Fourth Estate, the fourth branch of government

What, the self-appointed branch?

Can you vague that up a bit?

You want who to set standards on how they interpret presidential conduct?

 

The only influence allowed the press is that gratened by the consumers of media. I don't see how anyone's influence could be allowed or not.

 

Bush's conduct is different than his predecessors. Why do you think people feel the way they do about him?

Shooting the messenger isn't going to help. Bush got a free ride early on from the media. Now that his presidency is imiploding, it's not so good.

Go figure.

Some years ago, the Castros and Saddams of the world proposed a "new information order" in which governments would all control news to be "responsible." The UN was actually considering it. I wonder how Bush would look at that, now. At least some of his followers seem to think that a free press shouldn't be "allowed."

 

It is a scary thing when people start talking about limiting the freedom of the press to criticize those in power. That is a hallmark of totalitarianism.

 

Allowing a free press is totalitarinaism?

 

Apparently, in the mind of El Guero, it is. Since I am totally against totalitarianism, be it rightist or leftist, you can chalk his comments up to the same brain that accused me of racism for a hyperbolic remark he didn't get, since hyperbole is a sublety he also has trouble understanding.

Speaking of understanding, EG, what in the world are you trying to say here? You make no sense at all. Not trying to be rude, trying to figure out what you are talking about.

 

I couldn't quite figure it out. EG seems good at accusing others of "doublespeak" or misrepresenting what he says when all you do is quote him, which tells me that he either 1) has no point or 2) is unable to defend his point.

EG, if you could just make your point, that would really help.

 

EG,

Freedom of the press doesn't mean that they can be held to task by the government. Their only restriction is who buys their papers or watches their news. It's the market of information, or disinformation perhaps. A press who abuses that freedom is nothing new but goes back, in the US, to the first days of our new republic. It's not the best system but it beats what comes in second.

 

EG, I have no idea what you are talking about, yet again. You "confronting" me was to acuse me of racism for a sarcastic remark in response to your wanting to take the country back 50 years, so I mentioned in sarcasm, "yeah, let's do that. Let's make sure blacks have to sit at the back of the bus, that women stay home and out of the "man's world", etc. You failed to see the sarcasm and called me a racist, which is obviously the polar opposite of anything about me. You sir, owe ME the apology, which has never come.

Where am I angry in my tone? I merely said, I don't know what you are trying to say. I said restricting the press is a hallmark of totalitarianism. Somehow, you are not only missing what people are saying, but are also not making your thoughts understandable. I will not play any ad hominem games with you. Call me whatever you want, I will not drop down to your level. Base your arguments on facts and evidence, not on personal attacks because you disagree with people.

 

Amen!:thumbs:

 

Sometimes we on the Right get it right!

 

Also, I would imagine that I probably agree with EG more than I disagree with him on, and I understand his frustration at the press, but historically it's nothing new.