idrankwhat

But I'll bet the bread does. I've been amazed to see how prominently "high fructose corn syrup" is listed in lots of different breads, or actually anything for that matter. That crap is everywhere.

Yes. (don't tell me you missed him on Crossfire) So did you watch it Friday night? Great interview. http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04272007/transcript1.html

And this has to do with the content of the post how? Or is this just a knee jerk reaction by someone who has no idea what the program was about? It's pretty lame to slam the content when you don't even know what it is or what he's talking about. It has to do with the content of the post because Moyers was complaining about the fact that the administration was claiming victory. I am making it clear that I think that is a correct claim. We didn't wait to see if the civilian population or remnants of the armies in Japan or Germany would keep fighting before we claimed victory, so why should we this time? I've got to go, lots of jumping to do this weekend (I hope) but I have to leave one parting thought. So if we've claimed "victory" and have won, then why all the hub bub "winning" or "losing" the war these days?

I read that interview. What's the problem with Stewart? Sure, he runs a "fake news" show but he's typically more on the ball than most of the "real" news folks. Case in point: http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/04/19/jon-stewart-calls-out-bushs-rhetorical-bullt/ Now THAT's classic!

Certainly. Had he not had strong feelings about the war he probably would not have made it. However that does not make it inaccurate. He pretty much bashes everyone in the media for not doing a good job. He seems to back it up. Had he been biased in the other direction he probably simply would not have addressed the issue. But looking up this piece in various blogs it seems that most people are simply attacking Moyers, but not the content of his work.

It appears that there were 21 films that were fully commissioned out of over 400 proposals. 11 of those 21 made the cut.

What about this one: If you're looking for a thread to drift to, go here. You seem to have missed my last post. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2756674;search_string=martial%20law%20;#2756674

Well Goldberg is entitled to his opinion, but you don't have to do any editing to make that point. Quotes are sufficient: BILL MOYERS: And as the administration organized to strike back at the terrorists, there was little tolerance for critical scrutiny from journalists. WALTER ISAACSON: There was a patriotic fervor and the administration used it so that if you challenged anything you were made to feel that there was something wrong with that. BILL MOYERS: Walter Isaacson was then Chairman and Chief Executive Officer OF CNN. WALTER ISAACSON: And there was even almost a patriotism police which, you know, they'd be up there on the internet sort of picking anything a Christiane Amanpour, or somebody else would say as if it were disloyal…. BILL MOYERS: We interviewed a former reporter at CNN who had been there through that period. And this reporter said this quote, "Everybody on staff just sort of knew not to push too hard to do stories critical of the Bush Administration." WALTER ISAACSON: Especially right after 9/11. Especially when the war in Afghanistan is going on. There was a real sense that you don't get that critical of a government that's leading us in war time. SOLDIER: Move out! BILL MOYERS: When American forces went after the terrorist bases in Afghanistan, network and cable news reported the civilian casualtiesÂ…the patriot police came knocking. WALTER ISAACSON: We'd put it on the air and by nature of a 24 hour TV network, it was replaying over and over again. So, you would get phone calls. You would get advertisers. You would get the Administration. BILL MOYERS: You said pressure from advertisers? WALTER ISAACSON: Not direct pressure from advertisers, but big people in corporations were calling up and saying, 'You're being anti-American here.' BILL MOYERS: So Isaacson sent his staff a memo, leaked to THE WASHINGTON POST: 'It seems perverse' he said, 'to focus too much on the casualties or hardship in Afghanistan," REPORTER: There's a body up here. BILL MOYERS: And he ordered his reporters and anchors to balance the images of civilian devastation with reminders of September 11th. WALTER ISAACSON: I felt if we put into context, we could alleviate the pressure of people saying, "Don't even show what's happening in Afghanistan." BILL MOYERS: Newspapers were squeezed, too. This one in Florida told its editors: "Do not use photos on page 1a showing civilian casualtiesÂ…" our sister paper Â…has done so and received hundreds and hundreds of threatening e-mails

As a side bar, you might like this and I can't resist poking at them. Check it out, Shepard Smith from FOX gets caught up in a moment of Lib-like compassion....I mean weakness. He's damn near aiding the enemy if you ask me. And "treasonous" if you ask Tom DeLay The were showing the coffin of the Blue Angel who crashed. "This is a scene we are not accustomed to see during war times. They don’t allow us to see the victims — uh, heroes who died for us in Iraq. We don’t get to see their caskets come back. It’s a wonderful honor to be able to pay tribute to this man in this way. Wouldn’t it be nice if we were able to do this with the hundreds upon hundreds who have died for us in Iraq?"

I'd be interested to see those pointed out. I thought he did a good job of showing how complicit the media was in the lead up to the war. No one (but Knight Ridder) was asking any of the obvious questions. They were just taking the talking points and repeating them. It wasn't reporting, it was reciting. The Washington Post publicly apologized for doing it and Colbert had a good time with it at the press dinner last year. Not that I expect much to change, but the first step to getting better is admitting that you have a problem.

If you need something to wear: http://www.tshirthell.com/store/product.php?productid=472

Or if someone were to show flag draped coffins returning home?

He doesn't have to do anything to Bill so long as "Dancing with the Surviving American Idol Apprentice" is on every night. Bill's on PBS and the American public is self censoring.

Yep. We expect to hold other world leaders accountable for their actions. We should expect our own to be equally scrutinized. Do "shades of grey" or "don't throw the baby out with the bath water" mean anything to you? Careful, the right wingers around here are going to label you a libdemsocialistcommiepinkoappeaser if you continue with the "shades of grey" stuff. I was actually already taking the gray area into consideration. That's why I wasn't going to include Bush. He was just a tool. Cheney knew what he was doing, lied his ass off to do it, has been caught lying his ass off and still continues to lie his ass off. Amazing that he's got any ass left. (must be all ass). Let him take the fall, maybe throw in Rummy as a bonus. (He's only wafer thin).

Yep. We expect to hold other world leaders accountable for their actions. We should expect our own to be equally scrutinized.

You may take this as an insult or a compliment, but you are a master of thread drift. I'm not sure if it's participator or precipitator but I commend you, speaking or course as one tangential thinker to another. Now, back to the thread. Did you see the program by any chance? Any thoughts? No interest? It's all Clinton's fault?

Actually I thought the prayer started off well but he cut the list of proper nouns too short. I wish more people would pray like that. We'd fight less. "To God the Father Almighty, Creator of Heaven and Earth, God of Abraham, Jehovah,....."

Thanks for being thorough in your critique. It makes it easier to point out the first five words of my post.

I like that idea. Congress should just hop on the ICC bandwagon and let the international community give him the Milosevic treatment. The really scary part is a lot of people actually favor doing this. I think it's important to lead by example. If we're going to hold other countries accountable for war crimes, crimes against humanity, etc., then we should police our own. Otherwise you are perceived as a hypocrite imperialist whose actions may spawn a "terrorist" response. Same thing goes for exporting "democracy". Ours is still in the beta stage. The problem with sending him to a criminal court would be that we'd have to pay reparations, and we certainly can't afford to do that AND keep our military industrial complex living in the manner in which it's become accustomed.

I like that idea. Congress should just hop on the ICC bandwagon and let the international community give him the Milosevic treatment. Just so long as he's out of here, not working where he has any influence on our government and we don't have to pick up his pension, I don't care what happens to him.

That is the PERFECT way to put it!!!

And this has to do with the content of the post how? Or is this just a knee jerk reaction by someone who has no idea what the program was about? It's pretty lame to slam the content when you don't even know what it is or what he's talking about. C'mon, you're missing a perfect opportunity to rant on the inadequacy of the "liberal" media. If you were to take that route I'd join in the bash fest with you!

Anyone else see this last night. Bill put together another good one. http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/btw/watch.html

Like I said before, impeachment=waste of time. Cart 'em off to the Hague in the interest of national security. edited to add: Ooooo! Better yet, GITMO!! You don't even have to worry about charges if we do that!

Isn't this were someone is supposed to say "...it's ok if your party....blah blah...blah...." But I guess you're right, it's not prostitution if you leave the money on the dresser in the adjacent room.