The USA

[ohmymimi]

Ted Cruz for President? Is the GOP now lost to any resemblance of sanity? Why is 'progressive' a dirty word? How can the land of the free and the home of the brave have 1 in 5 of it's citizens on food stamps? Why do people watch Fox News? Is Glen Beck for real or just a big hoaxer ( or a chalk fetishist). BHO is an African Muslim? Why would anyone take Sarah Palin seriously? Are the Founding Fathers spinning in their graves? Thoughts please, if anyone is interested.

'Why is 'progressive' a dirty word?'
Excellent question.

'Why do people watch Fox News?'
For a closer representation of the truth than is available in the progressive media.

'Is Glen Beck for real or just a big hoaxer'
No, I don't think he is for real. He is the mainstream's attempt to steal the clothes of conspiracy theorists in order to mislead the viewers, in my opinion.

'Why would anyone take Sarah Palin seriously?'
Good question. I like her, but I think she is probably not for real either and is a good actor. But, a lot of what we saw on the news is theatre anyway and is not the truth, so she is entertaining.

'Are the Founding Fathers spinning in their graves?'
According to the conspiracy theorists, yes.

Very good questions. They all in some way get to the heart of the matter, who is for real, who is a hoaxer, are we all being played and what is their game.

'Ted Cruz for President?'
Why not? The real power is with the string pullers, not the puppet.

' Is the GOP now lost to any resemblance of sanity?'

It's a high stakes game of poker and the loser is the one who blinks first. The winner is the one who can go to the cliff's edge and retain their footing.

' How can the land of the free and the home of the brave have 1 in 5 of it's citizens on food stamps?'

Capitalism. Treat 'em mean, keep 'em keen.

' Why is 'progressive' a dirty word?'
Because it is spin and propaganda and everybody knows it.

'Why do people watch Fox News?'
For a closer representation of the truth than is available in the progressive media.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha etc.

Pox 'News' is the televisual equivalent of the Daily Heil. All the words are true, just not in the sequence they're put.

If you want an insight into American politics look up Abby Martin. Feisty, intelligent and insightful young woman. For a look at why their economy (and ours) is going tits up look at Max Keiser and Stacy Herbert.

'Why would anyone take Sarah Palin seriously?'

We live in a television age where the battle of ideas is fought out on our screens in very short timeslots and what matters is increasingly personality and telegenics. People back whomever is closest to what they want. If she taps in to what people really want and feel and if she can act well and pull it off on the screen, then people will back her, whether she is for real or not. the people will obly find that out later, but by then the game has moved on and new actors have entered the stage.

DoctorTwo, I watch all those presenters on Russia Today and they are good, but here is the deal, they are all actors too. The game is not just played by one side, it is played by two.

The OP asks the question "is he for real?" about Beck, but it applies to all the others too.

The media is either corporate or state and it reflects the real hidden owners view. Russia Today is very good as a balance, but it is slanted in its output too.

So if the corporate media lies and the state media lies, then wherein lies the truth? With the conspiracy theorist, but nobody on earth listens to them, they are treated as the joker in the pack and they get all the flak.

Claig - re Fox, what is 'the truth'?

Claig, are you selective with your conspiracy theorists? David Icke, for example, how close to the truth is he?

ohmymini, yo ar right that Fox is of course not the truth.

But Fox is very very clever, just like our own great Daily Mail. Fox came from nowhere, before Fox there was CNN and all the rest of US TV media which is all (as far as i know) without exception progressive and liberal, just as our own BBC and Channel 4 are.

So how did Fox become so successful that it now gets so many viewers and how did the Daily Mail do it too? What is it about Fox that appeals to people?

Everybody knows that Fiox cannot tell the real truth and nor can the Daily Mail, but they tell more of the truth than the progressive propaganda broadcasts of the liberal media. Fox understands the people better than teh liberal intelligentsia and progressive propagandists do. Fox knows that millions and millions of people do not believe what is on the news, they don't believe in global warming, they don't believe in the warmongers' calls for attacks on countries, they don't believe in the spin. So Fox give the people some of what they want i.e. they are sceptical of global warming, while all the progressive channels stream pictures of the polar bear.

But Fox knows that that is not enough, they know that millions of Americans tune in to conspiracy theorists and they know that they are losing their hold over the public's minds. So they create a Glenn Beck type figure who steals the clothes of what the conspiracy theorists have been saying for decades, and the public then tune in. But Fox is not for real, it wants to manage the news, it wants to spin the news, but it must hold on to the viewers, so it gives them more snippets of the truth (but not the real story) than the progressives do.

The progressives are not customer oriented, they have focus groups etc but they are too arrogant to listen to what the people really say. But Fox is much savvier, it hears the people and gives them some of what they want (i.e. the truth), in a bid to spin them their way.

Doctor Two, I'm pretty sure that not all the words are true, wherever order they are in! I find
Kaiser interesting, but I'm not familiar with Abby Martin. When I get really dispirited I find a dose of Jon Stewart usually helps or maybe a shot of 'Family Guy'.

'Claig, are you selective with your conspiracy theorists? David Icke, for example, how close to the truth is he?'

Yes, you have to be selective because no one can see or know the whole picture. Everybody is looking through a kaleidoscope and can only see fragments of the complete jigsaw.

Icke is right on some things (i.e. the global warming scam and on Jimmy Savile), but wrong on others (i.e. the lizards).

Someone mentioned Max Kesier. Yes, he is great and great entertainment too, and he is a pal of the world's number one conspiracy theorist - right wing Alex Jones (who is good but also not for real). Keiser is good and he was protesting at the Bilderberg Conference along with Alex Jones and David Icke and of course none of our New Statesman style and Independent newspaper socialist spinners and journalists bothered to turn up. But Keiser predicted a bond market collapse for April of this year. He can't see the whole picture and he is wrong on some things too.

So you have to be selective.

And that is why people back Sarah Palin. People make a choice, they can only back the players on the stage. They know they may not be for real, but what's the alternative?, there is nothing better, so they back the best of a bad bunch.

Just to be clear, I'm a liberal fascist retrograde progressive myself, with slight utilitarian tendencies.
Fox/Mail can't tell the 'real truth' . The 'real truth', please elaborate. F/M are bold and fearless, surely. What could hold them back from revealing such truth?

'What could hold them back from revealing such truth?'

They are not independent, they are corporate. Murdoch is a power player, he holds secrets and knows where the skeletons are, but he can't reveal them to us the plebs, he uses them as bargaining chips in the quest for power with the big players, the global elite. He can't upset the applecart, because there are others who have more power than him.

We are just the plebs, the ones that are spun to and lied to. We are the pawns in the game. But Fox has to keep us sweet and tell us some of the truth or they won't be able to use our votes in the game.

It is only when there is a clash of the Titans, when the Gods battle on Mount Olympus, that us mortals see more of the truth. So when Miliband and the Mail clashed, we found out about Mehdi's letter to "Dear Mr Dacre".

If there is a real clash between the power elite, then someone might spill the beans on the climate change scam, but until then we will have to watch pictures of the polar bear while they maintain their millenial scare.

Don't you mean they think we are the plebs and pawns? We are all able to think for ourselves,apply logic, keep our cynicism sharpened - should we choose to. Fox assumes we are the lowest common denominator, the blind consumer just longing to have our prejudices reinforced. There's no sweetness there for me.

'Just to be clear, I'm a liberal fascist retrograde progressive myself, with slight utilitarian tendencies.'

OK, so you're a Guardian reader.

In reality, we don't have too much power unless we all unite and vote them out.

They can make a manifesto where they promise not to increase tuition fees, and then they can treble them. We can't do anything except not to vote for them next time.

'Fox assumes we are the lowest common denominator, the blind consumer just longing to have our prejudices reinforced. There's no sweetness there for me.'

No it is the progressives who think we are the lowest common denominator. They think we are so stupid that we will believe their stories about the polar bear and their calls for humanitarian wars. They don't even change their spin, they just keep spinning the same old lies. But Fox is much smarter which is why they get higher ratings, because they listen to the people and give them some of the truth that they seek.

What is wrong with BBC News, that Sky News can get more viewers than BBC News 24?

"Sky News is still the most-watched rolling news channel in the UK, attracting 3.5 million digital or cable viewers per week"

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/1881176.stm

This is the BBC with their thousands of news journalists all across the world and their huge budget against Sky News which has the huge disadvantage of having adverts every 15 or so minutes.

I think it is because there is less progressive spin on Sky than there is on the BBC.

Don't take a paper, occasionally buy the 'i'. I watch a variety of news programmers/channels, follow some blogs of all tints, keep an eye on twitter and keep my bullshit detector on permanently - oh, and I think for myself. Capital punishment for parking of fences, who'd leave their car on double yellows then?

We call it Faux News in our home...

There's nothing humanitarian about war. The arms trade is a big earner and Ike was right. My view is the world will be a better place when humans become extinct, we're nowhere near as clever as we think.

Secret - I think even Murdoch cells it that!