On the Contrary

Here are a few of the tidbits of news that shed some light on where we have been and where we are going:

• “Many Republicans are already angry over the emphasis Mr. Obama placed on the public plan (health care) in last weeks letter.  Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader, said Friday that ‘the key to a bipartisan bill is not to have a government plan in the bill’ (New York Times).”  Said another way, the Republican idea of bipartisanship is their way or the highway.  We have already had enough of their failures haven’t we?  I wish they would just get the hell out of the way.  The real issue here is do you want something bipartisan or something that works.
• Here is another thought on health care:  The big question is how to pay for it and one of the suggestions is to tax health care benefits.  Another is to tax sugar in soft drinks. I find this whole discussion to be an indicator of how troubled our whole tax system is.  It also indicates how entrenched are the forces to prevent any change in our tax system when the suggestions are just to pile on more obscure taxes instead of reforming the whole system.  One way or another you already pay for health care so why not just get rid of all those hidden costs and include it as part of our income tax.
• Watching the banks maneuver is always entertaining, if not somewhat appalling.  Most of us understand that derivatives got us into the financial mess we are in because they were unregulated and basically invisible to the investor to understand their makeup and risk.  The Obama administration has proposed regulating them, but left a loophole for “customized” derivatives which would leave them, let’s just say, less than transparent.  Most agree that the best way to not allow speculation to get out of control again is to be able to evaluate the risk in each investment through the transparency of trading them on an open market.  So why are we opening ourselves up to “customized” derivatives?  So the banks can once again make fabulous amounts of money by hiding their risks and preventing open competition.  Isn’t it amazing that the boys who tout competition are the first ones who try to undermine it if it impacts their goose who is laying their golden eggs?
• President Obama has told Israel no more settlements.  This apparently broke an agreement by the Bush administration (verbal) that we would continue to say that, but normal growth is okay.  I think this is the pivotal “no duh” moment.  The Israelis have a problem here because much as we have our radicalized Republicans who want no government unless it prevents a woman’s choice or two consenting adults from marrying, they have their fruit loop religious radicals that think God made them special and they can take what they want (very similar to Republicans).  Until Israel decides on an equitable swap of land, there will never be peace there.  That means marginalizing their religious nuts.  So when the Republican Party can marginalize their nuts, maybe the Israelis can marginalize thiers and there may be hope for the future.  I am not holding my breath.
• It appears the administration is considering whether they can accept guilty pleas from some of the detainees for the 9/11 murders, skip the trial, and go directly to execution.  It solves so many problems like the law explicitly prohibits accepting the plea, and the fact that much of the evidence was gathered using torture which makes it problematic.  Note I am not saying abusive interrogation techniques.  Let’s just call it what it is.  Sometimes in our rush for retribution we forget what justice is about.  Yes a trial would be messy, but it would be honest.  And it would take what everyone knows is the PR approach to what a wonderful country we are off the package and expose our ugly underside.  But it would be what the world and we American citizens are really yearning for, honesty.  It would reemphasize that we are about, justice not efficacy, and it would help to expose what animals these people are.  Oh and on the execution thing, make it life without parole.  Execution just plays into their hands and makes them martyrs.   When will we ever learn that the hard road is the only road that will get us to where we want to go?
• Liz Cheney is still making a fool of herself along with most of the media.  She is still operating under the impression that saying it is so makes it so.  The media is also helping that impression by unquestioningly repeating whatever she or her dad say.  Ah, but the problem is video of what really happened and what they really said.  Liz is claiming that there was no attempt to link the 9/11 attack with Saddam Hussein.  Roll the video.  The only thing that worries me about all this is that the press seems to have learned nothing from their failures during the run up to war in Iraq.  But we still have The Daily Show, Colbert, and MSNBC.  The rest of them just sit there like idiots and accept this garbage or repeat it endlessly like it were true.  That’s entertainment folks!
• One last thought.  A friend of mine was trying to convince me that the whole economic mess was caused by Fannie and Freddie (government) and irresponsible home buyers.  That is like blaming your kids for their bad behavior without looking at how you set up an environment in which they could act out their worst impluses.  The banks were making a fortune repackaging debt and selling it to the rest of the world.  All the rest follows from this.  It is the root cause.  Why can’t we ever remember the simple rule, “follow the money.”

Are we getting anywhere yet?

The media bashing I am talking about is not the GOP’s, but mine.  The mainstream media has a long way to go before they are really doing “fair and balanced” coverage, and except for FOX noise, Glenn Beck, Lou Dobbs and some of the other blovators (yes even Keith Olberman from time to time), they are really trying to be balanced.  Their approach to this daunting task is fatally flawed by removing any judgment from their interviews by representing both sides with a passive moderator.  In effect they simply monitor the food fight.  They have eschewed any responsibility to ascertain the truth to avoid the appearance of bias and they will let the viewer decide.  So what is the problem?

The problem, which was described much more eloquently by Ruth Marcus in he Washington Post Op-Ed, True Whoppers, talking about misrepresentations and lies goes like this:

“All campaigns fall short, but some fall far shorter than others. And it is a phony evenhandedness, comfortable for journalists but ultimately misleading, that equates these failures without measuring the grossness of their deviation from the standard of decency.”

Said another way if the viewer isn’t given some frame of reference for the veracity of the statements being made by the participants from the moderator, he/she is left to let their own partisanship decide whose facts to believe.  If you have a debate between flat earthers and people who claim the world is round and you accord their claims equal footing, you are misleading people about the equality of the facts of each argument.  Note the media did this on the issue of Intelligent Design until the whole edifice of this faith-based system was destroyed in a Pennsylvania court room.   Now they try to avoid the whole debate because it seems rude to challenged faith with facts.  The economic argument may be proceeding in the same fashion.

At any rate, this kind of coverage is increasing the impact of the misrepresentations, and not clearing the air.  The critical thing that the journalist has to bring to these exchanges is knowledge of the facrs and push back.  Instead of allowing known misrepresentations to be voiced by one partisan spokesperson or the other, they push back where they know the facts are being misrepresented.  Of course they have to know the facts to push back which may be a reach for some of them.  The key is that the push back has to be unbiased i.e. usually David Schuster of MSNBC as opposed to Fox News or Lou Dobbs of CNN.  Then the debate would be on more level playing ground.  But because of their passive interview style of moderating debate, they are being run over by partisan flacks and their mission of balanced reporting goes out the window as they become a bullhorn for one side or the other.

I witnessed an example of what I call the passive aggressive attack on CNN’s Rick Sanchez as he was trying to inform the public about what is going on with the investigation of Sarah Palin in Alaska.  The moderator is passive, while the interviewee is agressive.  Having spent a portion of my career negotiating with bonding company lawyers in construction contract defaults, I immediately recognized the tactic.  A lawyer representing the McCain organization in Alaska was laying out their case for why the proceedings investigating Trooper Gate, in their view were tainted.  The technique is to begin a non-stop monologue/diatribe and get as many of your allegations in as quickly as possible so that the conclusion seems obvious while not allowing your opponent to question any of the allegations that makes up your argument.

The only journalist I have seen push back on this technique is Rachel Maddow, trying to stop the dialogue and examine some of the false allegations.  Well in this case poor Rick was trying to be fair and let the person state their case, but he got submarined by this technique as he let this monologue go on forever.  Worse, he appeared to not have a good grasp on the history of this investigation that could challenge some of the lawyer’s allegations.  He asked for a Democrat to come on the show to counter this argument, also showing his naiveté  in that no Democrats wants to get involved with this internal state investigation and make it a distracting (for the Democrats) campaign issue.

Here were some of the specific questions that Rick needed to ask to get a more balanced view of the claims of the McCain team.  The lawyer claimed the whole process was tainted by the Obama Campaign, but Rick never asked him how this could be when there was a team of twelve McCain Campaign people in Alaska helping manage this attack on the investigating board, but no personnel  with the Obama Campaign. He did press the lawyer for any evidence for contact with the Obama campaign and of course there wasn’t any except an alleged rumor.  He never asked why this investigation was biased when it started before the Governor was a candidate for VP and approved by a unanimous vote of the Republicans and Democrats in the legislature.  He never asked why the commission that was conducting this investigation made up of three Republicans and two Democrats could be biased if the majority were Republicans and could control its actions.  He never asked why the requested move to the personnel board would then be an unbiased review if the board was made up of Palin appointees that serve at her pleasure.  So all in all it was another example of nice try, but you became a soapbox for a very partisan view and participated in more disinformation.

Finally on Friday, I watched David Gregory of MSNBC (and of the famous quote, “I asked all the right questions before the invasion of Iraq” but never followed up on the lies he was told) ask his panel of commentators, isn’t this whole disaster on Wall Street due to the housing bubble?  In other words fix this problem and the rest of the system can press on which indicates to me he had little understanding of the real issues.  They had to explain to him that the housing crisis was just the effect, and the cause was the underlying structure of wall street to increase profits, short term gains and CEO compensation based upon those gains, greed and a culture of greed, and lack of regulation leading  all of which led to under capitalized and grossly leveraged firms.  I still don’t think he gets it so how is he going to help inform us of the choices for the future as each side makes their pitch and he has no basis for understanding their arguments?

I don’t know why journalists allow themselves to be abused by these partisan flacks.  I don’t know why they are so passive and allow themselves to be used to reinforce miss-information.  I don’t understand why they don’t fight back and start standing up for their profession.  I don’t know why we get pertty faces instead of smart and well informed journalists.  An interview should be a trial by fire for all concerned, not a chance to repeat your talking points.  Come on guys, get up to date, learn your subject, and start pushing back.  The fate of this country depends on you guys doing your job.  So far you get an F.

Back in 2004 when the nation was re-electing the bumbling fool we have for a President, there was one place you could turn to get real news and a perspective on events that were unfolding.  That was the Dailey Show with John Stewart and, as we all know, it is a comedy show.  Well John has stepped up once again as the mainstream media gets lead around by their noses by political hacks who invent reality while they fail to check it.  Friday night John ran a video clip of John McCain “straight talking” before he ran for President and now during the present Campaign (’Reformed Maverick‘).  There for all to see was McCain reversing positions on Bush tax cuts, Roe vs. Wade, cake walk in Iraq, pandering to the agents of intolerance (evangelicals), and immigration policy.

Why, one has to ask, oh why is this on the comedy channel and not on mainstream news so we can make an informed decision about who John McCain really is?  Why did it take John Stewart to take on Sarah Palin’s speech point by point demonstrating she was reading from a script and that most of her claims about herself were lies?  No I didn’t mean characterizations, I meant lies.  We get this on the comedy channel while mainstream media has their finger up their nose or have been cowered into a corner by claims of eastern establishment bias.  It took John Stewart and his stalwart of “reporters” to actually go out into the Republican convention and ask them what was meant by “small town values”.  What became abundantly clear was that they did not know, but it was people who think like them.  John’s show would not be near as funny if the Republicans were not taking such liberties with reality, but mainstream media seems unable to point this out.

The failure of our TV media to be journalists is a result of five intersecting forces:

• News as Entertainment to increase ratings driven by the profit motive
• 24/7 demand for material
• Journalists as celebrities
• Careful manipulation of the press by controlling access to sources
• The loss of income for print media

A quick summary of these points I have made in earlier blogs:

• In order to attract a wider audience for their advertising, TV news media focus on stories that are sensational but lack importance or educational value that is necessary for an informed electorate.  I bet more people know who John Edwards’ girl friend is that know how much of Sarah Palin’s speech was an outright lie.  Leave it to the National Inquirer.   It has also made them cowards in that if there is push-back on one of their stories they usually fold instead of threatening a segment of their buying public
• The demand for 24/7 information dumbs us all down as journalists become “chatty Kathys” rambling on about things that are not facts, but cocktail party fodder.  This lack of discipline in what words mean and what are facts and conjecture further degrades the line between fact and political spin.  Journalists seem to live in their own world and create their own narrative which is totally a product of this 24/7 cycle than of objective reality
• Journalists have become celebrities so they must lead most interviews because they are the star.  The problem with this approach is they don’t have the in-depth knowledge on each subject and as their guest misrepresents one fact after another, it goes completely by the “personality” while they focus on the next question that will make them look tough.  The exceptions here are Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann, and from time to time Anderson Cooper
• In order “to get the story” you have to have access to get the interview.  Print journalism use to, and to some extent still does do detailed research, but most TV media lives and dies by access.  The politicians are no dummies so they control access to those who will be favorable to them and not ask hard questions.  Ask yourself why there isn’t nationwide outrage that Sarah Palin will not face the press corps to answer hard questions and how they are getting away with it.  Ask yourself why when Campbell Brown pursued one of the Republicans to answer her question (Can you give me one order Sarah Palin ever gave to the National Guard) John McCain cancelled his interview with CNN
• People don’t read anymore.  I like to say the devil is in the details and you only get the truth, when you have done the research.  As print media loses its market share they will scale back on the background research necessary to get at the truth.  Here is a prime example:  David Gregory (another “personality”) likes to defend the presses coverage of the lead up to our invasion of Iraq as “We asked all the right questions.”  True enough, but then you accepted their lies as answers.  Had you done your homework like Knight-Ridder News Service did, you could have exposed their blatant misrepresentations bordering on lies and you could have pointed out those misrepresentations.  I think the rule of thumb for a journalist operating in this environment is the same as an attorney during cross-examination.  If you don’t already know the answer to the question, don’t ask it.  They are trying to create an alternate reality and you had better have reality firmly established so you can point out their lies

So what we are getting what was on display at the Republican convention.  The Republicans created a whole new reality with unsubstantiated claims.  Then political operatives claimed the press was being sexist and instruments of some fantasy liberal eastern establishment, so they had them cowering in the corner, and then repeated one outright lie after another while the press stood by broadcasting their message and not aggressively challenging their facts.  Note that a lie is an intentional misrepresentation of the facts so these weren’t miss-interpretations, they were lies.  The convention was carefully crafted so that during prime time speeches, there was no time between speeches to do an analysis.  So the untruths just laid out there un-rebutted and reinforced by political operatives as the main stream media was run over by their non-stop monologue.  The one exception was Rachel Maddow of MSNBC who kept trying to break into the monologue to point out the lies/misrepresentations.  So where were the rest of them?  Well as the foundations of our nation are crumbling, we have Andrea Mitchell with eyes upward on the balloon drop.  And that about sums it up.  None of them have their eye on the crumbling foundations of our society, but distracted on the balloon drop that was pretty  wasn’t it?.

This is what happened before we invaded Iraq and if you really want to see how badly the press failed I would suggest you watch Bill Moyer’s “Buying the War”.  Well they are about to do it again and then will, like before, accept no responsibility for their failure.  It is time for them to start pushing back.  I want journalist with teeth.  I want them to ask what is liberal eastern establishment bias and why is it bad.  I want them to ask what are small town values and how do they equip anyone for the world we live in today.  I WANT THEM TO PUSH BACK.  I want them to ask Barack what more troops in Afghanistan is going to accomplish and what is his end strategy.  They have a chance to redeem themselves, but they have to get a backbone and respect their calling, journalism.  They will have to understand how they are manipulated and plan accordingly.  If they don’t, we will lose our country for another four years of failure because we have a large segment of our population who lives in ignorance and is easily distracted and fooled.  It would appear that the last eight years was no lesson at all.

One other thought and I will call it judgment.  When your conservative friend tells you that it is their judgment that John McCain has the better judgment to be President, ask him/her the following questions:
1.    Did you vote for George Bush in 2000?
2.    Did you vote for George Bush in 2004?
3.    Did you help put in Congress the Republicans who grew our deficit and government faster than any government in our history, got us involved in an endless war in the Middle East, and have left our economy in the dumper?
Then point out to them that their judgment sucks and thank you very much, but I really do want change.

It is amazing to me to watch and read about the Republican Convention, McCain and Palin’s speeches, and wonder if they noticed that it was Alice in Wonderland?  Neither the President nor the Vice-President attended the proceedings.  No one mentioned them.  The power structure that put them in place was in that Convention center and they were blaming someone else for the dismal state of our government.  It was the liberal eastern establishment, except that there is no liberal eastern establishment and all those people were the establishment that has run Congress for twelve years and the White House, going on eight.  The lobbying scandal was not about Democrats (simply because Democrats had no power) nor were any of the other scandals about Democrats except for that fruit loop from Louisiana who put the money in the freezer.  Louisiana Democrats are really Republicans lite.  But the speeches went on and on and on and our media never pushed back and said, “Wait a minute, weren’t you guys controlling government for the last eight years in the Congress and Executive?”

It gets worse.  Sarah Palin is being stroked for such a fine speech and a new force on the political front and it was obvious she was mouthing the words someone else wrote, many were outright lies, and we have no idea what she knows or does not know.  When her lack of experience was raised, it was sexism and our brave press folded like a lawn chair.  Oh aren’t they the tool of the liberal media?  Where is she and why won’t she face a press conference to see if she can really think for herself on her own two feet?  She doesn’t like the extreme examination, but as Barrack said, welcome to what I have been facing for 17 months.  Would we say that Geena Davis could be a great politician and ready to step into the White House after she played the part in a TV series.  What pray tell was the difference?

Everybody thought the speech was great in her attack of the Democrats, but many of the facts weren;t just distortions, they were lies, and there was no substance.  If you don’t like the Democrats approach to change what is your plan?  She made mean little sarcastic comments that in polite conversation would be recognized for what is was, a mean spirited attack with no intent other than inflaming hate and intolerance.  No I do not think her small town values have anything to do with running this very cosmopolitan world and the press ought to have enough backbone to pursue that line of questioning.  John Steward did on the Daily Show and it was quite revealing.  Simple country folks like that country bumpkin we have for a President are the reason this country is in trouble.  Appealing to their need to feel valued with simple minded solutions like drill, drill drill, will not solve the complex problems we face.  What she did was guarantee that the message of working together to solve problems would be the furthest from the bases mind as she reinvigorated the cultural wars that belong in the last century.  Great speech though, didn’t you think?  You people in the press are morons.

Then we have John McCain standing up there and telling us, after the hate Democrats speech the night before, we will work with them.  The silence in the convention center and the luke warm response to that line tells you everything you need to know about how great Sarah Palin’s speech was.  She is a great American if you think inciting intolerance is a good thing.  We listened as they claimed they would bring about real change yet they offer us nothing in programs to demonstrate that change other than the same conservative dogma, and will continue with the same good old boys that brought us the last eight years. Fat old white men thinking in the last century and protecting their status quo is what we saw on display.   We are just going to be better conservatives and get rid of the straying ones.  Did it ever dawn on anyone that it is conservative ideas not the straying morons of the party that are really bankrupt?

I am sorry, the emperor has no clothes.  The rest of you, especially the media morons, stood there gaping and commenting on what a great convention it was and I am wondering if we saw the same event.  The attendees were a sea of fat white people totally unrepresentative of this country (except for maybe the fat thing) and you never said a word.  You stood there mute while their political operatives spouted out their talking points that were blatantly false.  Here are the Republicans trying to incite hatred of the Democrats and the liberal eastern media that doesn’t exist, and you guys went along with it.  Their failed conservative philosophy is what has brought us to the brink.

They were the only ones that had the power to change things in the last eight years and the change they brought is for all to behold.  John McCain promised to bring us real change.  His VP is an attack dog radical conservative that wants to ban gay marriage, ban all abortions (and that would be in vitro fertilizations also since life begins with the first cell), deny Constitutional rights guaranteed by the Supreme Court to detainees, and teach creationism in the schools in defiance of the Constitution, and she gave a great speech?  She showed the pluck to be VP?  John himself has changed his position on the major issues of torture, immigration, taxes, and evangelicals to get this nomination, but he was touting himself as the maverick who you can trust?  He will bring about change with the same conservative philosophy and the same cast of character that brought you the change in the last eight years?   We will get change all right, things will get worse.  He is wearing no clothes.  Can’t you see it?  Look closer.  Jesus, pay attention.

I am sitting here on the front porch thinking back on the coverage of the Democratic Convention and the announcement of the Vice President choice by John McCain and the same thought keeps running through my mind.  Is the 24/7 television media superfluous and are there any journalists left out there?  Are they just total buffoons?

Let’s just start with the Democratic Convention.  There were some wonderful speeches, but if you watched MSNBC or CNN (Only a moron would watch FOX news) what you got were interviews on the floor of the convention trying to find some disunity among the delegates.  As Media Matters so well documented, the “journalists” were searching for a controversy that did not exist, while there were major issues being presented from the podium.  Oh would it not have been nice if these “journalists” would have spent some time looking at what the Democrats were proposing and educating the viewer on the pros and cons of each issue.  What I thought was the biggest missed opportunity were the speeches given by “just regular Americans”, many of which had voted Republican up till now, but are switching their votes.  If the press would have interviewed these people, checked out their stories, and presented how the last eight years have destroyed their economic security, it could have been quite enlightening.  No, what we got was questions about Hillary’s sincerity, whether Bill will really support Barack, and never ending cocktail party chitchat about a soap opera that has nothing to do with the political ideas that are being put on display.  This election is about a new way of governing and finally throwing off conservative ideals that have hamstrung us for the last eight years and media was focused on trivia of personality.  It was Entertainment Tonight celebrity worship, not journalism.

But it gets worse.  Friday John McCain announces his selection for Vice President, conveniently timed to distract from the after glow of Barack’s speech and the criticisms he made of the John McCain’s policies.  The nominee is Sarah Palin, Governor of Alaska.  Now what we really need to know is who this woman is, other than a woman, and why she is qualified to be Vice President.  What we got was mind numbing political strategy discussions which is nothing but opinion and has nothing to do with the issues.   The Washington Post on Saturday tells us the John McCain shows what a maverick he is with this pick.  Reallly?  If he were a maverick, he would have picked Joe Lieberman who he really wanted but the Republican hierarchy would not accept.  Instead he appoints a woman who appeals to the extreme right.  Some Maverick.  They can’t run on the issues because their policies have dismally failed.  So they are going to run on personality and hope the press takes the bait.  They did.

What we really need is an examination of this woman’s views and qualification to step into the presidency if John McCain falters.  For me it is simple.  She thinks evolution and creationism should be taught side by side.  Apparently she neither understands science or the court ruling that have said this violates the Constitution.  I would refer her to the Pennsylvania case, Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District to understand the legal findings of the court that intelligent design is just creationism and it is against the Constitution to teach as science.  When asked about Iraq and our policies there last year, she deferred saying she didn’t know much about that situation as she focuses on Alaska politics.  Great.  That is about the same level of understanding that the Neocons had when they got us into that war.  She believes that life begins at day one and that all abortions should be banned.  If you believe that, then you must believe God is the greatest aborter because the number of miscarriages far exceeds the number of abortions.  I wonder where she thinks all those souls go?  Oh, I forgot, we have faith.  Faith based thinking has got us where we are today.  We need someone who is rational and experienced, which she is neither.

Finally she is being touted as the “new” conservative, that is pragmatic.  The proof of this was in a story that she vetoed legislation that would deny same sex partners benefits.  So the story line is she is against same sex marriages, but pragmatically believes they should have benefits.  The reality as documented by Media Matters is that she vetoed it because her Attorney General advised her it was an unconstitutional law that would not stand up in court.  So here we have it:  A woman who has been mayor of a 6000 person town and Governor for less than 18 months, knows little to nothing about international affairs, represents all the social conservative issues that have kept this country bogged down in religious issues, and is a heart beat away from the presidency if John McCain falters?  It is a desperate attempt by the Republicans to rally the base and take the focus off of failed policies with this erratic pick.  Will our media start to focus on her qualifications and ask substantial questions about her policies?  Not likely as we will get 24/7 discussions of political strategy instead of an honest look at facts and policies.

I fear for this country and the state of its journalism.  We have endless discussion of the politics of an issue instead of real reporting of the impacts or potential impacts of policies.  We have journalists whose access to information is dependent on their ability to carry water for the politically powerful.  We have journalists who are too close to the subjects they are reporting, letting their feelings for their subject get in the way of objective observation.  We have journalists who by the nature of the 24/7 television news have become celebrities and egos who must conduct all the important interviews even when they are poorly prepared to ask intelligent questions or challenge claims of their subject.  We have partisan “political analysts” who discuss an issue that is really nothing more than promoting the talking points of each Party.  And finally we have journalists who feed on each other’s narrative until the press is creating the story, not objective reality.  They are not reporting on what is happening, but their opinion about what it means politically.  On the other hand, if you agree with me, then we don’t have journalists anymore, just personalities with opinions.  This country is in a great deal of trouble if this passes as journalism and with the declining ability of print journalism to survive, real reporting may be dying and with our ability to discern fact from allegation.

One note:  Some think that the internet and blogs will take the place of the print media.  But blogs like mine depend upon real reporters doing real research so we can actually intelligently discuss an issue.  Real journalism requires in depth research and reporting, and a standard of ethics that ensures that the facts are facts substantiated by more than one source.  Every important story we have had in the last eight years has come from reporters doing detailed interviews and research.  That includes the false justification for the War in Iraq, rendition of suspected terrorists, the spying on our citizens by our own government, torture, the lying and misleading of the press in the yellow cake uranium story, the firing of Attorney Generals for political reasons, and it goes on and on.  People like me depend upon real journalist doing their job to get to the facts so we can have a factual basis for challenging the noise machine.  If we loose that resource, we are done as a country.