Sanity Anyone? ASSESSING JON STEWART (RT), POLITICS AS BUSINESS (Al Jazeera)

October 29th, 2010 - by: danny

Are We Saner Today Than We Were Yesterday? Could the Rally Have Done More to Connect with the Political Crisis? What now?

“Stewart Speaks: “This was not a rally to ridicule people of faith or people of activism or to look down our noses at the heartland or passionate argument or to suggest that times are not difficult and that we have nothing to fear. They are and we do. But we live now in hard times – not end times. And we can have animus and not be enemies.

But unfortunately, one of our main tools in delineating the two broke.

The country’s 24-hour political pundit perpetual panic conflictinator did not cause our problems, but its existence makes solving them that much harder. The press can hold its magnifying up to our problems, bringing them into focus, illuminating issues heretofore unseen – or they can use that magnifying glass to light ants on fire and then perhaps host a week of shows on the sudden, unexpected dangerous flaming ant epidemic.

If we amplify everything we hear nothing.‘

Some Photos To Share on Facebook.

Share Your Reactions On The Sanity Rally And March For Fear.

The Sanity Rally came and went. I was really hoping it could spark more than it did, given the failures of the left including the One Nation rally, and the implosion of the Democrats who seem to be running more on whats wrong with their opponents than what’s right with them.

Stewart often knows how to read the zeitgeist and expose the contradictions. The idea that he and Colbert were willing to leave the safe routines of their studios to go public was gutsy. I had hoped to be there but now am I am glad i watched on TV because I fear –and that’s my fear Stephen–nothinhg will come from this Mall Moment with all of its shticks and clever moments.

It was on target when it comes to the outrages of cable TV but a bit too formulaic in tossing in activsists (ie marxists) with the crazies on the right as if being nice and getting beyond our prejudices is enogh to prevail in this moment of exreme political polarization and right-wing relentlessness.

We needed more that a gathering of the tribe and a political Woodstock. I liked the music and some of the humor but it wasn’t enough. Many of the fans came in hopes of making a statement and getting recharged before next week’s erection; They were an audience, not really particpants in any unfolding process. There was barely a call to vote and get out the vote. Why?

Bob Parry asked, “Whether Stewart’s rally will have any lasting effect is another question. Is it possible that many Americans don’t want to be sane? Or put differently, are they addicted to the crazy?

Is watching the madness of Glenn Beck simply too much fun for many? Are Rush Limbaugh’s rants a way for listeners to feel better about their own personal grievances, by blaming the hated “liberals” or the “minorities” or some other scapegoats?”

Jon took us to the edge and left us there.

Politico: The rally was a comedic success but not necessarily a Democratic one.

I loved that A German car company was sponsoring this effort to sanitize America.

New York Times: At Rally, Thousands – Billions? – Respond
Crowds joined Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert for the “Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear.”

Washington Post report: Ho-Hum

The Guardian (UK) The targets were a lazy media and overheated debate,

WATCH: I AM INTERVIEWED ON RT ABOUT JON STEWART

New York Times, Yves Smith: How The Banks Put The Economy Underwater

Big News Sat: “Credible Threat” Pronounced. Suspect: Al Qaeda in Yemen

WP: Obama: Suspicious packages are a ‘credible terrorist threat’

Two packages mailed from Yemen and addressed to synagogues in Chicago contained explosive material and represented a “credible terrorist threat,” President Obama said Friday, as authorities focused their investigation on an increasingly lethal affiliate of al-Qaeda.

NYT: U.S. Hunts for More Suspicious Packages

The two packages seized in Britain and Dubai contained PETN, the same chemical explosive used in a foiled Christmas Day bomb plot last year. That plot was also hatched in Yemen.

Is the pre-election timing, or this disclosure on the day of the march for fear at all suspicious? Did the US expect that its escalated bombing attacks in Yemen would not lead to attempts at retribution? War is never a one way street.

About Those Packages That “credible terrorist threat” – coming just before Election Day.
By Ann Althouse
I didn’t know what to say as the story was unfolding yesterday. I had the thought – and I immediately censored myself – what does this have to do with Election Day?

The Real News Reports on Yemen

LISTEN: HERE’S THIS WEEK’S NEWS DISSECTOR RADIO SHOW WITH ELLEN BROWN, GREG PALAST, AARON KROWNE AND DISSECTRIX CHERIE WELCH.

Download this episode (right click and save)

NACLA: Bill Clinton Accused of Promoting Sweat Shops Over Homes in Haiti

READ: MY LATEST OPINION COMMENTARY ON THE AL JAZEERA ENGLISH WEBSITE

CASH AND CARRY: THE BUSINESS OF AMERICAN POLITICS AND POLITICS AS A BUSINESS

By Danny Schechter
Author of The Crime Of Our Time

New York: We live in a country in economic distress. Millions are out of work and cutbacks in public services are pervasive at the city and state levels. The ‘great recession’ is deep and could go deeper. Most families are tightening their belts and in some cases at the breaking point because their benefits have run out and money is so hard for many to find.

Hard to find, perhaps, for the people, but, curiously, not for their political representatives, their nominal public servants. Despite the fact that popularity for politicians, especially members of Congress, is at an all time low, campaign contributions are at an all time high. (A recent poll showed a majority of Americans want to toss out all incumbents)

The Washington Post reports, “House and Senate candidates have already shattered fundraising records for a midterm election and are on their way to surpassing $2 billion in spending for the first time, according to new campaign finance data.

To put it another way: That’s the equivalent of about $4 million for every congressional seat up for grabs this year.”

Think of that number, think of all the pressing needs in this country, and the world, and weep. But also think about why politics is so associated with, and seemingly dependent, on big bucks.

Some critics seem to believe there is no way to stop these practices because “the beast” must be fed.

“Candidates are raising more money in 2010 than ever before, and spending it at a much quicker pace than 2008,” said David Donnelly, director of the, Public Campaign Action Fund’s Campaign Money Watch project. “With all the attack ads, candidates have to spend more time dialing for dollars and less time talking with voters. They have to feed the beast — the endless raising and spending for campaigns — that is devouring our democracy.”

“Devouring” is a term often associated with beasts.

Donnelly adds, “Regardless of the outcome next Tuesday, the winners will be the big donors.”

There has been a big debate this year about the role corporations and to a lesser degree; unions have played in financing campaigns. The recent Citizen United Supreme Court decision makes it legal not to disclose where the money is coming from.

It’s been said that business is taking over politics.

As Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics which tracks political money, writes:

“When tens or hundreds of millions of dollars are targeting these midterm elections and our votes, but their origin is unknowable, one has to wonder whether someone isn’t trying to pull a fast one on us.

OK, so we get a disclaimer naming the coalition that runs an ad. Maybe that disclaimer names a group with some vague, innocuous-sounding moniker. Or it’s a group signaling that it has many “citizens” or “Americans” behind it. However, these groups often have no publicly known members, donors or contact info.”

Many are up in arms about the latest wave of “secret money,” some perhaps from overseas – including charges in one race in Washington State that the Saudis are involved.

The group Climate Action Network Europe released a new report revealing the effects of Big Business – all the way across the ocean – trying to weaken US environmental laws by backing climate change denialists.

They reported in part:

“Big European emitters Lafarge GDF-Suez, EON, BP, BASF, BAYER, Solvay and Arcelor-Mittal supported climate change deniers in the US Senate in 2010 for $107,200. Their total support for senators blocking climate change legislation in the US amounts to $240,200, which is almost 80% of their total spending in the 2010 Senate race. This is why those funds are seen as systemic. This amount is higher than the same type of spending of the most notorious U.S. climate denier and Tea Party funder: Koch Industries ($217,000).”

Overlooked in all the hoopla is the fact that American politics has itself become a business with a vast network of professional fundraising companies, consultants, advisors and ad agencies profiting from the services they provide in the competitive business at the center of all this. These people run permanent campaigns throwing fundraisers, parties and creating “giving” opportunities.

The politicians don’t just hire others. They spent much of their own time “dialing for dollars” as one Congressman I know well told me, in small rooms in the basement of the Congress where phone banks exist to call prospective donors from vast lists.

“Sometimes I just want to quit,” said my college friend.” I didn’t come to Washington to become a begger, but that’s what I do, harassing people I don’t know and don’t know me to give. Every Member does it because we all live in fear of the other party funding a primary race or buying ads to discredit us. We have to be ready to fight back.

The Post reports that Congressman is in the forefront of this effort to keep their jobs and influence. It’s not just about their salaries but their potential to supplement what the government pays them with outside donations.

“As of last week, House and Senate campaigns reported taking in more than $1.5 billion, exceeding the total collected by congressional candidates in 2006 and in 2008, Federal Election Commission data show. Most of that money already has been put toward advertising and other expenses.

The Public Campaign Action Fund, a watchdog group, will release a study Tuesday predicting that House candidates alone could spend nearly $1.5 billion by the time the dust settles on Election Day. The calculation is based on previous elections in which about half of a campaign’s money was spent in the final month of the contest.”

These candidates also have to kick back portions of their largesse to fund their own parties, helpers and bureaucracies. Many seem to see the campaign trail as a fundraising trail, speaking for fees and generating media visibility that they then can monetize with direct mail solicitations.

In some cases their donors and their lobbyists and well-funded think tanks even do their legislative work that in many by helping draft bills and orchestrate the political agenda. These “donations” of time are not considered contributions and also not reported making the cost of maintaining the political establishment much higher than funds raised in political contributions.

The political elite spends a disproprtionate amount of their time insuring that they remain the political elite. This focus on raising money often undermines time spent on raising awareness. It in turn leads to a reliance on bring guided by polls, not convictions.

No wonder this has been called “the best election money can buy. Donors and the recipients of their largesse are not naÃƒÂ¯ve. They know that when a politician takes money, there is an expectation of some quid pro quo. This money may not buy the politicians outright, but only rent them for a key vote or two.

Politics is about the never-ending fight over the allocation of resources, deciding what gets funded in the federal budget and then who gets the contracts. It is far more about serving interests than ideology or constituents. Millions of jobs are at stake in federal allocations and most companies have separate divisions, with plenty of former politicians on the payroll to help them win contracts through what is euphemistically called “public affairs.”

All want to be insiders, but, to achieve that status, they need access to politicians to do their bidding, to set up meetings, make key introductions and win business that is always rationalized in terms of the jobs, never the profits, that are generated.

On the day the latest report on new records being set in political donations was published, there were reports of Afghan president Hamid Karzai admitting he has received “bundles of cash” from Iran.
The story seemed so crude, so “Third World”, so corrupt.”

Until, that is, you look closely at politics as an industry in the USA where checks and electronic transfers are routine and make it easier to move money around so you don’t need paper bags and shady bagmen to carry them.

In the case of Afghanistan , a few days after this disclosure made news, another reported that $18 billion in US reconstruction aid to American companies – the stuff of endless hours of lobbying – can now not be accounted for. Where did it all go?

That’s first world corruption with a capital C.

News Dissector Danny Schechter edits Mediachannel.org and wrote “The Crime of Our Time” about Wall Street as a crime scene, and as a companion to his film Plunder (Plunderthecrimeofourtime.com)

Al Jazeera is not responsible for the editorial opinions in this piece. I will be offering commentary on Election night on Al Jazeera English TV. I will also be participating on an election night special on the progressiveradionetwork.com. Al Jazeera is still controversial in the Arab world as it is in the USA.

On Election night I waill also be at a panel discussion and screening in Brooklyn:

Cinebeasts: Campaign Spots & SPIN-

An Election Special

Tuesday, November 2nd at 6:30pm. $9 suggested donation, or $8 with proof of voting.
The films will be followed by a panel discussion on the evolution of political media language, featuring David Bushman (curator-in-chief of the Paley Center for Media) and “News Dissector” Danny Schechter.

WP: Homeowners Blindsided in Mortage Mess

NakedCapitalism.com: State Attorney Generals Could Bring Change

Will State AGs in Shining Armor Slay the Bank Dragons?

Joe Nocera has a very hopeful piece at the New York Times on the potential scope and impact of the investigation by all 50 state attorneys general into the robo signing scandal. Nocera stresses that the leader of this effort, Tom Miller of Iowa, and a core group of assistant AGs with long standing working relationships, are using the probe into what banks would have you believe are mere paperwork problems to delve into more serious abuses, with an eye to forcing the servicers to make serious loan modifications:

And best of all, they have a very clear idea of what they are trying to accomplish. They don’t want to merely reform the foreclosure system (though that would be nice, wouldn’t it?). Nor do they particularly want a big financial settlement, which would be meaningless for a giant like Bank of America.

Rather, they hope to use their investigation as a cudgel to force the big banks and servicers to do something they’ve long resisted: institute widespread, systematic loan modifications.

Scary New Wage Data by David Cay Johnston

Now for some really scary breaking news, from the latest payroll tax data.

Every 34th wage earner in America in 2008 went all of 2009 without earning a single dollar, new data from the Social Security Administration show. Total wages, median wages, and average wages all declined, but at the very top, salaries grew more than fivefold.

Not a single news organization reported this data when it was released October 15, searches of Google and the Nexis databases show. Nor did any blog, so the citizen journalists and professional economists did no better than the newsroom pros in reporting this basic information about our economy.

LETTER FROM SCOTLAND

From The UK: Parliament Square Anti-War Protest Goes On. Main Organizer In Hispital.

When I was in London a few trips back, I met Brian Haw who had moved a tent and some signs into the Square in front of Parliament to protest the Iraq war. I was impressed by his dedication and stocktoit ness. Scottsh activist Paul O Donnell who introduced me to him, reports that Brian is in hospital:

“Brian went in to hospital on September 23rd with a tumour on his lung – he is still in hospital for tests and treatment. He remains in good spirits and hopes to return to the campaign in Parliament Square when is he is better. In the meantime the campaign continues with Brian’s colleague Australian born Barbara Tucker keeping up the fight opposite the House of Commons. She has been there for nearly 5 years with Brian — since December 2005. She has actually been arrested more times than Brian — 39 in all — sometimes without a warrant. Here is a video of one of her arrests, Brian is featured as well:

That’s dedication.

LETTER FROM Margaux LaCoste In France:

hey Danny!

I was reading this week Telerama’s magazine, and I had the good surprise to see they quoted you in an article ” Fox News, the information anti-Obama”. here’s a link to the article online : http://television.telerama.fr/television/l-info-anti-obama,61843.php

it’s on the paragraph right under the last video :

« Faux, rÃƒÂ©agit Danny Schechter, observateur critique des mÃƒÂ©dias amÃƒÂ©ricains. Rien n’est neutre. DÃƒÂ¨s l’ÃƒÂ©mission du matin, la chaÃƒÂ®ne dÃƒÂ©finit l’agenda du jour et la maniÃƒÂ¨re dont les ÃƒÂ©vÃƒÂ©nements vont ÃƒÂªtre traitÃƒÂ©s. Et cette vision va ÃƒÂªtre reprise en boucle par tous les autres shows. »

here’s a quick translation: they are talking about Fox News and neutrality:

” False, react Danny, critic observator of the american media. Nothing is neutrual. Startind with the morning show, the channel choose the agenda and how the news are going to be used. and this is is vision that’s going to be picked by all the other shows.”

And From Kristin Perry in The USA:

Mr, Schechter, I didn’t know who you were–but saw your movie Plunder and thought it was great. Correct analysis–even before the recent stuff with foreclosures. So, glad to keep reading your stuff and following what you do. Good luck.

Comments: Dissector@mediachannel.org

The News Dissector