 days since he sent Congress his request for more funds for the War in Iraq. He added, "It's irresponsible for the Democratic leadership in Congress to delay for months on end while our troops in combat are waiting for the funds.

However, he failed to mention that during the last Congressional session led by Republicans, his request for $82 billion for took 86 days to fund and and his request for $72 billion took 119 days to fund.

After the 119 day delay, he said "I applaud those Members of Congress who came together in a fiscally responsible way to provide much-needed funds for the War on Terror and continued Hurricane Katrina recovery, as well as for securing our border and protecting against a possible avian flu pandemic. Responding to these critical needs in a timely way is not easy, but it must be done if we are to fight terrorism, defend our homeland, enforce our borders, and fulfill our moral obligation to help our fellow Americans in need."
thinkprogress.org (4-3-07)
whitehouse.gov (6-15-06)

McCain Lies to Public About How Safe Baghdad Is (posted on 4-4-07)
Senator John McCain regularly goes on television and radio talk shows to tell people that Iraq is safer than most of us realize.  He mocked newsman Wolf Blitzer on CNN last week by telling him that Blitzer's attitude about Baghdad being dangerous was old news: "General Petraeus goes out there almost every day in an unarmed Humvee.  I think you ought to catch up.  You are giving the old line of three months ago."

In a recent radio interview, McCain said that "there are neighborhoods in Baghdad where you and I could walk through those neighborhoods, today." 

However, this past week, when he walked through the streets of Baghdad with General Petraeus, he was surrounded by about one hundred armed US soldiers and covered by three helicopters. When a reporter spoke to General Petraeus' spokesman, he learned that the General "never goes out in anything less than an up-armored Humvee."  Retired General Barry McCaffrey just returned from Iraq and said in a report that no Iraqi government official, coalition soldier, diplomat, reporter, foreign NGO, nor contractor can walk the streets of Baghdad, nor Mosul, nor Kirkuk, nor Basra, nor Tikrit, nor Najaf, nor Ramadi -- without heavily armed protection."

After his walk through Baghdad, Senator McCain was asked for his assessment of the situation there.  He replied by saying "Things are getting better in Iraq, and I am pleased with the progress that has been made."
"Situation Room" transcript (3-27-07)
salon.com article by Tom Grieve (3-28-07)
salon.com article by Tom Grieve (4-2-07)

John_McCain.jpg
Photo of John McCain from fullcircle.typepad.com

Pharmaceutical Industry and Federal Government Conspire to Defraud the Public (posted on 4-2-07)
The pharmaceutical industry currently spends $100 million annually for campaign contributions and lobbying activities to build and protect its profits. The best example of this is the Medicare prescription drug bill, passed 3 1/2 years ago by a Republican Congress and signed by President Bush.

This law prohibits the federal government from negotiating on behalf of seniors, allowing companies to charge US citizens more money than people in any other country. It also allows drug companies to continue to raise prices over time. The Veterans Administration, because it negotiates on behalf of veterans, is able to secure significantly lower prices than seniors for the same drugs.

Prior to their vote, Congress was told that the projected cost of the bill was $395 billion over 10 years. However, the Medicare Chief Actuary, Richard Foster, later told Congress that he revised this number to $534 million before the vote; but the head of the Medicare program for the government, Tom Scully, told him to withhold the new estimate if he wanted to keep his job. At the same time, Scully was negotiating a job for himself at a Washington law firm as a high-powered lobbyist. He took the job about ten days after President Bush signed the bill into law. A minimum of 15 congressmen, staffers, and federal officials who worked on the Medicare bill have since left to go to work for the pharmaceutical industry.

Since the new Democratic Congress took over in January, the House has passed a bill to require that the federal government negotiate on behalf of seniors. However, the drug industry is spending millions of dollars in the Senate to try to defeat it, and even if it passes, President Bush says he will veto it.
"60 Minutes" transcript (4-1-07)

Enough Is Enough!
Matthew Dowd, Top Bush Adviser, Publicly Breaks With President
(posted on 4-1-07)
Matthew Dowd, one President Bush's top campaign strategists in 2004, has publicly announced that he has split with the president. In particular, Mr. Dowd stated the following:
--- The president shows continued intransigence on the War in Iraq.
--- Bush has not called for a shared sacrifice. 
--- He didn't hold high ranking people accountable for the problems at Abu Ghraib.
--- He governs with a "my way or the highway" approach.
--- His circle of advisers is too small.
--- His handling of Hurricane Katrina was poor.
--- His happily entertained Lance Armstrong around the same time he refused to meet with Cindy Sheehan.
--- His re-nomination of John Bolton as UN ambassador after the Democrats had not confirmed him showed an unwillingness to work with them.
NY Times article by Jim Ruttenberg (4-1-07)

Matthew_Dowd.jpg
Photo of Matthew Dowd from SimonSays.com


Manipulation Nation

Manipulation Information



Privatization Is Growing Exponentially (posted on 4-30-07)
Federal, state and local governments are now busy selling off their infrastructure to meet immediate budget shortfalls at the expense of increased fees that users will pay for many years to come. Airports, shipping ports, utilities, bridges, and roads are amongst the items being privatized for immediate cash.

The new owners, many of them foreign investors with dollars built up from years of trade surpluses with the US, are becoming monopolists with the leverage to raise prices to levels they need in order to make a sizable return.  Private organizations, which don't have to answer to taxpayers, are also freer to enact flexible pricing schedules, such as charging higher amounts to drivers who use toll roads during peak hours.

Not only are budget shortfalls motivating privatization, but so is the need for maintenance. In 2007, federal, state, and local governments need to spend about $155 billion just to maintain highways and bridges.

There is reason for concern about the quality of the upkeep of infrastructure that is purchased.  Quality performance is not easily quantifiable; but even when it is, all contracts will not be written so that governments and new asset-holders will agree on whether appropriate maintenance is being provided. In addition, governments won't necessarily have the leverage to be able to enforce quality standards. Since leases typically run from 25-to-100 years, it will sometimes be difficult for governments to regain control. This is especially true since much of the infrastructure that is purchased is likely to be re-sold several times over the terms of the leases.

Over the past two years, about $7 billion in public infrastructure was privatized; in the next two years, close to $100 billion is expected to be brought in.
Business Week article by Emily Thornton (5-7-07 magazine issue date)

Alternative Minimum Tax Now Impacts 23 Million Taxpayers in Mostly Blue States (posted on 4-28-07)
The Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) was passed in 1969, targeting 155 of the highest income households in the United States that paid little or no federal income taxes. However, because the AMT is not indexed to inflation nor is affected by President Bush's recent tax cuts, a rapidly increasing number of taxpayers are now impacted. In 2005, about 3.4 million taxpayers paid the AMT instead of their regular tax burden; in 2006, 23 million taxpayers paid it.

The burden of the AMT is most often shouldered by people in states with high state income taxes because these taxes are not deductible under the AMT. These states include California, New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Maryland, which by no coincidence, all vote Democratic.

The AMT also can adversely affect married couples, people with kids, homeowners, and people with large amounts of medical expenses because exemptions and deductions for these items do not affect it.

Because of the AMT, it is expected that mostly middle-class taxpayers will pay about one trillion dollars in additional federal income taxes over the next ten years.
wikipedia.org
tonawanda-news.com (4-25-07)
Seattle Pilot article by Mary Deibel from the Scripps Howard News Service (1-17-04)

Some Big Lies from the Administration of George W. Bush (posted on 4-27-07)
1.  Saddam Hussein is a threat to the United States.
2.  America is fighting for the freedom of the the Iraqi people.
3.  We have to fight them there so we don't have to fight them here.
4.  Iraq is the central front of the War on Terror.
5.  Joe Wilson was sent on a junket to Niger by his wife.
6.  Eight US Attorneys were asked to resign for performance reasons (seven on one day).

The "Big Lie" (posted on 4-26-07)
The "Big Lie" is a term first used defined by Hitler to describe a lie so monstrous that people believe that no one would have the gall to tell it if it weren't true.  The phrase was also used in a report by the United States' government in describing the psychology Hitler used to manipulate the population. 

The report stated that "His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; and people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one."
One of Hitler's best propagandists, Friz Kippler, said that two steps needed to be taken to get the majority of the population to believe a Big Lie. First, an issue needed to be reduced to a black-or-white choice that almost everyone could understand. Second, that oversimplification needed to be repeated over and over.

Hitler convinced Germans that the Polish people were being abused by a tyrant who would someday threaten Germany. He then invaded Poland and started World War II.  In addition, of course, he convinced Germans that Jews were the cause of Germany's problems.
wikipedia.org
thenation.com article by Robert Scheer (11-16-05)
CommonDreams.org article by Thom Hartmann (8-26-04)

Republicans Find Ways to Suppress Certain Groups of Voters (posted on 4-21-07)
Our society makes voting difficult or uncomfortable for minorities, convicted felons, legal immigrants, and other groups that often have low incomes.  Most people in these categories are Democrats. 

Republican political operatives sometimes work to lower the turnout amongst the groups in our society that are most vulnerable to intimidation. These are primarily low-income earners and others with the most to lose in a potential confrontation with the law.
The biggest barriers to registering voters are proof-of-citizenship requirements. Many low-income people do not have easy access to these documents.

Any rules that require drivers' licenses for identification eliminate about 12% of potential voters. These people primarily consist of minorities, senior citizens, students, and others with low incomes.

Long lines at the polls also suppress voters. In the 2004 election, many voters spent over an hour in line, while voters in Ohio sometimes waited four or more hours.  These lines were almost all in low-income and minority districts.

Voting rules vary from state to state.  No democracy in the world besides the United States takes the right to vote from citizens that have completed their sentences.  While many countries, including Israel, France, Norway, and Denmark, allow felons in prison to cast votes, 48 states and the District of Colombia prohibit it in the US. Convicted felons in most states are not allowed to vote, even after they have been released from prison.  About 5.3 million Americans, most of them low-income or minority, are not able to vote in the US due to felony laws.
pfaw.org

Does Bush Try to Provoke Terror? (posted 4-19-07)
In his book, Conservatives Without Conscience, John Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, states that "Many people believe that neoconservatives and many Republicans appreciate that they are more likely to maintain influence and control of the presidency if the nation remains under ever-increasing threats of terrorism, so they have no hesitation in pursuing policies that can provoke potential terrorists throughout the world."

Many people also believe that Bush, Cheney, and other neocons gain in the same way when they boast to the world that "We haven't had a terrorist attack since 9/11."
Conservatives Without Conscience, by John W. Dean, Page 82, (2006)

Bush Uses Unprecedented Number of "Signing Statements" to Undermine Laws (posted on 4-17-07)
President Bush used signing statements to disobey more than 750 laws that were enacted in his first five years and three months office, all from a Republican Congress. In contrast, Bill Clinton did it 140 times in eight years, only two of them with a Democratic Congress.

Bush vetoed no bills during that period of time; instead, he signed them and then issued "signing statements," which tell the federal bureaucracy how to implement the new law. These signing statements tell the bureaucracy what to follow and what not to follow.

Legal scholars have determined that the scope and power Bush has assumed are an unprecedented attempt to expand his influence at the expense of Congress. Portland State University law professor Phillip Cooper said "There is no question that this administration has been involved in a very carefully thought-out, systematic process of expanding presidential power at the expense of the other branches of government. This is really big, very expansive, and very significant.

Bush has used signing statements on laws that have banned torture, required background checks on civilian contractors in Iraq, authorized Congress to receive information on FBI national security wiretaps, and offered protection to whistle-blowers at nuclear regulatory facilities. The president has used these signing statements to tell federal workers not to enforce these laws after he signed them.
Boston Globe article by Charlie Savage (4-30-07)

Bush's War Is Destroying the US Army (posted on 4-13-07)
Since President Bush chose to invade Iraq over four years ago, the Army has been steadily disintegrating.  Fewer and fewer people are re-enlisting, which puts added pressure on those who are there to get the job done.  The Army is meeting its recruiting goals, but only by taking recruits that they used to turn down.  Now they are taking more people who don't have high school diplomas, many more people who have committed felonies, and now are accepting recruits who range in age from 36-to-42.

The standard is for troops to be in combat for one year and back at their base for at least two.  Now, some units go back in less than a year.  All troops will now be deployed in combat for up to 16 months.  There is less time for training and less time for rejuvenation.  In addition, a shortage of equipment and armor means that when soldiers are deployed to Iraq they are not necessarily familiar with what they'll be using.

All this means more deaths, more physical injuries, and more psychological trauma.  About 170,000 troops have been deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan more than once.  Those soldiers chances of getting acute combat stress is 50% greater than those who are only deployed for one tour of duty.
This war is not only killing our troops; it's also killing our our Army.
Time Magazine article by Mark Thompson (4-5-07)

"Environmentalism, Bush Style" (posted on 4-12-07)
As April 15th approaches, more 2006 hybrid car buyers will be taking their tax credits.  Wired magazine calls it "environmentalism, Bush style."

Rather than offer greater tax credits to those who purchase the most fuel-efficient cars, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 offers more money to people who buy heavier, less-fuel efficient cars.  Buyers of hybrid SUVs get a bigger write-off, on average, than do buyers of the most fuel-efficient cars that are produced.  For example, the purchase of a Toyota Highlander Hybrid, which gets 33 miles per gallon, earns a $2600 credit, while a Honda Insight, which gets 57 miles per gallon, earns a $1450 tax credit.

The greatest write-offs are earned because of the fuel savings that hybrids get in comparison to cars of a similar weight.  This provides the incentive for automakers to continue making large cars, but to make them more fuel-efficient, rather than to simply make cars that get the best mileage.
wired.com article by John Gartner (10-11-05) 

Some Pharmacies Take Huge Markups on Generic Drugs (posted on 4-11-07)
When prescription drugs lose their patent protection, most competitors that sell the generic versions of those medicines sell them to pharmacies at a greatly reduced price. However, many large chains with pharmacies don't pass a significant part of those price decreases along to consumers.

Zocor, for example, designed to lower cholesterol and one of the most prescribed medications in the nation, lost its patent protection last June. Just one month ago, while a typical month's supply was priced in the $140-to-$160 range at the major chains, cvs.com and walgreens.com were selling the generic equivalent, Simvastatin for $80 and $90, respectively. Meanwhile, Sam's Club was selling the exact same product for $7 and CostCo was selling it for $12. CostCo told the "Wall Street Journal" that in can buy the product for $2.71.

Zoloft, an anti-depressant, is another good example. It also lost its patent protection last summer. While it ranged in price from about $75-to-$95 at the major chains one month ago, a typical one month supply of Sertraline, its generic equivalent, was selling at Wal-Mart for $56 and walgreens.com for $74. Sam's Club and CostCo were selling it profitably for about $6.

Why the big differences in price? CVS and Walgreen's claim that their "pricing model" requires them to make profits for their stores on drugs, while stores like Sam's Club and CostCo can make their profits on lots of other items. The reality is that CVS and Walgreen's are gouging the consumer because they can get away with it.

Unbelievably (pun intended), spokesmen for CVS and Walgreens told the Wall Street Journal that their profit margins on prescription drugs are 2-to-3 percent.
"Wall Street Journal"  by Sarah Rubenstein, Page D1 (3-13-07)

"Who Killed the Electric Car?" (posted on 4-10-07)
In 1996, General Motors introduced its first electric vehicle, called the EV1. GM leased out all of its EV1s, so no consumers owned them. Lessors loved them! They were maintenance-free, clean, and ran well.  In spite of their success, however, GM stopped renewing their last leases in 2004; and the last ones were shredded soon after they were returned.

Why did GM require people who wanted to re-lease their EV1s to return them to a dealership and subsequently shred them? Here are some theories:

GM would make a lot less money on parts because a lot less maintenance would be required for EV1s than vehicles with internal combustion engines.

Oil companies funded fake consumer groups that raised public questions about whether taxpayers should fun battery charging stations. These groups also raised questions in the media about whether there were real environmental benefits of electric vehicles.  These questions made GM think that demand was less than it was in reality.

Texaco purchased GM's battery technology patents to prevent competition.

In promoting a car that is clean, GM would be implicitly acknowledging that the cars that it makes the most amount of money from are dirty.

The California Air Resources Board mandated that in order to sell cars in the future in California, manufacturers would have to sell an increasing percentage with zero emissions.  GM hated those mandates.

Most of the large funds that own GM stock own a lot more oil company stock.  These funds put pressure on the GM board of directors to stop producing electric cars.
"Who Killed the Electric Car?" documentary (2006)
evi.org

Former White House Insider Says White House Manipulates Christians (posted on 4-9-07)
David Kuo, former deputy director of the Office of Faith-Based Initiatives at the White House, recently authored a book entitled "Tempting Faith." In the book, Kuo says that the Bush administration manipulates Christians to meet its political agenda.

According to Robert Altemeyer, a professor at the University of Manitoba who has researched and written extensively on authoritarians, we should not be surprised about what Kuo says.  Authoritarians generally show disdain for their their followers. They are able to look their supporters in the eye and lie convincing. Altemeyer says that "authoritarian leaders, when responding to research surveys, admit that manipulating others, exploiting the gullible, intimidating, cheating, and being a hypocrite are all justified if they get you what you want."

Both Democrats and Republicans lie and cheat, but research shows that Republican politicians are much more likely to dominate and manipulate their way to power. There are two reasons for this. First, Republicans believe in a strong president, military power, big business, the virtue of self-interest, and punishment/reward motivation, all of which flow out of authoritarianism. Second, the majority of followers with authoritarian tendencies are on the right side of the political spectrum, looking for leaders and role models. Many of these followers have grown up in religious households where adult authority was used to make decisions that affected family life. "Authoritarian followers," as they are called, often operate out of fear and will attack when their authorities tell them to.

Authoritarian followers, based on survey answers, are highly conventional, zealous, self-righteous, and religious. They also have a lot of fear in them, which leads to aggressiveness. According to Altemeyer, "One of the classic reactions to fear is to fight, and the followers will attack when their authorities tell them to." Ironically, by following authoritarian leaders, authoritarian followers end up with an amoral government run by people who keep telling them how wonderful they are (as long as they keep following their leaders).
BarbaraNY9.blogspot.com
Tempting Faith:  An Inside Story of Political Seduction, by David Kuo (2006)

David_Kuo_1.jpg
Photo of David Kuo from msnbcmedia4.msn.com

Professor/Researcher Finds That Large Majority of Authoritarians are Republicans
(posted of 4-6-07)
Robert Altemeyer, who has researched authoritarians for over thirty years, has found that they are almost always right-wingers. Most often, they are aggressive for the pure pleasure of it.  The are motivated by their beliefs that they are almost always right and that the world is a very dangerous place.  They have a propensity to attack others, both fairly and unfairly.

Altemeyer has divided authoritarians into two groups--- leaders and followers.  The leaders are usually men who are dominating, oppose equality, desirous of personal power, amoral, intimidating, vengeful, pitiless, exploitive, manipulative, dishonest, mean-spirited, create false images to sell themselves, and are usually politically and economically conservative Republicans.

The followers are both submissive to authority and aggressive on behalf of it, highly religious, with moderate to little education, trust untrustworthy authorities, prejudiced, intolerant, zealous, dogmatic, hypocritical, moralistic, severely punitive, demand loyalty and return it, have little self-awareness, and are usually politically and economically conservative Republicans.

Conservatives Without Conscience, by John W. Dean, Pages 66-69 (2006)
Robert_Altemeyer.jpg
Photo of Robert Altemeyer from bendweekly.com

President Bush Uses Doublespeak to Justify Troop Surge (posted on 4-5-07)
At his press conference on Tuesday, President Bush, showing that he will say almost anything to justify sending more troops into Iraq, declared that "The solution to Iraq - an Iraq that can govern itself, sustain itself, and defend itself - is more than a military mission. Precisely the reason why I sent more troops into Baghdad."
thinkprogress.org (4-3-07)

Leaders Instill Fear to Get the Public to Comply With Their Wishes (posted on 4-4-07)
Leaders everywhere use propaganda techniques to avoid telling the truth and to get the public to back its policies. Perhaps the most effective technique takes advantage of fear. When we are afraid of losing what we have, we are likely to do what our leaders tell us to do.

If we are afraid of being killed in a terrorist attack and our president tells us that if we knew everything he did we'd "be very afraid," we're likely to follow his recommendations for protecting ourselves. If, on the other hand, we are more afraid of losing our democracy, we are likely to do whatever we can to prevent that.

Leaders will try to push our emotional buttons by making us afraid and then tell us what to do to alleviate the fear.
PropagandaCritic.com

Republican Presidential Candidates Are Open to Arresting Citizens Without Charging Them (posted on 4-3-07)
When questioned recently about whether it was acceptable to arrest US citizens without without charging them with committing a crime, Rudy Giuliani said that he would want to use that authority infrequently. Mitt Romney is evidently open to the possibility, saying that he wasn't sure because he would want to hear the pros and cons before he makes up his mind. 

Winston Churchill, on the other hand, during World War II, when Britain's survival was at stake, said "The power of the executive to cast a man into prison without formulating any charge known to the law, and particularly to deny him judgment by his peers for an indefinite period, is in the highest degree odious, and is the foundation of all totalitarian governments whether Nazi or Communist."
salon.com article by Glenn Greenwald (4-1-07)

Manipulators Know How to Make People Feel Guilty (posted on 4-2-07)
Manipulators know that many other people have different consciences than they do and they use this knowledge to keep their victims feeling uncomfortable. They use techniques such as suggesting that their victims:
--- are being selfish
--- don't care enough
--- don't want it enough
--- think they're too good
--- aren't being fair

These techniques are most effective for manipulators when victims don't realize that their feelings are the result of techniques. Identifying them often dilutes their power. 
RickRoss.org




Techniques Manipulators Use



Bill O'Reilly Claims Poor Non-Whites Are Irresponsible and Lazy (posted on 4-28-07)
The Situation: Bill O'Reilly, host of the nationally syndicated show, "The Radio Factor," stated the following:

"Reagan was not a confrontational guy, didn't like confrontation, much rather be your pal ... doesn't want to get involved with the really nasty stuff, the tough stuff, and that's what racial politics is -- nasty and tough. ... It's hard to do it because you gotta look people in the eye and tell 'em they're irresponsible and lazy. And who's gonna wanna do that? Because that's what poverty is, ladies and gentlemen. In this country, you can succeed if you get educated and work hard. Period. Period."

The Manipulations: Here O'Reilly uses the "Big Lie" and oversimplification techniques. In telling a Big Lie, he audaciously asserts that all it takes other races to succeed is education and hard work. He completely ignores how much more difficult it is to grow up in a community where one's parents are not well-educated, don't have much money--- even to cover the basics, and live in an environment with many negative influences. Then he ignores the fact that even well-educated people are often not able to get good jobs that help them earn a decent living. Many college graduates with good social contacts and learned cultural skills can't get ahead, so what are the chances that a person who doesn't grow up in a good environment will be able to succeed? Whatever the probability, it's not a sure thing like O'Reilly states. 
MediaMatters.org (4-16-04)

Bill_OReilly_1.jpg
Photo of Bill O'Reilly from cbsnews.com

Limbaugh says Virginia Tech Killer "Had to Be a Liberal"
(posted on 4-22-07)
The Situation:  Radio commentator Rush Limbaugh, said: 

"If this Virginia Tech shooter had an ideology, what do you think it was?  This guy had to be a liberal.  You start railing against the rich and all this other--- this guy's a liberal.  He was turned into a liberal somewhere along the line.  So it's a liberal that committed this act."

The Manipulation: Limbaugh starts out with the word "if," and four sentences later, he concludes: "So it's a liberal that committed this act."  His evidence is that the shooter "railed against the rich." 

The Conclusion:  Limbaugh appears to be trying to turn a tragedy into a political act, but the logic and evidence probably wouldn't hold up in court!
mediamatters.org (4-19-07) 

Rush_Limbaugh.jpg
Photo of Rush Limbaugh from wikipedia.org

White House Deputy Press Secretary Says Democrats' Iraq Funding Position Is "So Unreasonable"
 (posted on 4-16-07)
The Situation:  At her daily press briefing today, Dana Perino, temporarily replacing Tony Snow, who is recovering from a cancer operation, was asked, "What is the outcome the president hopes to see at Wednesday's meeting (with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid) at the While House?"
Here is the text of her answer: 

"The president hopes to find out if the Democrats are going to be able to come together and resolve their differences and stop being so unreasonable1 and come to him at tell him how they're going to pass a clean bill2 that will get to his desk that will fund our troops. As you continue to hear from them, they are not consistent in their position3. They refuse to take arbitrary timetables off the table4 and other restrictions against our generals; and the president has said how he hopes they can come down here and get a clean bill to his desk. They've also said that they're not going to let the troops go without funding5 and so there has to be a reasonable discussion on Wednesday and the president hopes that that will be the beginning of that on Wednesday afternoon."

The Manipulations
1.  She is declaring that it's the Democrats that are being so unreasonable, not the president.  
2.  She isn't mentioning that the president didn't get clean bills for the previous six years. 
3.  The House and the Senate bills are not consistent because the two houses of Congress passed two similar, but different bills, and they haven't yet fully reconciled them yet.  
4.  The president has had four years to end this war; now he needs to be held accountable.  
5.  Both houses have passed bills that fund the troops in greater amounts than the president requested.  It is his choice whether he wants to veto them.
c-span.org White House Press Briefing (4-16-07) 

Dana_Perino.jpg
Photo of Dana Perino from chron.com

Internet Marketer Claims That We Can Place Our Own Google Ads Free (posted on 4-15-07) 
The Situation: An Internet entrepreneur is selling a product using a system that he claims has gotten him $87 million in free Google pay-per-click ads. While this may or may not be the case, one of the interesting techniques he uses to sell his "secret" is by answering frequently asked questions in his online sales letter. Here is one of them:

Q: Do I have to be some kind of technical "wizard" to use and apply your system?
A: Are you kidding? What would be the point of trying to sell you something it took a Harvard PhD in order to use?

The Manipulation: His answer warns us that we are being ridiculous if we ask a question like that. This kind of technique is used to prevent people from questioning his integrity, which is certainly open to question, given his claim.
getgoogleadsfree.com

Orrin Hatch Attacks Critics Using the Wrong Facts (posted on 4-6-07)
The Situation:Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) appeared on "Meet the Press" this past Sunday to defend Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who it appears fired up to eight US attorneys for political reasons.

Senator Hatch said the following about Carol Lam, one of the fired prosecutors:

"She was a former law professor, no prosecutorial experience, and the former campaign manager in Southern California for Clinton."

The Manipulation: The reality is that Carol Lam is not a former law professor; she has tremendous prosecutorial experience (14 years as an Assistant US Attorney in San Diego), was appointed by President Bush, and could not have worked as a campaign manager for President Clinton at the same time without violating the law, since she worked for the federal government as an attorney. It would have been a potential violation of the Hatch Act to do both. 

The Follow-up:
Orrin Hatch gave out inaccurate information on national television.  Then, yesterday, he wrote a letter to Tim Russert, moderator of "Meet the Press," saying that he "accidentally used her name, instead of her predecessor."  This is a "non-apology" apology, because he was talking about Carol Lam on the program, not her predecessor.  Since his apology is purposely inaccurate, it's not difficult to conclude that his original statement was purposely inaccurate.

The Conclusion:  Orrin Hatch demonstrated another way to manipulate. . . to lie.  Then, when he was caught, he apologized. . . but his apology, which tried to cover up what he originally said, was another lie.
AirAmericaRadio.com (4-4-04)
HuffingtonPost.com (4-5-07)

Orrin_Hatch.jpg
Photo of Orrin Hatch from media.washingtonpost.com

"Bush Logic" Says Funding Bills Don't Support Troops (posted on 4-3-07)
The Situation: Both houses of Congress have just passed bills to provide more funding for the troops than the president requested. However, while the bills were being debated, the president said he would veto them because he didn't want to comply with a timetable to withdraw the troops from Iraq as the bills require.

President Bush gave a speech today, stating the following:

"The bottom line is this: Congress's failure to fund our troops on the front lines will mean that some of our military families could wait longer for their loved ones to return from the front lines. And others could see their loved ones headed back to the war earlier than they need to. That is unacceptable to me, and I believe it is unacceptable to the American people."

The Manipulation: Clearly, since both houses of Congress have just passed bills to provide more funding for the troops than the president requested, if he chooses to veto legislation because he doesn't want to comply with a timetable to withdraw them from Iraq, he is the one who is failing to support them. Giving his intelligence the benefit of the doubt, he is purposely using convoluted logic for his own benefit.
tpmcafe.com article by Greg Sargent (4-3-07)

Senior Counselor to President Evades Question on War With Iran (posted on 4-3-07)
The Situation: Moderator Bob Schieffer interviewed Dan Bartlett, senior counselor to the president, on "Face the Nation" on Sunday after Iran boarded a British ship and took 15 sailors hostage. Here is an excerpt from their conversation: 

Bob Schieffer:  The president came down very hard on Iran yesterday.  He said there's no excuse for them taking these prisoners.  Are we about to get into a war with Iran here?
Dan Bartlett:  That's not what he was suggesting at all.  He is showing solidarity with the British government as they pursue a diplomatic resolution to the problem.

The Manipulation:  Dan Bartlett's main technique here is answering a different question than what was asked. Mr. Schieffer asked, "Are we about to get into a war with Iran?" Instead of answering "yes" or "no," Bartlett evaded the question by providing his interpretation of what Mr. Bush was trying to communicate. Bartlett is giving the interpretation intended for the American people. The correct interpretation of the same statement for President Ahmadinejad of Iraq is likely very different.
"Face the Nation" transcript Page 9 (4-1-07)

Dan_Bartlett_1.jpg
Photo of Dan Bartlett from msnbc.com

Just Asking

Has Bush Taken Advantage of People Who Signed Up for the National Guard? (posted 4-25-07)
Is it fair for people who signed up for the National Guard to be on call for disasters and emergencies to be sent to Iraq?

The American Flag is Flying Half-Mast in Afghanistan  (posted on 4-23-07)
Why do you think that the American flag is flying at half-mast in Afghanistan in honor of the 32 victims of the Virginia Tech killer but has not been flown at half-mast for the 315 Americans who have been killed there since our invasion?
canoe.ca (4-23-07)

Should Guns Be Allowed on College Campuses? (posted on 4-18-07)
In the aftermath of the Virginia Tech shootings, gun supporters are asserting that less people would have died if the State of Virginia had allowed students and faculty members to carry guns on their campuses. They think that someone in the classroom would have shot the attacker soon after he opened fire. While this is unlikely, there is no mention of the culture of fear that would be created nor the increased likelihood that students would be killed in other incidents.  Do you think society would be safer if we went back to the days of the Wild West where people were allowed to carry their own weapons?

Did You Know That Our Nation Has 30,000 Gun Deaths a Year? (posted on 4-18-07)
We changed our way of life when 3000 people were killed on 9/11/01.  Why doesn't 30,000 gun death per year change anything?
HuffingtonPost.com article by R.J. Eskow (4-18-07)