Issue:If anyone can say this it is a news man - Broadcaster says serious news at risk:

Specific:"'Truth no longer matters in the context of politics and, sadly, in the context of cable news,' said Aaron Brown, whose four-year period as anchor of CNN's NewsNight ended in November, when network executives gave his job to Anderson Cooper in a bid to push the show's ratings closer to front-runner Fox News."

Comment: Where does the "truth" come from these days? Topics can be addressed in a fair and balanced manner, and yet be lacking truth. This can be the case when truth is ommitted. What is truth? this questions should be explored by the body politic yet again. Imagine if the Fox news dedicated the time it spent on Natalee Holloway's disappearance - since May of '05 to current reports - on the many aspects of truth.

It seems that opinion and not truth is what matters to FOX. Opinion is not a subset of truth. Opinion is the expression of a set of ideas and fact that the individual accepts as accurate and therefore deemed to be a truth - but only for one. It is in my humble opinion that a Truth it requires agreement among many.

The existence of many individuals expressing a synchronocity with a set of ideas and facts that make a truth with which society can deal.

I like Aaron Brown.

Address: http://www.palmbeachdailynews.com/news/content/news/brown0126.html

Issue:The king of the bait and switch - CNN.com - White House?steps up defense of?domestic eavesdropping - Jan 23, 2006:

Specific: "'I'm mindful of your civil liberties, "

Comment: I am glad the President is "mindful". But just as he "doesn't read". Civil Liberties was not the issue people were concerned about. It was the void where an explanation belongs. Why is a 72 hrs after a wiretap has been started not enough time to get a warrant? After 4 years, why as he not corrected the issue? If this is so necessary and valuable - what stopped them from using it to catch the 9/11 attackers?

Please do not think that I am surprised or outraged. This is the new reality. I like truth or honesty from my President's. I am concerned about the next Nixon or other President who want to extend his even more. I am concerned about the neo-con supporting cast of the administration.

I'm waiting for the day when the revelation of a political operation using this information is ignored.

In the current environment Watergate was not a crime.

The premise that in a time of War Presidents has no limits, is only valid when the battle is active and visible on American soil - like the civil war. This conflict is not at that level.

But what if the war is invisible and never ends? Like Korea - perhaps President Bush doesn't need to defend himself because we are still in a technical state of war with North Korea. Who needs a new war?

Address: http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/23/nsa.strategy/index.html

Issue:A good example of the Twisted Right - Nation...

Issue:
A good example of the Twisted Right - National Review Book Service: The War on Christmas by John Gibson:

Specific:"Happy holidays!' Every time a supermarket checker or store clerk greets you with those words instead of 'Merry Christmas,' you have met another soldier in the war against Christmas. Secularists are bent on imposing upon us a neutered, secular winter holiday that throws out every trace of Christianity from the public observance of Christmas. It's all necessary, they tell us, to avoid offending non-Christians and, above all, to keep from violating the all-important separation of church and state. Meanwhile, Christians in America are increasingly marginalized and shunted aside."

Comment:This is a non-problem. But this kind of hyperbole needs to be examinined to expose the gaps in it's logic. Once the gaps are revealed then it can be acknowledged and discredited just as the debate on intelligent design. This kind of rhetoric or flawed logic is the kind the controlling cabal of the Republican party uses to defend America and the war in Iraq.

The "Supermarket checker" is not a securalist warrior when he greets with "Happy Holiday's". He or she is a teenager. Working as a clerk is probably one their first jobs. They are under stress because they have finals coming up or a big important event - in addition to Christmas. The cash the make is of greater value to them in the moment than it will later in life. They have a great many more things on their minds than many adults. Teenagers are aware that we live in an age of many different cultures, customs and traditions. They are probably more intent on being non-offensive to the customer than they are of making the sale. The clerk's manager is is probably too busy to give his staff direction on this fine a point. Beyond asking them to be polite and smile, the likely hood of managerial pressure to use one form of greeting over another is minimal. So when the "store clerk" makes this greeting, it is because the logic of choosing a greeting that is least likely to offend is clear.

There is no separation of "church and state" involved in the interpersonal transaction or the financial transaction. Politics are not a part of it. Perhaps politics can be a part of the transaction in the context of taxes or if both parties have some prior personal history. But the average supermarket check out sequence does not involve politics or religion.

It almost sound like a conspiracy against Christmas? It can't be people being caring and polite.

As to the "Meanwhile, Christians in America are increasingly marginalized and shunted aside." comment - this makes me do a double take. The President is evangelical born again Christian. The Republican Party is his party. The Republicans control both houses of Congress and is responsible for seating most of the Supreme Court. When I surf my local cable channels, there are at least a half dozen CBN (Christian Broadcast Network) channels. The leader of a major Christian group - Pat Robertson advocated the assassination of a foreign leader - without penalty from either God or the state department. And we are to accept the statement that Christians are MARGINALIZED and SHUNTED?!?!?!? - it hurts my head.

So when Bill O'Reilly takes on this cause I'm not surprised. I'm not surprised in his use of flawed logic. His motto is the "no-spin zone" yet acknowledges and defends his far right show of opinions. He does not recognize that Opinion is spin. President Bush, the neo-cons, the Fox network will be recalled by historians as having flawed logic.

Even if the Iraq adventure succeeds in bringing a peace to the middle east, it will not be attributed to this regime's impeccable use of logic and reasoning. They may have facts, a sense of conviction, a dedication and loyalty to their cause. Their cause may take the day, but historians cannot look back on this time and have a consensus that reasoned logic was what made it happen. Logic has a timeless nature and quality. Missing WMD, opinionated "no-spin zones" are not examples of logic and reason. Perhaps they are of intelligent design.

Future historians cannot avoid it any more than Bill Clinton's biographer can ignore his impeachment. Not even revisionists.

ISBN#: 1595230165

Address: http://www.nrbookservice.com/products/BookPage.asp?prod_cd=c6824

Comment: There is a key point for the NSA surveillance that I don't understand. Why is the tap-now-approve-within-72hrs not fast enough? How can this be too much of a delay. How is it a delay?

This points to the key problem I have with this President as a person. Much of his logic is flawed. His policies are based on his logic and reasoning.

His personal secretiveness does not serve him well because his logic and reasoning is inadequate. If his logic and reasoning was consistent, then his secrectiveness would be acceptable and a virtue.

Instead it give the notion that he is constantly hiding something he did wrong. It is simply a matter of finding and deciding what it was - Katrina, WMD, Valerie Plame? But that is right, this man does not make mistakes.

Or is it possible that he is showing signs of true guilt about those past mistakes by attempting to appear strong on this issue?

Issue:What about the next Nixon? - NSA Gave Other U.S. Agencies Information From Surveillance:

Specific:"has been passed on to other government agencies, which cross-check the information with tips and information collected in other databases, current and former administration officials said."

Comment:The surveillance is not so much the concern. It is the logic and reasoning used with the information gathered. It is the competence of those handling the information - this time and in the future. These are items for the debate.

What is the guarantee that information gathered was not used in political objectives? What is/are the guarantee that the information gathered is not used in enabling large corporation to gain advantage in the "flat" world?

In a slightly different issue. There is some discussion about "Attack Prevention". It has been said that the value of this kind of surveillance has been proven, but it would be a violation of national security to make the case. Well, to this old software developer this rings of the old "Zero bug initiative". This is a management technique used to prove to other management, that their house is in order. But it is a paradox and a myth.

The state of having "zero bugs" in a software program cannot exist. "Zero Bugs" is in actuality a social communication. It the sociological mechanism that specifies and limits the uses and confines the environment within which a software application is run. So if an application has zero bugs on an Intel Chip machine, running on XP - is run on old Apple Mac - it will fail. So where is the error? Is that developer didn't design it properly? Is that the Manager allowed the client to run it on an Apple? Is it with the client for actually running where he knew it couldn't run? Many of those answers depend on the cash and power positions of the players. The reality of a state of zero bugs does not exist.

So, translate this to the War on terror. Can we be truly safe? For there will always be terrorist. Terrorism is a tactic and not a ideology. Therefore, those who oppose the war today can be classified as a threat to national security tomorrow, just because the President decides as much.

There will always be people willing to blow up the American people. Some will Americans - like in Oklahoma and others will be non-Americans. Should we give up our rights of governance to any Presidency, to simply protect us? This President is selling "we the people" - the end users of the software system called Democracy - an application that has "zero bugs".

Americans will and do die. They will die at the hands of other people. These future civilian and innocent death will be unjust deaths. They will be tragic. These future deaths are now unavoidable and certain. The only real question is the definition of the bad guy - who is to blame. The questions of when and how are basically irrelevant. History won't care about that. The leader when it happens won't care. They will predictably seek to avoid the blame.

The key is the qualities and nature of those who survive. America and American Democracy can survive for thousands of years. But only if fundamental assumptions can withstand the demands and strains of temporary and short term conditions.

If the War on Terror is allowed to "conquer" and dominate the world in the name of protecting ourselves, oppositional forces will bring it down and eliminate our culture - eventually. President Bush has indicated that Iran, Syria and Korea are an "axis of evil". Evil is to only be conquered. Evil is not something to be tolerated.

Democracy is a religion in that it must be accepted willingly and it cannot be forced on a population. It is an ideal. It is an idea. A democractic "dogma" will cause participants to overlook details and create vulernabilities through which terrorist to exploit.

The truest and most securing long term tactic is the involvement of the individual. Democracy is time consuming. If you fill the time of day of potential terrorist with the activities that motivates them, they will be less inclined to act out.

That's enough for now.

Address:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/31/AR2005123100808.html?nav=hcmodule