Government is supposed to be married to justice and media married to truth, but with govt and media now unified, indeed with mega-corporations an equal third party, it looks more like an omnidirectional incestuous love triangle.

Since they are supposed to be cooperative but not colluding forces in the service of us, the people,* the way they support and cover for each other looks more like incest a lot of the time. The corporations dominate the govt by buying the politicians and the media by buying advertising.

The media, laughably thinking they're totally independent, use their power to make or break any public figure they want at the behest of politicians. (It so happens the reporters and editors hired by the robber barons agree with them about everything.) Politicians write the media script from the other end in a pincer movement that most involved are unaware of. Conversely, politicians are at the mercy of the media -- favorably with communist depravities like pezident Oh!Bummer, but for ill in the case of any "star" figure (Marge Schott, Jimmy the Greek, John Rocker) they judge guilty of speech, thought or policy crimes. It so happens that the politicians agree with the corporatocracy about every "issue" in sight.

So -- who runs or dominates the corporations and thereby the rest of the stinking mess? Every phenomenon has a cause, every straight line a moving force behind it, and as a mammter of fact the solution to this little puzzle has been avowed by many of the top dogs through the years:

</span>"The world] forgets, in its ignorance and
narrowness of heart, that when we sink, we become a
revolutionary proletariat, the subordinate officers
of the revolutionary party; when we rise, there rises
also the terrible power of the purse."</span> </span>-- The Jewish
State, New York, 1917 via
http://www.stormfront.org/posterity/...n/q451-500.htm

Oh yes, the article that got me going:

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/08/15-1
Published on Saturday, August 15, 2009 by CommonDreams.org</span><br style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0);"><h1 style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0);">Pundits Trying to Help Cheney Avoid Jail</h1>
by Ray McGovern


The stenographers of the
Fawning Corporate Media (FCM) are missing the most obvious explanation for
former Vice President Dick Cheney's widely reported "disappointment" with
former President George W. Bush on the issue of pardons - self-interest.

Barton Gellman of the Washington Post has now joined feature
writers from Time in aping Cheney's
hagiographer in chief, Stephen Hayes of The
Weekly Standard. They all choose to dote on Cheney's loyalty to his former
chief of staff, Irv Lewis "Scooter" Libby, while ignoring reasons why Cheney
might have hoped for a presidential pardon himself..............</span>Gellman is a talented
journalist with a tainted record. He wrote a truly shameless article for the Post when it was competing with The New York Times for cheerleading
laurels prior to the war on Iraq.

First Leak It; Then Confirm
It

Remember those dangerous
sounding "aluminum tubes" said to be procured by Iraq to develop a nuclear bomb
- the ones that turned out to be for conventional artillery? The Bush
administration tasked the Times'
Judith Miller and Michael Gordon to push the canard that the tubes' technical
properties showed the intended use to be as casings for rotors in centrifuges
to enrich uranium, a key step in producing a nuclear bomb. The pair rose to the
occasion with flair.

The Times front-paged their story on Sunday, Sept. 8, 2002; and on the
morning talk shows Dick Cheney, Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleezza
Rice all referred to the Times story.
The ploy worked like a charm. None of the talk show hosts dared ask an impolite
question - like who gave the information to the Times.

The </span><i style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0);">Post's[/i] Gellman was suborned into doing a similar story on chemical
weapons in the fall of 2002, when the White House was fuming at recalcitrant
analysts in both the Defense Intelligence Agency and the CIA. The
not-yet-corrupted intelligence analysts still there could simply not get the
hang of it. They were having a hard time, sans
evidence, in producing faith-based intelligence on "weapons of mass
destruction" in Iraq..........................Here's a terrifically professional exposé -- by whom???
<h1 style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0);">Media bias about the Israeli - Palestine conflict EXPOSED!</h1>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kiyyp9cZdY0

Later, not by much.</font>

Speaking of incest:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/24/bu...ia/24ftc.html? _r=1
<h1 style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0);">F.T.C. to Assess Business of News</h1><nyt_byline style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0);" versi&#111;n="1.0" =" ">
<div ="byline">By PRADNYA JOSHI</div>
</nyt_byline>
<div ="timestamp">Published: August 23, 2009</span>

(You've got to read it for its multi-gewish and government-media complex factors!!!)
</div>
----------------------------------
* or as most people would say nowadays, "in the service of we, the people" [img]smileys/smiley26.gif[/img]


Edited by: Nelson3