|
joether -> RE: Fox News Tells The Truth! (8/5/2012 8:22:10 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: subfever
What was specifically said in the broadcast that is wrong/highly inaccurate?
Eventually I'll read the whole book. Last week was a hell week and this one is shaping up to be less....stressful....
What the FOX reporter explains in one instance is the 'secret meeting'. I've learned one thing when it comes to the 'conservative media' (I hate to say it this wy by the way), uses words or phrases they know will have maximium effect on their audience. I'll give a few brief examples:
The first question is, why was the bill rewritten from the previous bill that was in Congress? I look at the creation of the Affordable Care Act as an example (History does repeat itself, right?). In the ACA, it was taken behind closed doors so that the press and lobbyist could not change it with popular opinion, or vilify what the writers were deciding on. The previous version of the ACA had been out in the poblic for many months and had been not just torn into peices, but were becoming a wedge issue driving Americans against each other. So if I were to take this issue back to 1913, it would be to say they (the representatives of the investing houses) knew the previous bill was so watered down as to do nothing useful for America. By doing it in secret, they could remove this 'Money Trust' concept that was starting to be engrained. The Fox Reporter did not explain that the 'The Money Trust' concept in 1913 was about as big in politics as SuperPACs are today (infact, they are very similar in concept).
Another example,
The Democratic whip and not the Republican whip had headed up this reforming of the bill, we would have learned not only the party but the name of the person. Dont you think it would be pretty important to know who organized this? Not just who....else....was there? Since it was a Republican whip, this information was conviently left out. Since I guess, reporting that a Republican went into a secret meeting with the leading investment houses to create the arch-evil entity known as the Federal Reserve (which many Republicans in 2012 wish to demolish) would have left their audience confused. I'm trying to express the right manner the audience would understand the information to all of you, but not doing a wonderful job at it.
Third,
The reporter failed to explain what was both 'the original goals of the Fed' and what the morden (2012) version of the goals. Things change in a 100 years? The music of 1912 is MUCH different from that today by the youth, right? The movies are different. What we know of how people think, feel, exist, eat, travel, invest, and viewship of say politics, has changed in 100 years. The Fed as a concept was created under the same principles as the US Constitution; That it evolves with time and experience. And like any other mechanism in the US Goverment, there are those that wish it to work for the benefit of all persons equally, and those that wish it to work for just themselves (or give themselves an advantage over all others).
|
|
|
|
