There are so many subtle & overt ways the liberal press exposes its bias. Just one example. Our only major newspaper (metro area of some 3.5mil) has yet to print a story about U.S. casualties in Iraq without an obligatory qualifier, going something like this: "Two U.S. soldiers were killed by a roadside bomb outside Najaf today, the xxxth and xxxth casualties since President Bush declared an end to major hostilities in Iraq." That's not intended as a direct quote, but every such article, without fail and for months on end, has included the "since President Bush declared" language. What purpose is served, pray tell, by including that language ad nauseum? None, except to make us aware that the reporter (or editor) wants to get another shot at Bush in. That kind of gratuitous crap gets wrapped around story after story, I'm afraid, by reporters and/or editors whose agendas include much more than reporting facts. They clearly hope that the wag-the-dog theory proves true, that if they say something often enough & loudly enough it will be believed as factual.

0.02/Opinion

Cheers,
Daiwa

I've read and enjoyed a lot of sf novels from Orson, who is a devout Mormon, BTW, last I heard. His "Enders Game" is classic for kids or adults, and the series that follows has a lot to recommend it, as well. Altogether a thoughtful and thought provoking author, who enjoys taking on really challenging moral and philosophical issues and does a really good job, generally, in presenting them. (And, I speak as a devout atheist and follower of Ayn Rand.)

I suspect, however, re "liberal bias," that the reality is more diverse. I occasionally cruise the local radio dial just to see who's out there, and it's a real zoo here in the LA/OC area. One thing that has gone largely unremarked by the media is the rise of the ultra-right "Patriots" on the low-budget AM circuit. These are direct descendents of the old John Birchers, with their Bilderbergers and Illuminati/Council on Foreign Relations schtick, and their typical holocaust denials, etc.

The interesting thing is that if you look at their publications, or listen to them for very long, you find that on a wide variety of issues, they are precisely in line ideologically with the radical progressive left. In fact, many of their published articles could be dropped right into some progressive/left inner city rabble rouser journal and wouldn't raise a ripple. It's absolutely the same line, verbatum. And it's really embarrassing to the leftists when I hand them an issue of one of the Patriot rags, open to a select article, watch them eat it up, and then show them the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" nonsense, or the magnetized water that will cure AIDS, on the following page.

So, where does THAT fit in this dialogue? Does it discredit the left? Or the "Patriot" right? Has one of them been somehow subverted by the other? Or have both groups been sucked into a bodacious conspiracy?

There are major biases on both sides of the fence in the media outlets each party controls - talk radio for republicans/conservatives and newspapers for democrats/liberals. On tv and the internet, you can find whatever opinion you want or are looking for. The fact that these media outlets usually portray and debate just one of only two positions should give concern to all of us about the reliabililty of either position - right now both sides leave out big chunks of info. to support their postions when necessary. Most issues cannot be distilled to 2 simple arguing points as is being done in ALL of our media outlets (except the net) left and right...

Articles like the one Drag posted seem only to draw more lines between the population via finger-pointing and name-calling and do nothing to actually solve real issues. It's just a blame game that creates ever more distrust, paranoia, and suspicion - these create bureaucracy and grid-lock. Many people seem to think most of the worlds problems exist because of democrats and their lying (or vice-versa)- the true problem is the government itself and the systems it has created (how many people are actually familiar with the econmoics of a fiat based currency - like US dollars - and the problems our currency itself creates in society - how many people know that a central bank - the Federal Reserve - is a plank of communism or that we have implemented 8 or 9 of the 10 planks of communism here in America and what that means). Power of the size that exists (media/state/military/etc.) will (eventually) be used unwisely by whoever it is controlled by (mostly one-world commies from what I see) regardless of their political affiliations.

For information on what the conservatives are saying that might be a little varied from the actual truth, check out mediamatters.org - I am not a liberal, but lets cover all the hyperbole/truth-twisting if we are going to start finger-pointing about hyperbole/truth-twisting.

There are major biases on both sides of the fence in the media outlets each party controls - talk radio for republicans/conservatives and newspapers for democrats/liberals. On tv and the internet, you can find whatever opinion you want or are looking for. The fact that these media outlets usually portray and debate just one of only two positions should give concern to all of us about the reliabililty of either position - right now both sides leave out big chunks of info. to support their postions when necessary. Most issues cannot be distilled to 2 simple arguing points as is being done in ALL of our media outlets (except the net) left and right...

Articles like the one Drag posted (no offense Drag, just and observation) seem only to draw more lines between the population via finger-pointing and name-calling and do nothing to actually solve real issues. It's just a blame game that creates ever more distrust, paranoia, and suspicion - these create bureaucracy and grid-lock. Many people seem to think most of the worlds problems exist because of democrats and their lying (or vice-versa)- the true problem is the government itself and the systems it has created (how many people are actually familiar with the econmoics of a fiat based currency - like US dollars - and the problems our currency itself creates in society - how many people know that a central bank - the Federal Reserve - is a plank of communism or that we have implemented 8 or 9 of the 10 planks of communism here in America and what that means). Power of the size that exists (media/state/military/etc.) will (eventually) be used unwisely by whoever it is controlled by (mostly one-world commies from what I see) regardless of their political affiliations.

1. Abolition of private property and the application of all rent to public purpose. Property Taxes –fully implemented

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. Income Taxes – fully implemented

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance. – partially implemented via inheritance tax

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. – partially implemented via asset forefeiture laws

5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly. – fully implemented via the Federal Reserve

6. Centralization of the means of communication and transportation in the hands of the State. – Fully implemented via FCC, DOT, etc.

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State, the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. – Fully implemented via Corporate Taxes (50% of profit) and corporate farming

8. Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of Industrial armies, especially for agriculture. fully implemented via Women’s rights and migrant workers

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the population over the country. fully implemented via corporate farms, expressways, and urban sprawl

10. Free education for all children in government schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc. etc. almost fully implemented via Public Schools

If you think that property taxes is the equivalent of abolishing private property, you need to take better advantage of free education.

An interesting earlier counter-argument article about the media, which demonstrates how a slightly conservative stance by the major media outlets is safer for them:

Here it is.

Madine,

I don't think that property taxes are the equivalent of abolishing private property. I think they can be interpreted as a Plank of communism. Several Planks seek to transfer the labor of the individual to the state via taxation.

Karl Marx said that any state practicing 6 or more Planks of communism, was practicing communism. The US, therefore, is practicing communism. It may not be the totalitarian form that we were taught to fear and loathe, but it is still communism according to Karl Marx.

My point here was that who is bias and who is not is a surface issue meant to distract the population. Articles like Orson Scott Card's do nothing to affect the status of the core issues (or even get people thinking about them) that directly affect each of us every day - core issues like fiat money and Central Banking are good examples because most Americans don't understand their own monetary system, who controls it, who profits from it, who is indebted by it, when fiat started in the US, what the founding fathers said about fiat, etc.

Also, "free education" is not free, we pay for it via taxes whether we use it or not - "public education" would be an acceptable term. Taking advantage of public education is no longer in the best interest of the individual unless there are no other options available. The system itself is bloated, corrupt, bureaucratic and unresponsive and does not use the resources it has as wisely as privately run schools which results in not producing the best quality student. Test scores prove it and so do the lessons and books being used in many schools. Teaching to the level of the least intelligent kid in class isn't doing us or our country any favors...

Madine,

One more thing.

If you think that you actually own the land (not the dwelling) you live on (if you "own" a house), you need to sit down with your lawyer and your deed and see who actually, legally, owns your land. You will find that, effectively, you are a renter of land from the US Federal Government and you do not have the right to use your land any way that you would see fit to (and I'm not talking about wanting to dump nuclear waste or something). You are restricted from many uses depending upon where you live, what bugs and animals the Gov. claims you have on your land, what resources you have on your land, etc.

Just because you rent, doesn't mean it is not your "private property". If I lease a copier it is still "mine" even though I might even make more money than the payment each month, but I don't really ever own it - I use it for a fee. The same is true of your land. You rent it, you make money off it, and you probaly pay somewhere between 200-1000 dollars a month in property taxes if you are middle class depending on location, home size, home value, etc.

Property tax IS rent to the federal government - it matters not what they do with it or if it is used for good or evil. It is still rent.

Property tax IS rent to the federal government

I'm pretty sure that the federal government does not collect property taxes. State and local governments do.

The US has had a national bank/banking system long before Marxism.

Madine,

OK -I should have said Property tax is rent to government in general, but the Feds are the ones that truly "own" your land and the local and state guys collect the money for a Federal schooling system that does not do a good job. Forget who collects the money (I collect taxes on all 100 of my employees for the Feds) - it's who has the right to spend it that counts. In the case of schooling, I believe much of the core dedision making is done at the Federal level.

There is a difference between a National Bank/Banking system and a Central Bank and its' banking system. Also, the national banks you speak of did not issue fiat money except the Bank Of The United States (to pay for the war of 1812 I believe) - Jackson relinquished the charter on that bank after the debt was relieved and we did not have a Central Bank again in the US until the Federal Reserve was created in 1913. 1913 is the same year income taxes were first begun - there is a connection between the two. Central Banks create debt for the state, the state pays interest on the debt via taxation. How much of the tax dollars each year are used to pay the interest on the debt? About 400 BILLION - almost the same as our entire defense budget each year!

These things you mention are, again, just surface issues and do seem to get to the heart of things to me...

BTW, anyone who thinks O'Reilly is conservative either doesn't watch him or is so left wing that anyone who isn't far left must seem conservative. Conservatives don't consider O'Reilly conservative.

Good point, Brad. O'Reilly addresses this in his books "The O'Reilly Factor" and "The No Spin Zone". In one of the two (I can't remember which), he lays out all of his chief positions and challenges the reader to label him as liberal or conservative based on that. The point is, it can't be done.

I would also like to point out that O'Reilly was calling Bush to task for the Ken Lay/Enron connection LONG before any other major media had picked it up.

Any sovereign nation ultimately reserves the right to do what it wants with the land it controls.

There is a difference between a National Bank/Banking system and a Central Bank and its' banking system.

And this would be...?

The US government was authorized to borrow money under the original Constitution.

There were two national banks, the first from 1791-1811 and the second from 1816-1836. The war of 1812 was financed without a national bank, and the problems associated with that financing was one of the motivations for creating the central bank. Most banks in the 19th century issued bank notes, which although not the official currency of the US were essentially "fiat money".

Madine,

Sorry for responding 1 day later, but I am trying to run a business and try to spend evenings with my children or reading (books).

You may be right about any sovereign nation being able to use its' land the way it wants, but not all have "property taxes" and there was a time in the US that there was no such thing as "property tax" or income tax - the ability to do something does not necessarily justify it, so I don't understand your response. One must ask oneself why these things came into existence, who brought them into existence, if they are necessary, if there are other ways to accomplish the same goals, if they are benefical or detrimental to the public, if they allow concentration and corruption of power, etc.

A National Bank is one of many that is allowed to issue credit. A Cental Bank is one with an exclusive Monopoly on the issuance of credit (Read Plank 5 again - it does call for a National Bank, but one that has a Monopoly - like the FED). Also, borrowing money is not the same thing as issuing fiat money - from what I can gather from your short response, you believe the 2 are the same thing. Fiat money is paper currency not backed by a hard asset such as gold, but backed by a future promise to pay (an IOU). Fiat money represents work that still needs to be done - "honest" money, such as gold coin, represents work that has already been done. I can borrow gold, print/coin money representative of the amount of gold and still not have fiat currency, but be in debt. Debt should not be confused with fiat currency.

The bank notes isued in the 19th century were, in many cases, backed by the gold (or hard assets) of a depositor and fractional reserves were not employed anywhere near the way they are today, if at all.

I am not really sure what your responses are supposed to mean. They point out minor errors, but they do not address the point. Do you believe the central banking system of today handles monetary policy in a way that is the most beneficial to the people - why/why not? Do you feel the US is practicing communism - why/why not? Is that a system that has more flaws than other systems or less - why/why not? Are there any other systems of economics (Austrian Theory for example) or government that may serve the public better - what are they and why would they be better or worse?

My point was to get people talking and learning about issues that have importance instead of smoke and mirrors issues and I guess I got at least one person to start doing that with me. For that I thank you Madine and am willing to learn/listen to what you have to say. I do believe that my overall concerns are valid and true even if I got a few specifics (working from memory here) wrong - the US has become a communist country and most people don't even know it and would not admit it if they did...

Madine,

Sorry for responding 1 day later, but I am trying to run a business and try to spend evenings with my children or reading (books).

You may be right about any sovereign nation being able to use its' land the way it wants, but not all have "property taxes" and there was a time in the US that there was no such thing as "property tax" or income tax - the ability to do something does not necessarily justify it, so I don't understand your response. One must ask oneself why these things came into existence, who brought them into existence, if they are necessary, if there are other ways to accomplish the same goals, if they are benefical or detrimental to the public, if they allow concentration and corruption of power, etc.

A National Bank is one of many that is allowed to issue credit. A Cental Bank is one with an exclusive Monopoly on the issuance of credit (Read Plank 5 again - it does call for a National Bank, but one that has a Monopoly - like the FED). Also, borrowing money is not the same thing as issuing fiat money - from what I can gather from your short response, you believe the 2 are the same thing. Fiat money is paper currency not backed by a hard asset such as gold, but backed by a future promise to pay (an IOU). Fiat money represents work that still needs to be done - "honest" money, such as gold coin, represents work that has already been done. I can borrow gold, print/coin money representative of the amount of gold and still not have fiat currency, but be in debt. Debt should not be confused with fiat currency.

The bank notes isued in the 19th century were, in many cases, backed by the gold (or hard assets) of a depositor and fractional reserves were not employed anywhere near the way they are today, if at all.

I am not really sure what your responses are supposed to mean. They point out minor errors, but they do not address the point. Do you believe the central banking system of today handles monetary policy in a way that is the most beneficial to the people - why/why not? Do you feel the US is practicing communism - why/why not? Is that a system that has more flaws than other systems or less - why/why not? Are there any other systems of economics (Austrian Theory for example) or government that may serve the public better - what are they and why would they be better or worse?

My point was to get people talking and learning about issues that have importance instead of smoke and mirrors issues and I guess I got at least one person to start doing that with me. For that I thank you Madine and am willing to learn/listen to what you have to say. I do believe that my overall concerns are valid and true even if I got a few specifics (working from memory here) wrong - the US has become a communist country and most people don't even know it and would not admit it if they did...

The point about sovereignty is that if you say, "The government owns X because the government has the ultimate authority regarding X", it is not possible to own anything if you are under the authority of the government.

There is a big gap between what is theoretically possible and what is likely to actually happen. Theoretically, I'm sure the government could declare grass an endangered plant and confiscate all our homes. I don't expect that to happen though.

Does the government control all banks? What is the difference between a bank under govnernment control and a bank not under government control?

What is the important difference between income tax, property tax, and sales/excise tax?