Government Manipulation of Media, Legal Community

The American media and legal community proved to be as much as a threat to American liberty as the US government.

* * *

Researchers reviewing the US media may want to examine the issue of media intimidation under the Bush Administration.

One challenge as a private citizen has been the time and energy required to double check the intimidated, unreliable media.

Under the Bush Administration the media proved to be unresponsive, unreliable, and deferential. How this occurred is a separate issue, but important to consider.

* * *

Future generations need to prepare for the return of this abuse. You will be challenged and tested, openly ridiculed, and have your best intentions challenged by those who say they are on the same side.

The burden of public oversight of the media is one that can be time consuming, exhausting, and draining. The way forward is to remember the rule: Believe little of what you see or hear; and even if you think it's true or have seen it personally, it may be something else.

* * *

Lawyers proved themselves adept at putting their loyalty to the Bush Administration before their loyalty to the Constitution.

Attached with those misplaced loyalty is the attached problem of the media not doing what it should: Asking tough questions; and providing the range of issues needed to engage in informed debate and oversight.

It is curious the extent to which the US government, despite supposed "concern with leaks," will rely on US public-Congressional opposition as a tool to fix defective plans; and the extent it will go to shape and manipulate public opinion to thwart oversight of illegal activity.

* * *

Blogging, in part, took off because citizens viewed the media as part of the problem: Unreliable, not doing their jobs, and spewing forth drivel. This does not mean that bloggers saved the world but they helped.

Private citizens, in the wake of this unreliable media, have had to do independent analysis, engage in oversight of the media, and aggressively challenge the media as if it were a failed branch of government.

It takes a lot of energy to examine what the media is or is not doing; and this assists the government in dispersing needed attention.

This government took advantage of power, abused the media, and the public had to fill in the gaps and do the jobs of media and the government: Eternally check, challenge, and oversee the institutions who supposedly acted in our name, but were first in line to put their interests before those of the American public.

Beware the personnel in the media and US government who say they are working for the public. They're working for themselves, their power, and their discretion to abuse and manipulate others. They remain the eternal opposing faction, putting at risk the rights and liberties of the people for any arbitrary.

* * *

The challenge of fascism is seeing the threat to liberty is not just from the government, but from the institutions supposedly checking the government's abuse of power. The error is to believe that the US media and legal community will comprehend when they are being used, or when they are a greater threat to the people they supposedly say they are serving.

* * *

The US citizen obligation: Compel other sources of information to prevent abuse of power; compel other sources or methods be used and relied upon when the US government stifles the media.

It is exhaustive to second guess the government and media -- the reason why government is able to abuse power and get the public to blame the media, not hold both the media and government to account.

The public can be inducted to believe it should do something that it has a responsibility to refuse. It can be an overwhelming job challenging the media when the government and media create the incorrect perception that the public is alone. This is untrue. Many are in the same position. The trick is to recognize the common identity -- something that is lawfully asserting power to check the abuse of the media, fiduciary, and failed government institutions. Incompetence is not the standard which institutions can compel others to meet; the burden of proof is on the institution to justify confidence despite their tendency to abuse.

* * *

Rather than respond to reasonable questions and concerns, it is interesting to observe the extent to which "patriotism" is a shield to scrutiny; and is used to manipulate people to be silent about what should be challenged when it was a small problem, as opposed to letting it get so large the problem was seemingly out of control.

___ What are some more useful tools We the People can develop, create, share, and use to question the media and government formally?

___ How might the US government be restructured to make this desired questioning, interaction, and interface something that is institutionally protected, and cannot assent to an agenda that puts loyalty to man above loyalty to reason?

___ Public oversight of the media: When is the media a tool of the government?

* * *

Day to day requirements of jobs and families can be enough of a burden. The government and media abuse continues when the public is dissuaded from challenging what should be questioned as unreliable. What’s worse than an abusive government that burdens the population with illegal activity, is a defective government that relies on a manipulated media to compound the oversight problem of We the People. When the problem is larger than the hassle is worth, there are legal alternatives to the cess pool the American government has told, not asked, the American people to put up with.

We can legally recreate a New Constitution turning this failed US government on its head, permitting We the People to focus on our expertise: Eternally reminding the US government it is not the expert, but eternally subject to the arbitrary will of We the People.