A Tale of Media Coverage American Style

[8537]

EVERY POPULIST movement, right or left, is going to be put down by the media.

The last thing the masters want is the people discovering their own power.

Frame that and hang it on your wall. Truth to power.

 

[8537]

I have visited all the 'official' websites now I think and I still don't see any coherance in either group. The "Occupy DC" group says get rid of the special interests without specifying what a 'special interest' is. The Tea Party in fact is a 'special interest' in that they have specific goals they wish to accomplish through the people they send to Washington. The OWS group doesn't seem to have a clue what they want other than they somehow want the banks and financial institutions and the stock exchange punished without specifying how.

Again, restrict the federal government's ability to favor anybody for any reason and all the other issues disappear except that there will still be rich and there will still be poor because that is the human condition and is not avoidable among even free people. It is just with maximum freedom, the poor are far less likely to remain poor.

This 'coherent message' criticism is so much malarky. "Occupy Wall Street" really says it all: what Wall Street has done is unacceptable, and they needed to be held accountable for fraud, not bailed out.

I am 100% in agreement that government bailouts for anybody are not acceptable. But Wall Street didn't force anybody to bail them out. In most cases the government forced Wall Street to take the bailouts.

you've got to be kidding me. Most of the largest financial institutions and insurance agents were banging on Paulson's door begging like homeless drunks in need of one more fix.

 

[Cuyo]

The difference between mainstream media coverage of "Occupy Wall Street" and the Tea Party movement has been most interesting and instructive. Ditto the rhetoric coming out of the White House and Congress.


What do you think? The groups are similar? Dissimilar? Are the Tea Partiers the hateful, unsmiling, unhumorous ones as the Left wants to depict them? Or are the OWS groups similar to the Marxist uprising of the new Bosheviks that some are seeing?

I think you're a baby boomer. Only your protest is legitimate to you.

A clash of generational protests

Why Baby Boomers don't understand the OWS protests

Did you actually read that piece by Ferguson - a man who I know personally and respect?

And... you're wrong... it's got jack shit to do with being a 'baby boomer'... it's about who is responsible for the current clusterfuck. OWS blame Wall St.... TEA Partiers are wiser and blame the Government... because the Government are responsible.

Oh gawd Cali, let's not do this.

"The government are responsible?" What a load of horse shit. They're responsible only in failure to prevent at best and as enablers at worst. And the teatards are 'wiser?' Puhleeze. They have no greater median intellectual capacity than OWS, and in all likelyhood, far less.

And again, stop capitalizing 'TEA' as if anyone takes that foolish post-fact contrived acronym seriously.

 

[Amelia]

I've noticed the MSM saying nice things about the Tea Party. At least less judgmental things.

Now they're being more careful to cut slack to some of the things which people scoffed at early on.

One example I heard this weekend was about that famous sign where the Tea Partier says to keep gov't hands off their medicare.

That's now an example of people with passion and understandable concerns but not a refinement of their ideas. As to be expected (in hindsight) the refinement of the ideas came later.




Translation: MSM wants people to overlook the wacky signs and soundbites from OWS while OWS tries to find a coherent message. So now in retrospect they're being kinder to the Tea Party.

 

[Foxfyre]

This 'coherent message' criticism is so much malarky. "Occupy Wall Street" really says it all: what Wall Street has done is unacceptable, and they needed to be held accountable for fraud, not bailed out.

I am 100% in agreement that government bailouts for anybody are not acceptable. But Wall Street didn't force anybody to bail them out. In most cases the government forced Wall Street to take the bailouts.

you've got to be kidding me. Most of the largest financial institutions and insurance agents were banging on Paulson's door begging like homeless drunks in need of one more fix.

Begging and writing yourself a check are two separate things, At least half of those receiving TARP monies didn't want it and highly resented the strings the government imposed on them when it forced them to take the money. Meanwhile, very few of the issues that created the sub prime mortgage crisis have been addressed, much less fixed including almost zero reform at Fannie and Freddie where the problems started in the first place.

Wall Street did not corrupt government. Government has corrupted Wall Street. Fix the issues in government and Wall Street will be just fine.

 

[Foxfyre]

I've noticed the MSM saying nice things about the Tea Party. At least less judgmental things.

Now they're being more careful to cut slack to some of the things which people scoffed at early on.

One example I heard this weekend was about that famous sign where the Tea Partier says to keep gov't hands off their medicare.

That's now an example of people with passion and understandable concerns but not a refinement of their ideas. As to be expected (in hindsight) the refinement of the ideas came later.




Translation: MSM wants people to overlook the wacky signs and soundbites from OWS while OWS tries to find a coherent message. So now in retrospect they're being kinder to the Tea Party.

That may be an unintended consequence of the whole phenomena. If the media wants to legitimize the OWS group as grass roots and populist, then it can't find as much ammo to launch at the Tea Party movement.

 

[8537]

I am 100% in agreement that government bailouts for anybody are not acceptable. But Wall Street didn't force anybody to bail them out. In most cases the government forced Wall Street to take the bailouts.

you've got to be kidding me. Most of the largest financial institutions and insurance agents were banging on Paulson's door begging like homeless drunks in need of one more fix.

Begging and writing yourself a check are two separate things, At least half of those receiving TARP monies didn't want it

What in the world are you talking about? Tell me which "half" on this list didn't want TAPR money, even though they filled out the applications and did the paperwork to apply for...TARP funds:

Tracking the $700 Billion Bailout - The New York Times

 

[Foxfyre]

you've got to be kidding me. Most of the largest financial institutions and insurance agents were banging on Paulson's door begging like homeless drunks in need of one more fix.

Begging and writing yourself a check are two separate things, At least half of those receiving TARP monies didn't want it

What in the world are you talking about? Tell me which "half" on this list didn't want TAPR money, even though they filled out the applications and did the paperwork to apply for...TARP funds:

Tracking the $700 Billion Bailout - The New York Times

J.P. Morgan and Wells Fargo didn't want TARP money. That's two. There were several others. But the government insisted and through regulatory powers had the ability to essentially force the financial institutions to take the money. Of course pro-big-government types don't want to think that there was anything underhanded or coercive or manipulative in the TARP bailouts because they would then have to put the blame where it goes--on self-serving people in government--instead of being able to blame big, bad Wall Street.

Those who want honesty to prevail instead of ideology, however, know the truth:

Americans for Tax Reform Center for Fiscal Accountability

RealClearMarkets - Why Won't Geithner Take TARP Repayments?

http://www.chron.com/business/steffy/article/Take-this-money-whether-you-need-it-or-not-1610794.php

 

[8537]

Begging and writing yourself a check are two separate things, At least half of those receiving TARP monies didn't want it

What in the world are you talking about? Tell me which "half" on this list didn't want TAPR money, even though they filled out the applications and did the paperwork to apply for...TARP funds:

Tracking the $700 Billion Bailout - The New York Times

J.P. Morgan and Wells Fargo didn't want TARP money. That's two.

So when you said "half" you really meant three or so out hundreds? OK then. That's par for the conservatarian course.

Tell me, with new capitalization rules would JP Morgan have survived without TARP funds?

 

[whitehall]

It seems that left wing "journalists" from Rolling Stone are holding seminars for the protestors, showing them (the college grads?) how to express themselves better, presumably without excessive use of the "F" word.

 

[uscitizen]

If the OWS group actually knew what they were protesting, they would be camped out at the White House or the Capital Building instead of Wall Street. They would be complaining about where the problems originate, what escalates them, and what perpetuates them instead of some sort of vague movement against faceless people that had little or nothing to do with it.

The OWS group assemble where they're told, say what they're told to say, and think what they're told to think. They're nothing more than useful idiots.

And this is different from the Tea Party, RNC, or DNC or religion in what way?

 

[Foxfyre]

What in the world are you talking about? Tell me which "half" on this list didn't want TAPR money, even though they filled out the applications and did the paperwork to apply for...TARP funds:

Tracking the $700 Billion Bailout - The New York Times

J.P. Morgan and Wells Fargo didn't want TARP money. That's two.

So when you said "half" you really meant three or so out hundreds? OK then. That's par for the conservatarian course.

Tell me, with new capitalization rules would JP Morgan have survived without TARP funds?

I don't expect a hard core progressive to understand, appreciate, or want the truth nor to do his/her own homework to get it. Some WILL go to hardcore progressive sites to get the point of view they want to be the truth and don't really care whether it is correct or not so long as it fits the proper mantra.

I still say at least half of those receiving TARP money would never have done so had the government not insisted. You didn't even look at the links I provided, did you.

I also now way that the largest financial institutions that received TARP funds are now even bigger and more overshadowing than they were before.

Whenever you have the government picking winners and losers and using the taxpayer's money to do it, you will have a skewed system that disrupts the free market and produces many unintended negative consequences.

 

[blastoff]

Yeah, but don't forget it was Tea Party people yelling racial slurs at black congressmen in D.C. and that shows....Wait a second. In this day in age when everyone and his brother has video equipped cell phones, no one has collected the $100,000.00 reward Breitbart offered in exchange for video showing such actions by TP folks.

 

[Charles_Main]

If the OWS group actually knew what they were protesting, they would be camped out at the White House or the Capital Building instead of Wall Street. They would be complaining about where the problems originate, what escalates them, and what perpetuates them instead of some sort of vague movement against faceless people that had little or nothing to do with it.

Hear of Occupy DC?
Have you guys thought about going to their Facebook page and actually read what they are saying? If you did you would know who they are speaking out against.

Been there, done that. Basically what they are saying is. WS is no good, Capitalism is no good, We want entitlements, We want More Pay, We want what they have.

 

[8537]

J.P. Morgan and Wells Fargo didn't want TARP money. That's two.

So when you said "half" you really meant three or so out hundreds? OK then. That's par for the conservatarian course.

Tell me, with new capitalization rules would JP Morgan have survived without TARP funds?

I don't expect a hard core progressive to understand, appreciate, or want the truth nor to do his/her own homework to get it.

So only a hardcore progressive would interpret "half" to mean, oh....50%?

Some WILL go to hardcore progressive sites to get the point of view they want to be the truth and don't really care whether it is correct or not so long as it fits the proper mantra.

and some will just make shit up. For instance, those that claim half of TARP recipients were forced to take the money.

I still say at least half of those receiving TARP money would never have done so had the government not insisted. You didn't even look at the links I provided, did you.

Then why did all those banks apply for TARP funding? You didn't look at the list, did you? Or are you "Still saying that" because it "feel" right and meets your ideological bias?

 

[Amelia]

So only a hardcore progressive would interpret "half" to mean, oh....50%?

Obama thinks 17% is half.

 

[Foxfyre]

So when you said "half" you really meant three or so out hundreds? OK then. That's par for the conservatarian course.

Tell me, with new capitalization rules would JP Morgan have survived without TARP funds?

I don't expect a hard core progressive to understand, appreciate, or want the truth nor to do his/her own homework to get it.

So only a hardcore progressive would interpret "half" to mean, oh....50%?

Some WILL go to hardcore progressive sites to get the point of view they want to be the truth and don't really care whether it is correct or not so long as it fits the proper mantra.

and some will just make shit up. For instance, those that claim half of TARP recipients were forced to take the money.

I still say at least half of those receiving TARP money would never have done so had the government not insisted. You didn't even look at the links I provided, did you.

Then why did all those banks apply for TARP funding? You didn't look at the list, did you? Or are you "Still saying that" because it "feel" right and meets your ideological bias?

Numerous banks refused the TARP funds and all have fared better than those who took them. I know who is on the list. I also have done a lot of homework and have followed at least some of the money since TARP was first implemented. The list of financial institutions receiving TARP money cannot be interpreted that all of them WANTED TARP money. But that is a nuance I suppose is over the head of hard core leftwingers. A pity too.

You seem to wish to blame the financial institutions for everything and make the government an innocent pawn in the process. But you would be so very wrong in that point of view.

You didn't check out the links I provided did you.

 

[8537]

I don't expect a hard core progressive to understand, appreciate, or want the truth nor to do his/her own homework to get it.

So only a hardcore progressive would interpret "half" to mean, oh....50%?



and some will just make shit up. For instance, those that claim half of TARP recipients were forced to take the money.

I still say at least half of those receiving TARP money would never have done so had the government not insisted. You didn't even look at the links I provided, did you.

Then why did all those banks apply for TARP funding? You didn't look at the list, did you? Or are you "Still saying that" because it "feel" right and meets your ideological bias?

Numerous banks refused the TARP funds

Such as....which ones, exactly?

and all have fared better than those who took them. I know who is on the list. I also have done a lot of homework and have followed at least some of the money since TARP was first implemented. The list of financial institutions receiving TARP money cannot be interpreted that all of them WANTED TARP money. But that is a nuance I suppose is over the head of hard core leftwingers. A pity too.

Can you show me which half on that list didn't want a virtually zero-interest loan that they could in turn deposit at the Fed and get 1% interest?

You seem to wish to blame the financial institutions for everything and make the government an innocent pawn in the process. But you would be so very wrong in that point of view.

I'm not blaming anyone. I'm simply asking you to be honest about what happened - including being honest that Paulson didn't force half those banks to take TARP funds. That's just rightwing bullshit.

 

[Foxfyre]

So only a hardcore progressive would interpret "half" to mean, oh....50%?



and some will just make shit up. For instance, those that claim half of TARP recipients were forced to take the money.


Then why did all those banks apply for TARP funding? You didn't look at the list, did you? Or are you "Still saying that" because it "feel" right and meets your ideological bias?

Numerous banks refused the TARP funds

Such as....which ones, exactly?

and all have fared better than those who took them. I know who is on the list. I also have done a lot of homework and have followed at least some of the money since TARP was first implemented. The list of financial institutions receiving TARP money cannot be interpreted that all of them WANTED TARP money. But that is a nuance I suppose is over the head of hard core leftwingers. A pity too.

Can you show me which half on that list didn't want a virtually zero-interest loan that they could in turn deposit at the Fed and get 1% interest?

You seem to wish to blame the financial institutions for everything and make the government an innocent pawn in the process. But you would be so very wrong in that point of view.

I'm not blaming anyone. I'm simply asking you to be honest about what happened - including being honest that Paulson didn't force half those banks to take TARP funds. That's just rightwing bullshit.

Read the information in the links I provided and then get back to me on that rightwing bullshit thing.

Oh and here is one more link for you. I don't know anything about the website itself, but the piece inside includes a LOT of links to credible sources:
http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/25/banks-forced-to-take-bailout/