Our President Obama receives the Nobel Peace Prize
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/27/obama-nobel-prize-jesse-jackson
Full text of speech http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34360743/ns/politics-white_house/
Yes, President Obama is the President who represents all the people of this country, and our President receiving such a prestigious award is an honor for all Americans. Yet, Steven Crowder who was passed-off yesterday as a "journalist" in another blog article (Syringes, Wild Dogs...), also offers his video commentary on the President's prestigious award (same website) http://stevencrowder.ning.com/ . Freedom-of-speech? Sure. Propaganda, intent to mislead? You betcha. Funny if you're a skin head, probably embarrassing or "enough to make you sick" if you're a moderate, middle-of-the-road, conservative Republican, or, any other person with a brain.
One of the core values of those who sponsor this public blog is "fact based, fact driven" information, even when the intelligent intent is edgy or sarcastic. There is no commentary censorship, but shouldn't posted articles be held to a higher standard?
Posted by Kathy Meeh
14 comments:
"fact based, fact driven" information. Excuse me. What if I choose not to believe or give credence to anything J Jackson may say? What if I think that anything J Jackson says or said is "Propaganda, intent to mislead? You betcha." The video didn't "make me sick" so according to you I don't have a brain. I've seen worse when President Bush was in office.
I wouldn't trust J Jackson with my frog.
Another question: What did Obama do to deserve the Nobel Peace Prize after being in office two weeks?
Lois, the references used for this article are from the London Observer "Year in Review" (12/26) and MSNBC news 12/10). The news accounts of President Obama receiving the Nobel Peace Prize are widely known.
Jessie Jackson was quoted by Paul Harris of the London Observer. Did Harris make a mistake quoting Jackson? Jessie Jackson was an important leadership component of the civil rights movement here and overseas, ran for President twice, shadow Senator the District of Columbia (Washington DC, 91-96), and held a Master of Divinity Degree (first attending Chicago Theological Seminary, Baptist minister). He also founded Rainbow/PUSH, a non-profit social justice organization advocating affirmative action and social programs, and political empowerment.
Steven Crowder by contrast is a 22 year old stand up comedian, actor, voice actor; born in Detroit Michigan (1987, raised in Quebec Canada, graduated from high school, currently lives in Los Angeles (his father is an independent film director). He is the voice of Alan "The Brain" Powers, a children's television program series. He also has a far right wing attitude website which includes the you tube posting above, and the one which was presented yesterday in the skewed "Syringes, Wild Dogs.." article.
The Norweigian Nobel Committee awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to President Obama 9-10-09, the presentation speech occurred 12/10/09. Why? Their statement "..for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples." "The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons." Here's the link http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2009/press.html
Steven Crowder is not only 22 years old, but he also wasn't raised in this country. Since when do citizens of this country trash a celebrated President receiving the international peace award, which also reflects positively on this country?
Do I think conservative Republicans such as George Will and Charles Crowdhammer would congratulate the President for this award-- I sure do. What happened to cross-party political civility, working together, and a moderate purposeful view to solve common national and civic problems? How about checking and understanding the merit of information before presenting it as an article-- and, if its spin and fake information the article should fail. If it doesn't fail it deserves clarification from others. You may want to do your own research on some of these issues, google is very good these days.
Thank you for your very condescending response.
We have very different views on quite a few things (especially the merits of anything J Jackson has to say) - I believe I will let it be...for now.
I'm just saying, look at these issues more closely, and don't accept any party-line without consideration. Admittedly some history with Jessie Jackson has been controversial, but his long track record with civil rights is real and commendable.
Contrast, the apparent loathing of President Obama, Detroit, possibly people of other ethnic types, plus possible inadequate education, experience, his age-- with the intent to skewed "news postings" and hate.
Then, from where did this bogus information come? Did it come from someone who can't tell the difference between what's fake or fact, does she find posting propaganda acceptable, or is there some other reason?
My comments about the posting of false article information is not about typos, incompletely known or understood information, or about creative license with humor or sarcasm based upon core fact. Rather, purposefully presenting false information in a front page article is more difficult to counter in less visible commentary postings. Therefore, articles should be held to a higher standard of reliability, which protects readers from such inconsistencies. Absent such policy, accountability falls to the person who posts the article.
Lois, my commentary was never intended to be condescending to you, but to answer your terse comments to me. The unreliable article posting has occurred from the same person who doesn't get the hint to keep in formation reliable. Beyond that, to avoid such chaos as the blog grows, my reasoned assessment is that some commonly understood standards should apply. Hence, such articles would not be posted, and this conversation would not have occurred.
I'm not impressed with Kathleen's wing-nut posts either. Still, the problem with screening posts according to whether they're "factual" is that for many, something's deemed "factual" if you agree with it, and a "lie" or "propaganda" simply because you disagree with it.
Steve, I'm not suggesting much screening of article posts, irregularities are rare. To date all articles have appeared to be acceptable posts, except for some assumptions and references from Kathleen. Also, friendship doesn't seem to be problem in questioning information, because the majority of those who post comments are fact-based and fact-driven.
I think issues of "lies" and "propaganda" are clear enough, and not just an issue of agreement. Of course we don't agree with Brent Plater's Sharp park Golf Course position, but we also know that he propagates propaganda.
When you have a questionable post you are welcome to sent it here to the "truth squad" for a quick reference review. I can easily check the references, post some notes and send back to you.
"Want to share an article or opinion? Unlike some other Pacifica blogs, Fix Pacifica won't bury viewpoints we disagree with. Send your submission to: fixpacifica@gmail.com"
The statement about not burying viewpoints we disagree with isn't just for show. If we refuse to post things we don't like, even if we convince ourselves it's for cause, then we're no better than Riptide. That's what we were trying to get away from.
Where did the idea that the blog is fact-based and fact-driven come from? Short of threatening the President or something, this is a place where people can post different VIEWPOINTS using fake names. It would be nice if people could back up their statements with facts, but they won't always be able or willing to do that.
If you allow free-speech, it means you're going to get some great stuff, and some total crap. If Brent Plater sent in a submission, it would be posted. I've long felt that if people censor ideas they don't like, it's because of a lack of confidence in their own ideas. Anyone who doesn't like what's posted can write a comment or send in another post explaining why.
HaHaHaHahaaa!!!!
Good one. Quoting Rev J. Jackson. What IS this?!?!
Rev J. Jacksons son's wife belongs to the CPUSA. Kathy, you are a joke, these people are commies and are destroying America and the President does not even belong here. Who said it?, Ummm....someone said, send his commie ass back to Kenya where he came from. And then, former Gov Richardson calling Obamy a immigrant, not from here. HaHa! HaHaHa. You're a joke. Fact check that, you betcha!
Yeah!! You go, Kathleen Rogan!!
Steve, a view point is different and separate from substantial information presented as such. Example, a newspaper has articles (held to a higher standard), then there is the opinion section (view points from readers).
Again, articles on this blog should not include unsubstantiated information when presented as fact. As the blog grows, if it grows, what is posted is subject to be becoming questionable. Only Kathleen has met that standard thus far.
Propaganda presented as fact lends itself to being believable when repeated over time. Nancy Hall said 9 times, when she was quoting from the a text referred to as "The Book of Propaganda", about 7 years ago in a Tribune LTE.
And, here is Kathleen again spreading unsubstantiated, debunked, false, politicized, vulgar far-right probably raciest spin (propaganda), referring to President Obama "send his commie ass back to Kenya where he came from." She should put together an article of that, you'll accept it.
LET FREE SPEECH REIGN !!!!
I'm glad Kathleen spews her idiocy. It only reveals how racist and hypocritical the so called Christian Ultra-Right wing really is.
If Jesus came to earth today they would surely crucify him all over again for being a left wing socialist.
Feed the poor.
Heal the sick.
Cloth the naked.
Love your enemy.
Money changers out of the Church.
The nerve of that guy, who does HE think HE is?
Jesus was a commie!
Don't get you panies all twisty, Smelly Bell. You better lern Espanyol because yer smelly Godless butt will be sharng a pit in hell with your fello commies Hugo Chavex and Fidel Castro. Or maybe you will die and end up with your commie butt buddies in detroit. GO to hell, Mr. Smelly Bell. WAKE UP libtard!! I saw it on Youtube, so it's true. Now I have to go watch Glen Beck. I love him. GLen can have me if he wants me. He so sexy I love guys that blubber like babys.
Still Krazy as a loon I see.
Glen Beck deserves to have you. Maybe you should consider a gangbang and add Palin, Hannity, O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Bachman and Coulter. You could even invite Idiot Boy unless of coure he's busy reading comic books or riding his bicycle on mommies farm.
Post a Comment