[Peace-discuss] Fw: Lou Dobbs is dangerous

Sat Aug 15 22:44:09 CDT 2009

Who says I was?  I am sure that I am not totally exempt and what exemptions
I have may come from a set of more or less than ordinary - if not unique -
biographically determined experience or history.  This history may not have
significantly altered the nature of my character but it did effect the
content.  In short I hate and am prejudiced against different people than
them and maybe most other Americans, my enemies are different than theirs
and maybe most other Americans , my fears are different than theirs and
maybe most other Americans, etc.

-----Original Message-----
From: C. G. Estabrook [mailto:galliher at illinois.edu] 
Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2009 9:43 PM
To: LAURIE SOLOMON
Cc: 'unionyes'; 'Peace-discuss List'
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Fw: Lou Dobbs is dangerous

How were you able to escape these defects?

LAURIE SOLOMON wrote:
> Very simply and to the point the people of the U.S. , for the most part,
are
> and have been inherently  all the things that Dobbs, Beck, Hannity,
Limbaugh
> et al stand for. They comprise a natural audience for these commentators
and
> those like them and, therefore, represent a significant demand for their
type
> of commentary, which can be denied and ignored at one’s own peril.
> 
> 
> 
> To elaborate:
> 
> If anything these commentators are catering to the inherent racism, 
> intolerance,  ethnic bigotry, religious prejudices, social Dawinian
biases,
> fearfulness, desires for conformity, love of violence, etc. that is part
and
> parcel of America and its people.  The people already have these traits
and
> have no need for corporations or the corporate establishment to instill,
> encourage, or bring out such attitudes and values since they pre-existed
the
> rise of corporations in the US and of corporate America.  Hence, they are
not
> the creatures of corporate power, money or spin.  To be sure, contemporary
> corporations make use of the existence of these attitudes and values for
> their own purposes – often to maintain control over the workings of the
> society so that it works in their interests – whenever possible.  However,
> the corporate establishment is not the source of these attitudes and
values.
> Hence there exists a significantly large native group who hold these and 
> similar values, beliefs, and attitudes which make up a natural audience
for
> the Dobbs. Becks et al which create a demand for what Dobbs, beck et al
are
> giving them.  To deny this or to minimize it is to play ostrich and stick
> one’s head in the ground.
> 
> 
> 
> *From:* unionyes [mailto:unionyes at ameritech.net] *Sent:* Saturday, August
15,
> 2009 8:20 PM *To:* Peace-discuss List; LAURIE SOLOMON *Subject:* Re:
> [Peace-discuss] Fw: Lou Dobbs is dangerous
> 
> 
> 
> And your point Laurie in 50 words or less ?
> 
> 
> 
> David J.
> 
> 
> 
> P.S. I am NOT trying to be " flippant " or disrespectfull, becaue I truely
> respect your opinion and knowldge ~!
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> 
> *From:* LAURIE SOLOMON <mailto:LAURIE at ADVANCENET.NET>
> 
> *To:* 'unionyes' <mailto:unionyes at ameritech.net>
> 
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 15, 2009 8:12 PM
> 
> *Subject:* RE: [Peace-discuss] Fw: Lou Dobbs is dangerous
> 
> 
> 
> I guess that may be where we disagree; I think that there is a tendency to
> give too little credence to the fact that there is this demand and that it
> comes from a significant and large segment of the U.S. public who may be
> guided by corporate spin  bought by corporate money but which nonetheless
> represent and embodies some very fundamental values and beliefs that are
> actually deeply held by a large number of the American public and masses.
> American racism, ethnic and religious prejudice, cultural biases against
> intellectual as opposed to practical education, and fear and hatred of
new 
> immigrants and people from other countries, intolerance, bigotry, and
demand
> for conformity are somethings that preexisted the rise of corporations in
> America or corporate America.  The corporate establishment with its power
and
> wealth has been able to use these characteristics of the American public
to
> their advantage very effectively in modern times; but it is not the
source,
> cause, or grounds for said attitudes, values, or love of violence toward
> other living creatures and properties. As was once said by Stockley 
> Carmicheal, I believe, “Violence is as American as Apple Pie.”  I would
add
> that so is lawlessness, intolerance, prejudice, conformity, as well as
> notions of racial, ethnic, and  religious supremacy, as American as apple
> pie.  They all have roots that pre-date the rise of American corporations
and
> are part of our cultural and psychological heritage.
> 
> 
> 
> *From:* unionyes [mailto:unionyes at ameritech.net] *Sent:* Saturday, August
15,
> 2009 3:05 PM *To:* LAURIE SOLOMON *Subject:* Re: [Peace-discuss] Fw: Lou
> Dobbs is dangerous
> 
> 
> 
> It's not so much that ; Lou Dobbs, Rush Limbaugh, etc., have a demand for
> their shows from a large segment of the U.S. public, but instead is a
> function of what the corporate advertisers, the rest of corporate america
and
> the wealthy right-wing foundations want and will pay for !
> 
> 
> 
> David J.
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> 
> *From:* LAURIE SOLOMON <mailto:LAURIE at ADVANCENET.NET>
> 
> *To:* 'Neil Parthun' <mailto:lennybrucefan at gmail.com> ; 
> peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net <mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> 
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 15, 2009 10:36 AM
> 
> *Subject:* RE: [Peace-discuss] Fw: Lou Dobbs is dangerous
> 
> 
> 
> Whether or not one is engaged in censorship in this case appears to depend
on
> one’s referent level being addressed.  Your point about Lou Dobbs, the
> person, may have some merit vis-à-vis the difference between censorship
and
> access to the exulted platform of radio & TV; however if you move the
level
> of reference up to the radio/TV station level, then one might be seen as
> engaging in the censorship of the station and its broadcast content.
> 
> 
> 
> While no one guarantees the right to have a nationally televised show, no
one
> guarantees anyone the right to prevent someone from having such a show or,
> for that matter prevents someone from having such a show.  In the case of
> radio/TV, the air waves allegedly belong to the public to license to
actors
> for use. The radio/TV stations and networks are among those actors; and 
> within legally prescribed restrictions they are free to air whatever
content
> they see fit,  independent of what the public or any portion of the public
> might desire although in this country that decision is driven by the
market
> (audience share and advertising money).  Obviously, if one wants to alter
the
>  legal restrictions, one needs to go through the process of changing the
> legal framework , statutes, and administrative rules pertaining to the
> conditions of licensing.
> 
> 
> 
> If one moves up a level to the ownership and control over the air waves,
> which belong legally to the public, then I am afraid that those who wish
to
> see Dobbs shut down are going to lose for now and in the near future since
> they do not compose a majority of the public – or enough to force a change
in
> the licensing requirements for the stations and their personnel as to the 
> sorts of content that they can air and when.  Like the other right-wing
talk
> commentators, his station and he appear to have strong national following
> that support and demand him be given air time and are willing to put their
> money where their mouths are.  That cannot be said for the progressives,
the
> left, or even the moderate reformers.  If they comprised a significantly 
> large population and if each contributed $5 or $10 each per year for
purposes
> of buying advertising on the stations that carry Dobbs, they could
probably
> use that as leverage to get the stations to either reel him and other in
or
> take them off the air.  But it seems that the progressives, the left,
liberal
> and moderate reformers would rather hold on to their money  or spend it
> elsewhere and exercise their lungs shouting and crying about him and his
> content instead.
> 
> 
> 
> *From:* peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net 
> [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] *On Behalf Of *Neil
Parthun
>  *Sent:* Friday, August 14, 2009 10:13 PM *To:* C.G.Estabrook *Cc:*
> peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net *Subject:* Re: [Peace-discuss] Fw: Lou
Dobbs
> is dangerous
> 
> 
> 
> Banning speech and requesting that such speech does not have a
hyper-exulted
> platform to amplify it are two very different things.
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody is saying Lou Dobbs doesn't have a right to say whatever he wants.
He
> has that right.  However, no person is guaranteed the right to have a
> nationally televised show to promote their views and perspectives on any
> topic.
> 
> Solidarity,
> 
> -N.
> 
> 
> 
> Neil Parthun
> 
> IEA Region 9 Grassroots Political Activist
> 
> Writer/Facilitator for Champaign-Urbana Public i
> 
> 
> 
> "Early in life I had learned that if you want something, you had better
make
> some noise." - Malcolm X
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list

> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net 
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list

> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net 
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss