Daily Kos

Would Murdoch become Turkish, endorse Obama?

Thu May 29, 2008 at 08:40:30 AM PDT

I know, it almost sounds like a troll diary (but do check my other entries to see that I'm no troll). But there are two very real questions I'm asking here:

Would Rupert Murdoch, owner of Fox News, ever change his nationality and become Turkish?

Would Rupert Murdoch actually endorse the almost-presumptive Democratic Party nominee for President in the US, Barack Obama, over John McCain?

The answers may surprise you. More, below the fold...

First, a bit of history. In 1972, Murdoch acquired the Sydney morning tabloid The Daily Telegraph. In that year's election, Murdoch threw his growing power behind the Australian Labor Party (translation: left-center Democratic Party) under the leadership of Gough Whitlam and duly saw it win power.

So he started by supporting the left-of-center party.

He then moved to the UK markets, saw a shift in the wind and changed to conservative endorsements.

Murdoch bought The Sun and News of the World newspapers in Britain, and promptly threw his considerable weight into supporting the UK Conservative Party under Margaret Thatcher.

The next bit of this diary entry might seem like déjà vu, so here goes...

Rupert Murdoch helped the Conservatives hype up a foreign war with a former friendly country that cost billions, and those that said it should not have happened were labeled 'traitors'.

He helped perpetuate the image that Conservatives were the part of employment for all (employment rose dramatically to 4 million under Thatcher, and was down to under 2 million under Blair). He helped spread the talking point that the Tories were the party of Godliness too (but an almost never-ending multitude of Conservative sex scandals put a stop to that nonsense).

He also helped perpetuate the old "Conservatives are the fiscal responsible ones" myth, which lasted right up to the bit where Black Wednesday forced the Tories to withdraw the pound from the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM),  after they were unable to keep Sterling above its agreed lower limit when currency markets believed the policy was unsustainable.

The most high profile of the currency market investors, George Soros, made over US$1 billion profit from Black Wednesday. Which means George Soros, the person so hated by the [f]right-wing over here, put his money where his mouth was by betting against the Conservative way of doing business. So now you all know why the GOP hates him with a seething irrational hatred... they fear him because he was 100% correct and they lost their little fluffy dreams (and possibly some of their cash too) based on Conservative sound-bites.

Oh, and Murdoch perpetuated the names "The Iron Lady" and "The Decider" in his media too. Nothing like a good strong name to help drive the message home.

Eventually, some of the UK Tories started writing books saying "it wasn't me" (Scott McClennan is just the first over here, trust me). Even when Alberto Gonzales testified over Iraq, he followed Maggie Thatcher's example and gave his answers as "I don't recall", such is the amazing string of coincidences!!

And then, in the late 1990s, Murdoch said it's time for a change, and that he was endorsing the union-friendly UK Labour Party.

Like I said: he started by supporting the Left and it won. He then moved to the UK markets, saw a shift in the wind and changed to conservative endorsements, and they won. Then he saw another shift (because of the reasons previously mentioned, which the GOP are now repeating) and went back to the Left in the UK. Since those endorsements in his media, Labour has beaten the Conservatives in three successive General Elections.

If anyone thinks this doesn't constitute a pattern, you might have had a point. Until recently. When he did the same thing in his native Australia. For years he was behind the Conservatives there, then he endorsed Kevin Rudd and Rudd was elected in as Prime Minister of Australia. To let you know what kind of politician Rudd is, so there's no misunderstanding: Rudd's first act as Aussie PM was to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. As can be seen here in Murdoch's The Australian newspaper, it was reported in a very positive light:

Within hours of being officially sworn in as the nation's 26th prime minister, Mr Rudd held his first executive council meeting with Governor-General Michael Jeffery, who agreed with his request that Australia ratify the decade-old protocol.

News of the ratification spread quickly, sparking a sustained burst of applause on the floor at the UN climate change conference in Bali, which Mr Rudd will attend next week on his first overseas trip as Prime Minister.

The page contains a video from Sky News Australia. Owned by Rupert Murdoch.

It's also something I would like the next POTUS to do, too. But don't say it yet, or Bush might decide it's the betterest thing to do. Just putting that out there. It would be a nice gesture.

So what does this have to do with Barack Obama? The Silicon Valley Insider has an article today that says Murdoch is pessimistic about the financial situation in the US...

"for the next 18 months, I think this country is in for a very hard time"

...and that he is cautiously optimistic about Senator Obama becoming President, adding:

"I want to be convinced that Obama is the real thing, that can really carry through. I'm open to that."

Look at it this way: Rupert Murdoch was the 33rd richest American on Forbes' list of wealthy people for 2007. Yet I said he was Australian, right? yes, he was born Australian and considered himself to be an Aussie under oath.

In fact, he told the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal in 1979: 'I carry an Australian passport. My children are Australian. I pay my taxes in Australia...' He did hold a 'green card' issued by the US Immigration Service, but just as a necessity of working for Australia in America. Did not this mean he would soon be entitled to US naturalisation? a lawyer asked. 'Yes. But I think I have stated many times it is not my desire.' The lawyer wondered if such a desire might sometime emerge? 'I cannot imagine it,' said Murdoch.

But when he wanted to buy his way into the US market, something was in the way. His lack of American-ness. So he changed his nationality as quickly as he could.

His 1985 purchase of the Metromedia television stations required him to become an American citizen to comply with Federal Communications Commission (FCC) restrictions on foreign ownership of U.S. television stations; many felt he received inordinately preferential treatment by the Reagan administration in expediting the citizenship process.

If anyone thinks this doesn't constitute a pattern, you might have had a point. Until recently. In his push to expand, old problems keep re-emerging. But if there's one thing we know about Murdoch, he puts his earnings above everything else. Even his nationality.

Recently, Murdoch has bought out the Turkish TV channel, TGRT, which was previously confiscated by the Turkish Board of Banking Regulations, TMSF. Newspapers report that Murdoch has bought TGRT in a partnership with Turkish recording mogul, Ahmet Ertegün and there are alleged reports that Murdoch has acquired Turkish citizenship to overcome the current obligations against capital sales to foreigners.

---

I'm not saying we should trust the man. Personally speaking, I trust him about as far as I could spit him. But consider this: the man is opportunism personified. He will change his nationality to make money. He will wrap himself in any flag for a buck, lessening the value of what that flag means as a result (are you listening, lapel pin flag wearers?). He will hype wars to curry favor with those in power.

And now he has seen a new thing emerge: The Long Tail, first coined by Chris Anderson in an October 2004 Wired magazine article, works in politics.

To paraphrase the idea: forget squeezing millions from a few mega-money contributors at the top of the pile. The future of politics is in the millions of niche contributors at the shallow end of the populace. You. me. Us. Those of us that can't afford $10,000 for dinner and a photo with the candidate, but can afford a $25 online donation, have changed the face of politics.

I may not trust a man that may have become a Turkish national just to buy a TV channel, but one interesting fact remains. Throughout recent history in English-speaking countries, history has repeated. And that history has Keith Rupert Murdoch smack-dab center in it. He'll support the "business-friendly" side, until that conservative business-friendly side self-destructs. Then he'll switch to the left-of-center choice, because there's no profit in aligning with the conservatives anymore.

It's all about advertising dollars.

It's all about what's good for Murdoch.

And it may just be, very soon, that a lot of Fox Noise, Faux News fanboys are going to wake up one morning and wonder why the hell 'their' network has changed.

It's nothing to do with you, dear Republicans. It's because you were nothing to do with it in the first place. It's about cash. Just ask the Turkish guy with the Aussie accent over there, he'll tell you.

Poll

Rupert Murdoch supporting Obama?

5%2 votes
47%17 votes
47%17 votes

| 36 votes | Vote | Results

Tags: rupert murdoch, barack obama, politics, australia, britain, USA, turkey (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 39 comments

  •  Tip jar. Many thanks. (5+ / 0-)

    The nation can be made to produce a far higher standard of living for the masses of the people if only government is intelligent and energetic... (FDR, '37)

    by ShawnGBR on Thu May 29, 2008 at 08:40:42 AM PDT

  •  His daughter Elizabeth (3+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    ShawnGBR, Shhs, Dougie

    hosted a fund-raiser for Obama.

    •  His son, James, has some intesting connections... (0+ / 0-)

      From Wiki:

      Murdoch has two children with his American wife Kathryn Hufschmid, who works for the Clinton Climate Initiative, a charitable foundation set up by former President Clinton in 2006.

      So if James ever gets to control the media outlets...

      Following the shock resignation of his brother Lachlan Murdoch from his executive positions at News Corporation on 29 July 2005, James is widely viewed as his father's heir-apparent.

      ---

      Some sources report that he will succeed Peter Chernin as News Corporation COO when Chernin's contract expires in 2009.

      In a related announcement, James will also "take direct responsibility for the strategic and operational development of News Corporation’s television, newspaper and related digital assets in Europe, Asia and the Middle East".

      The nation can be made to produce a far higher standard of living for the masses of the people if only government is intelligent and energetic... (FDR, '37)

      by ShawnGBR on Thu May 29, 2008 at 08:51:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  She might totally disagree with him. n/t (0+ / 0-)

  •  The point is- (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    jfromga

    All of the major corporations will pander to the Dems because THEY will be in power.  Corporations don't give a shit what party is in power- they have been paying off both sides of the isle for decades.  Let's not lose our focus.

  •  Murdoch is an Ameican citizen (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Dougie

    which is a related by slightly differnt concept than a national.

    US laws require citizenship to own US television stations.

    •  No difference at all. (0+ / 0-)

      US National is defined as:

      US citizen and US permanent and temporary legal resident aliens.

      Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms. US Department of Defense 2005.

      That's Joint Pub 1-02 or JP 1-02 to you military types. The full thing is a 2MB PDF file, from here. Page 561.

      Sorry. Please check sources before engaging engines.

      The nation can be made to produce a far higher standard of living for the masses of the people if only government is intelligent and energetic... (FDR, '37)

      by ShawnGBR on Thu May 29, 2008 at 09:00:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Tell that to the American Samoans (2+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        ShawnGBR, Dougie

        who are US nationals, and not US citizens.

        Not all US nationals are US citizens. Though all US citizens are US nationals.

        The Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, while useful, is not the controlling authority for the definition of a US national, or a US citizen.

        If you like, you may check 8 U.S.C. section 1408 for an example in the law where nationals are not citizens.

        •  Conceded. (0+ / 0-)

          The nation can be made to produce a far higher standard of living for the masses of the people if only government is intelligent and energetic... (FDR, '37)

          by ShawnGBR on Thu May 29, 2008 at 09:57:26 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  ...although Murdoch is no Samoan. (0+ / 0-)

            And at no point did I mention him being a US National.

            I used the phrase Turkish national, but only referred to US nationality.

            So there is that small point.

            The nation can be made to produce a far higher standard of living for the masses of the people if only government is intelligent and energetic... (FDR, '37)

            by ShawnGBR on Thu May 29, 2008 at 10:15:16 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Huffington Post (3+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    ShawnGBR, jfromga, BrighidG

    just had an article that he was thinking of supporting Obama who he likes better than his "pal" McCain.  the NY Post, which he owns, did support obama.

  •  I like this diary BUT (3+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    ShawnGBR, jfromga, Dougie

    it seems you imply that Murdoch had more influence over those political occurances than he really did, which is irksome because that guy is a douche who would love to hear you say that.

    Thankfully, if that is in fact what you were driving at, you have the causality backwards in that Murdoch is simply an opportunist who shouts loudly and obnoxiously whatever people at the time want to hear.  He was not causing the various shifts in political allignment, merely reacting to the shifts that were inevitable and wholly independent of him.

    The times change regardless of one man or his news corp.  Murdoch is no Jesus, to controll the passions of millions.  All he has going for him is a good eye for which way the winds are blowing.

    •  Agreed, the guy is a douche. (1+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      jfromga

      However, never over-estimate the power of TV to control the framing of modern politics.

      It works both ways. He's known as The Dirty Digger (and gold-digging is just a park of that name), so he will indeed just switch to wherever he thinks the money will be. But he does it months before the switch happens.

      He's no Jesus, but it doesn't take a Jesus to change the world. I'm going to borrow some words from Depeche Mode now, of all bands:

      You can't change the world
      But you can change the facts
      And when you change the facts
      You change points of view
      If you change points of view
      You may change a vote
      And when you change a vote
      You may change the world

      Look at how many facts there are out there concerning the push to war in Iraq. How it was indeed a war for oil and money, how Halliburton shares that were mired for years at the $10 mark before 2003 are worth more than $40 now (I have some rather nice before and after graphs that show it surprisingly well). Yet the 27%ers will still refuse to believe this had anything to do with oil profits for the friends of AEI members.

      Passions are very easy to control. History is full of instances where whole nations have been led sleeping into catastrophe and inhumanity because of passion.

      So yes, he has a good eye for the direction of the wind.

      But with that amount of power, he can have a few million people fanning the air too.

      The nation can be made to produce a far higher standard of living for the masses of the people if only government is intelligent and energetic... (FDR, '37)

      by ShawnGBR on Thu May 29, 2008 at 09:10:04 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not TV tho Shawn (1+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        ShawnGBR

        The influence that Murdoch has in the UK is rather different from that in the USA. In the former the national "red top" newspapers, especially the Sun, have considerable influence over the white working class vote. His Sky network in the UK would never get away with the sort of coverage on Fox News. I believe similar regulations limit any bias on his Australian stations.

        Does Magna Carta mean nothing to you? Did she die in vain?

        by Lib Dem FoP on Thu May 29, 2008 at 10:11:41 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  ...and who watches Sky News before the BBC? (0+ / 0-)

          Or, for that matter, ITN?

          (Welcome back, Sir Trevor.)

          He has his hands in many pies. And will use the one that works best to get him ahead. Be it the daily rags in Blighty, or Bill Orally on Fox 'News'.

          The nation can be made to produce a far higher standard of living for the masses of the people if only government is intelligent and energetic... (FDR, '37)

          by ShawnGBR on Thu May 29, 2008 at 10:17:59 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Agreed (1+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            ShawnGBR

            Tho Sky News also provides the bulletins for Five and TVAM.

            What I was pointing out was that different media have  the greater influence over voting in the two countriesK

            In the UK there is also the consideration that "New Labour" moved rather more towards Murdoch than he towards them. Far from being trades union friendly, Blair had the same sort of relationship with the unions that you and I have with an ATM, press the right buttons and money pops out.

            Does Magna Carta mean nothing to you? Did she die in vain?

            by Lib Dem FoP on Thu May 29, 2008 at 10:30:52 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  I agree with you (2+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      ShawnGBR, Dougie

      and I think the diarist does as well.  Its that Murdoch is a particularly adept weather vane.  He senses the change coming and reacts more quickly than many others, making more money out of it.

      And as the Huffpo article sarakandel mentioned points out, he's now saying Obama is a rock star, he will beat McCain, and he would like to meet Obama.  Murdoch isn't a king maker, but he's an accomplished courtier who kisses up particularly well if he senses a profit in it for him.

      •  To be fair, though... (0+ / 0-)

        I should point out that I am the diarist (so I should hope my views match my own)!!

        The nation can be made to produce a far higher standard of living for the masses of the people if only government is intelligent and energetic... (FDR, '37)

        by ShawnGBR on Thu May 29, 2008 at 09:11:55 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  but I think (1+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          ShawnGBR

          I clicked in the right space and replied to m4gill4 agreeing with him, and supporting the idea that you also meant what he said, and it just so happened we posted almost at the same time.

          If I clicked accidentally under your post, I didn't mean to as I was trying to post to m4gill4.  I sometimes go cross-eyed trying to figure out who replied to whom and the time line.

          But I still support and agree with you as opposed to denounce and reject.  ;)

          •  No problem. (0+ / 0-)

            Just thought it was a bit weird. Happens to the best of us.

            =)

            The nation can be made to produce a far higher standard of living for the masses of the people if only government is intelligent and energetic... (FDR, '37)

            by ShawnGBR on Thu May 29, 2008 at 10:52:29 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  This statement is absolute crap (0+ / 0-)

    Rupert Murdoch helped the Conservatives hype up a foreign war with a former friendly country that cost billions, and those that said it should not have happened were labelled 'traitors'.

    Argentina invaded a British territory and imprisoned British citizens. That's not hype that's illegal aggression. Damn right they went and kicked the Argies out.

    Murdoch does what's best for Murdoch regardless of politics. He likes to support winners. In the UK The Sun endorsed Tory candidate Boris Johnson and signals Murdoch's shift back to the Tories because of their rising political fortunes.

    •  How hyped was The Falkland War? (0+ / 0-)

      News of the invasion was only recognized by the UK Government after a ham radio message was received by an amateur radio operator that also worked as a BBC journalist. That story is here.

      "We have now been taken over. The British government still denies it but they have no contact I believe with the Falklands, and this is probably why they are still denying it.

      "But we have been taken over. There is an aircraft carrier and I believe four other boats - I don't have the details on them - but they do have heavy armoured vehicles in Stanley, details I don't know, and quite a number of personnel.

      "They landed approx 0930 GMT this morning in landing craft and stormed the capital Port Stanley and have taken over the government office, they landed with heavy armoured vehicles.

      "We're now under their control. They are broadcasting that all local people will be treated as normal. Fairly peaceful in Stanley at present time."

      The reaction from Rupert Murdoch's The Sun" Unions are bad, we are heroes (even when one ship, the General Belgrano, was sunk outside the exclusion zone, and was sailing away from the area of conflict). Wallop! Wallop! Got them Argies! Two world wars and one World Cup, doo dah, erm, never mind, wrong country. Front page of the infamous 'Gotcha!' front page here.

      I see, by your use of the word "Argies", that you're pretty conversant with the events. I also see from your most recent diary entry that you cite the Daily Conservative Torygraph Telegraph. Jingoism still a bit fired up for the old UK [f]right wing, eh?

      I also see you're a Scot. It wasn't the Tories losing all Scottish seats in the 1997 election (the one where Murdoch switched alliances) that has you a little angry, is it? I mean, you're still pissed about the early 1980s, it's probably only right you might be pissed about the 1990s too.

      The nation can be made to produce a far higher standard of living for the masses of the people if only government is intelligent and energetic... (FDR, '37)

      by ShawnGBR on Thu May 29, 2008 at 09:32:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  more crap (1+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        Dude1701

        look who's bringing petty party politics into this.

        Regardless of the party in power when a foreign nation seizes territory and imprisons your citizens then you have every right under the international law and the UN charter to kick ass.

        Why don't you make the argument here that the US should have done nothing when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbour and see how far you get?

      •  As for the Obama story (0+ / 0-)

        I used the Telegraph link because it was the only mainstream source that wrote about it.

        You don't have a fucking clue what party I vote for. Maybe you're too far disconnected from the UK to realise there a whole swathes of Labour supporters who have had it with our current pointless government. The SNP control Scotland now.

        •  Really? (0+ / 0-)

          Not this? Not British enough?

          LONDON: U.S. Senator Barack Obama, the favourite to win the Democratic nomination for the race to the White House, on Tuesday promised to put America’s relations with Britain on a more equal footing if he won the election than has been the case under the Bush administration.

          Addressing American expatriates in Britain through a phone-link at a fundraising event in London, Mr. Obama called for "recalibrating" the British-U.S. "special relationship," which under the Bush presidency has seen Britain reduced to playing the second fiddle to Washington.

          Or maybe this? Same date as the Torygraph post. Too left-wing?

          Barack Obama has called for the "special relationship" between the US and Britain to be "recalibrated" to make it a fairer, more equal partnership, the Guardian has learned.

          Senator Obama, who leads the race to be the Democratic candidate for the US presidency, made the remarks in a telephone address to a fundraising event attended by American expatriates in London.

          Hey, you don't think this need to address the Special Relationship might have been, in some small part, because I was wearing a Wayne Rooney number 9 England 2006 red shirt shirt when I shook his hand recently at the Riverside Sports Complex in Scranton, PA, and told him "the world wants you, Barack. I tell you, the world wants you."

          (Now that's a stretch. But it happened.)

          The nation can be made to produce a far higher standard of living for the masses of the people if only government is intelligent and energetic... (FDR, '37)

          by ShawnGBR on Thu May 29, 2008 at 10:42:11 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yeh right (0+ / 0-)

            like I read the Hindu Times ever day because it is on every newspaper stand in the UK.

            I googled the story and the Telegraph was the first one up. Simple as that.

            •  Didn't know you copy and pasted from papers. (0+ / 0-)

              I usually copy and paste as a result of Google searches. It's a lot easier to copy and paste stuff that's already in computer form.

              How do you copy and paste stuff that's on a newspaper stand, Dougie? Really want to know.

              Oh, and keep the comments up. More comments = this is more likely to be in the Recommended Diaries.

              Cheers!

              The nation can be made to produce a far higher standard of living for the masses of the people if only government is intelligent and energetic... (FDR, '37)

              by ShawnGBR on Thu May 29, 2008 at 10:50:39 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  Uhhhh - Argentina wasn't a "former friendly (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Dougie

    country." Especially after it violated international law and invaded and seized the Falkland Islands, which were sovereign British territory.

    •  No? Not a former friend at all? (0+ / 0-)

      Let's check the facts, shall we? This from 2006:

      The invasion, the 25th anniversary of which will be marked by "major celebrations" in London next year - was a great tragedy for British-Argentine relations. There remains a huge English-speaking community throughout Argentina, established over the last 200 years. In 1900, Harrods had two branches, London and Buenos Aires, surely a sign that trade had cemented the two countries.

      Prince Charles. Playing polo. In Argentina. It was seen, at the time, that the war was a bit of an inconvenience to the polo players that would lose a Southern hemisphere place to visit.

      Finally: History of English settlement in Argentina.

      The nation can be made to produce a far higher standard of living for the masses of the people if only government is intelligent and energetic... (FDR, '37)

      by ShawnGBR on Thu May 29, 2008 at 09:53:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not to mention (1+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        ShawnGBR

        Finally: History of English settlement in Argentina.

        See also the Welsh colonization of Patagonia.

        Does Magna Carta mean nothing to you? Did she die in vain?

        by Lib Dem FoP on Thu May 29, 2008 at 10:16:39 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  give me break! (0+ / 0-)

        That's all you've got. Far to inconvenient to actually get to the nub of the matter which was very poor inter-government relations with the Argentine military junta.

        The Falklands War was a contributing factor to the return of democracy to Argentina.

        Argentina in the Victorian age was part of the United Kingdom's informal empire, an independent nation that Britain had economic influence in that was outside the British Empire.

        There are plenty of former colonial countries, formal or not, where we have poor relations and yet they have historical British influences. That doesn't make us eternal friends regardless of current affairs. Zimbabwe and Burma anyone?

        •  Yes, facts are 'all I've got'. (0+ / 0-)

          Looks like someone needs to wash the sand out of his vagina. You point to countries NOW that have poor relations as an apples-to-apples comparison to Argantina, which had strong friendly ties before the Falklands War and has those ties now...?

          Come on, you can do better than that. How about Britain and South Africa? Much better example. Oh wait, doesn't fit the point you were trying to make. Never mind.

          You don't HAVE to keep being demeaning. But as long as you are, I'll give constant reminders to keep that vajayjay sand clear. Fair's fair.

          I'm trying to see why you're really angry. It isn't because Andy Murray was voted dreamiest catch (sorry, "ace of hearts") by a gay dating website in the news, was it? I mean, he beat an Argentinian tennis player. That might knock your Scottish manliness a wee tad, even with the win.

          The nation can be made to produce a far higher standard of living for the masses of the people if only government is intelligent and energetic... (FDR, '37)

          by ShawnGBR on Thu May 29, 2008 at 10:33:49 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You really are an ignorant wanker (0+ / 0-)

            WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU KNOW ABOUT MY SEXUALITY?

            What gives you the right to imply that Scotland and Scots are homophobes?

            Why don't you STFU because you clearly don't know what the hell you're talking about.

            •  So let me get this straight. (0+ / 0-)

              You start with the phrase This statement is absolute crap, continue with More crap, then say I don't have a fucking clue, the give the old "give me break" (me Tarzan, you Jane).

              And now I'm an ignorant wanker.

              Wouldn't it be funny if I were born in Scotland?

              You're just too easy to wind up, is all.

              The nation can be made to produce a far higher standard of living for the masses of the people if only government is intelligent and energetic... (FDR, '37)

              by ShawnGBR on Thu May 29, 2008 at 10:48:07 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  Rupert's Rosebud (0+ / 0-)

    August 1915, reporter Keith Murdoch endures arrest and further potential consequences to report on the abuses of troops by military commanders.  He was kept safe from government persecution by the support of a powerful British press baron. He was later knighted for his efforts.

    In 1959 Rohan Rivett, Rupert Murdoch’s mentor(son of now deceased Sir Keith Murdoch) and the Editor in Chief of Murdoch’s newspaper at the time, spearheaded a story which embarrassed the Australian government but saved an innocent aborigine’s life.  The government brought several sedition charges against Rivett and the newspaper which they were cleared of except for one which lingered for months until it was withdrawn by the government.  Shortly thereafter, in spite of the fact that circulation and profits were much higher since Rivett took over the paper, Rivett was fired by Rupert Murdoch.  Thereafter, according to contemporary observers, the government also began to receive more favorable press from Murdoch’s papers.  The child learned his place was to be found in the dichotomous role of slave/master to government.

    So, the father speaks out against a tyranny and is protected by a powerful press baron.
    The child becomes a media baron and persecutes those who challenge tyranny.  
    The child would seem to have cowered into yellow journalism where the father stood firm in objectivity.  

    One can’t help but wonder if he’s a bit like Kissinger, (who as a child fled the terror of the Nazi’s and went on to support atrocious governments and their actions) and twisted himself into what twisted him.  The child lashes out at whoever is politically convenient, regardless of whether they're deserving or not.  He has become a distorter, distracter, and denouncer of truth in black and white.   The child who for months and years has slung mud, now sing’s the praises of Obama.  How powerful the archetype of "your father comes home" is to a child.

Permalink | 39 comments