Obama Bailout for Media Against Blogs

[Fintan]

[GaryGo]

Erm? D'ya have any money for me? Im running a little low

[silverthread]

Yeah Fintan ,
Obama Is responsing to a Forcasted-Trend-Wave....
{ i.e. How free IS free-will for human-species...
'Choice'...Often is Response to destined-trends & limited options}

Here's a video post on YouTube in 2007...
ForCasting how , not Only , Newspapers...
but T.V. too , due to TiVo , will soon be on State-
Life-Support...

Now , Outdated thinkers ,
such as person who wrote article ,
May complain & bicth...
Yet still...
they gotta get out the way of the Bullet-TRAIN.

Newspapers , T.V. & other-Ol' Media...
Adjusting to Media Revolution :














Here's Another Good-One :

















Yeah ,
So much for the INFINite Fr-E-E Will
of human-Species....

So ,
Let's Ride THAT Bullet-Train -YEAH

P.S.
Outdated activist...Still lOOkin'
for some politico-'Save-Humanity REVOLUTION'...

Damn-It ! The 'Revolution' Is "Trans-Generational"...
And goin' Down Right In front of THEIR EYES
{I.E. part of 'REVOLUTION' Is : social-Media-NWO}

[J Ruthless]

Newspapers are a HUGE deal to these bastards....

TV news is blatantly for the average to below average american who would rather be ignorant then put in any effort, or put him/her self out. If its not spoon fed to them, it just spills all over their bib.
But the Newspapers are targeted at all the "smart" and savvy "grown ups" and academics who use their newspaper as a means to gain credibility over their internet/blogger counterparts. (you know them people who are always using cliché phrases such as "get with the program", "time to grow up", "you gotta play the game to get ahead in life", and "shape up or ship out". I cringe when i hear such bullshit.)

I know a lot of the people who Fintan referred to in his last audio as the pavlov's dogs of the left. And these people are not stupid, they have brains and they are successful, and they can conduct rational thought, but the conditioning is overwhelming. Anytime i bring something up that they havent read about in the newspaper, its like it never existed. Or they just look at me like ive been smoking some bad weed and change the subject, or just write me off. (BTW, These are my family and friends and neighbors too, so i cant just forget about em and move on. Even though thats what i want to do, I have to say something.)

I also know a lot of people who used to be dogs, but are now just on the line of breaking through, or who know something is wrong, but just cant get passed thinking its their own democrats who are tightening the noose. (This group has been drilled to the point that they believe the democrats are their last hope against EVIL INSANE republicans, who want to destroy their "middle class paradise".)
But when they read an article they don't quite write it off in the same manner as the dogs. For example; I have told people of things or given them an article to read, and then a week or two later they come running up to me telling me all about the same stuff that was in the article. But they read it in the newspaper this time, and totally forgot i even brought it up a week earlier. The conditioning is unbelievable. Or they come up and say how they read the same thing in the newspaper, like they were waiting for confirmation from the newspaper before they bought into it, and tell me what i said was "a little too far out there", which i hear all the time. Even though it was the same information.
I dont know where im going with this. I guess im saying that the newspapers are perceived as the spoken truth by this group. They know the news is bullshit, although for the wrong reasons (either the evil l'brals, or the devious repubelicans), but they still hold on to the papers. And the PTB does not want to get rid of that grasp. If all these people are deprived of their information source, i see two things happening. Either they go the ignorant route and just dont care, or they move on to either TV news or internet. And since most of these people hate the tv news shows, that only leaves the internet.
I think this scares the SHIT outta the PTB. No editors, no producers, no censors.

People have been conditioned to judge the person/people who are feeding them information, and not the information itself. They decide on whether the information is pertinent by whom they are getting it from and only that. They have no intention of actually going to do their own research or check out any info themselves. They just expect to read the report and be informed, no physical effort, nearly any mental effort. To them, if the source is credible the info is credible. So when they hear "crazy CT websites" all day long from the mainstream...when someone tries to give them info from an internet source....automatically they think, bullshit....and then they put the burden on you to prove it to them, with the intention of the person not being able to prove it. (which btw prob wouldn't change their minds) Even when you bring the proof, most start making excuses or get aggravated.

This is when you can tell just how far conditioned they are. If they get angry and start using abusive language, its a lost cause. If they get frustrated, and seemingly fatigued, they know its true, but the brain cant handle the thought and is fighting its own rationale. I've seen it happen. If they just deny it vehemently they are either strongly disinformed, or that type of person who just refuses to admit they are wrong, egotistical. I'd avoid them. And lastly the people who take it in, but it doesn't really phase them. It could be true, or false but cant take the time out of their pathetic lives to care. These people are caught up in the "fast life" mentality psyop. "My life is too busy for me to worry about it. I only got time to worry about myself."
(...but lets keep it on topic...)

This is why they will never give up their newspapers. And why people will support such a ridiculous bill. Its the standard source for stupid people who like to think they are smarter and more sophistocated then other people. As well as a mental barrier between the people and the internet. To them the newspapers will always be the more valuable source, and the internet will always be the "wild west", "anybody can say anything", info source.

Thats my input...a whole lot of random thoughts...i tried to organize them the best i could

[GaryGo]

[bri]

[GaryGo]

Wayne Root: ‘Let Newspapers Fail!’
September 22nd, 2009 ·
Bailout of Newspapers Threatens Free Speech and Editorial Independence.

Bailouts Constitute “Legal Bribery.”

By Wayne Allyn Root, Author
“The Conscience of a Libertarian: Empowering the Citizen Revolution with God, Guns, Gambling & Tax Cuts”

Members of Congress have recently suggested that the federal government should undertake a billion dollar newspaper bailout. President Obama seems interested. Really? Why? Because the other bailouts worked out so well? Congressional investigators recently disclosed their doubts that AIG will ever be able to payback it’s government loans. At the same time, economists suggest that at least $20 billion of the government loans to U.S. automakers are lost forever. GM and Chrysler now constitute a $100 billion welfare program, that just happens to sell cars (that no one wants). Meanwhile the economy continues to flounder despite the $800 billion economic stimulus package (a bailout to more fat cat corporations and Obama contributors). This disaster just keeps on growing (because government is involved).
http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/09/wayne-root-let-newspapers-fail/

[silverthread]

YEAH....

"Let Newspapers Fail!’
September 22nd, 2009 ·
By Wayne Allyn Root, Author
“The Conscience of a Libertarian: Empowering the Citizen Revolution with God, Guns, Gambling & Tax Cuts”

It now amazes me That :
what Libertarians say & write....I now can SEE
as being Straigth from : John Birch Society Play-Book.

Now , when I hear a libertarian... rant their talking-points
I simply refer to John Birch Society website....
& There I can See where their comin' from.

J.ohn-B.irch-S.ociety :

[silverthread]

OH Yeah ;
Almost Forgot :

[duane]

i'm not a big Ayn Rand fan but on this subject......
So what did Ayn Rand think of Libertarians?
Well, let's ask her:

http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=education_campus_libertarians

Ayn Rand’s Q & A on Libertarianism

More

Q: What do you think of the Libertarian movement? [FHF: “The Moratorium on Brains,” 1971]

AR: All kinds of people today call themselves “libertarians,” especially something calling itself the New Right, which consists of hippies, except that they’re anarchists instead of collectivists. But of course, anarchists are collectivists. Capitalism is the one system that requires absolute objective law, yet they want to combine capitalism and anarchism. That is worse than anything the New Left has proposed. It’s a mockery of philosophy and ideology. They sling slogans and try to ride on two bandwagons. They want to be hippies, but don’t want to preach collectivism, because those jobs are already taken. But anarchism is a logical outgrowth of the anti-intellectual side of collectivism. I could deal with a Marxist with a greater chance of reaching some kind of understanding, and with much greater respect. The anarchist is the scum of the intellectual world of the left, which has given them up. So the right picks up another leftist discard. That’s the Libertarian movement.

Q: What do you think of the Libertarian Party? [FHF: “A Nation’s Unity,” 1972]

AR: I’d rather vote for Bob Hope, the Marx Brothers, or Jerry Lewis. I don’t think they’re as funny as Professor Hospers and the Libertarian Party. If, at a time like this, John Hospers takes ten votes away from Nixon (which I doubt he’ll do), it would be a moral crime. I don’t care about Nixon, and I care even less about Hospers. But this is no time to engage in publicity seeking, which all these crank political parties are doing. If you want to spread your ideas, do it through education. But don’t run for President—or even dogcatcher—if you’re going to help McGovern.

Q: What is your position on the Libertarian Party? [FHF: “Censorship: Local and Express,” 1973]

AR: I don’t want to waste too much time on it. It’s a cheap attempt at publicity, which Libertarians won’t get. Today’s events, particularly Watergate, should teach anyone with amateur political notions that they cannot rush into politics in order to get publicity. The issue is so serious today, that to form a new party based in part on half-baked ideas, and in part on borrowed ideas—I won’t say from whom—is irresponsible, and in today’s context, nearly immoral.

Q: Libertarians advocate the politics you advocate. So why are you opposed to the Libertarian Party? [FHF: “Egalitarianism and Inflation,” 1974]

AR:They are not defenders of capitalism. They’re a group of publicity seekers who rush into politics prematurely, because they allegedly want to educate people through a political campaign, which can’t be done. Further, their leadership consists of men of every of persuasion, from religious conservatives to anarchists. Moreover, most of them are my enemies: they spend their time denouncing me, while plagiarizing my ideas. Now, I think it’s a bad beginning for an allegedly pro-capitalist party to start by stealing ideas.

Q: Have you ever heard of [Libertarian presidential candidate] Roger MacBride? [FHF: “?” 1976]

AR: My answer should be, “I haven’t.” There’s nothing to hear. I have been maintaining in everything I have said and written, that the trouble in the world today is philosophical; that only the right philosophy can save us. Now here is a party that plagiarizes some of my ideas, mixes it with the exact opposite—with religionists, anarchists, and just about every intellectual misfit and scum they can find—and they call themselves Libertarians, and run for office. I dislike Reagan and Carter; I’m not too enthusiastic about the other candidates. But the worst of them are giants compared to anybody who would attempt something as un-philosophical, low, and pragmatic as the Libertarian Party. It is the last insult to ideas and philosophical consistency.

Q: Do you think Libertarians communicate the ideas of freedom and capitalism effectively? [Q&A following LP’s “Objective Communication,” Lecture 1, 1980]

AR: I don’t think plagiarists are effective. I’ve read nothing by a Libertarian (when I read them, in the early years) that wasn’t my ideas badly mishandled—i.e., had the teeth pulled out of them—with no credit given. I didn’t know whether I should be glad that no credit was given, or disgusted. I felt both. They are perhaps the worst political group today, because they can do the most harm to capitalism, by making it disreputable.

Q: Why don’t you approve of the Libertarians, thousands of whom are loyal readers of your works? [FHF: “The Age of Mediocrity,” 1981]

AR: Because Libertarians are a monstrous, disgusting bunch of people: they plagiarize my ideas when that fits their purpose, and they denounce me in a more vicious manner than any communist publication, when that fits their purpose. They are lower than any pragmatists, and what they hold against Objectivism is morality. They’d like to have an amoral political program.

Q: The Libertarians are providing intermediate steps toward your goals. Why don’t you support them? [Ibid., 1981]

AR: Please don’t tell me they’re pursuing my goals. I have not asked for, nor do I accept, the help of intellectual cranks. I want philosophically educated people: those who understand ideas, care about ideas, and spread the right ideas. That’s how my philosophy will spread, just as philosophy has throughout all history: by means of people who understand and teach it to others. Further, it should be clear that I do not endorse the filthy slogan, “The end justifies the means.” That was originated by the Jesuits, and accepted enthusiastically by Communists and Nazis. The end does not justify the means; you cannot achieve anything good by evil means. Finally, the Libertarians aren’t worthy of being the means to any end, let alone the end of spreading Objectivism.

[silverthread]

Quote :
articles states :

Ayn Rand says :
Moreover, most of them are my enemies:
they spend their time denouncing me,
while plagiarizing my ideas.

Now, I think it’s a bad beginning for an allegedly pro-capitalist party
to start by stealing ideas."

Yes , by ALL means:
Ayn Rand MUST get credit for HER-Ideas...

Yes , Libertarians PLAGIARIZE Her Ideas....
So , for Her To Denounce them IS :
Like a mother denouncing Her 'BasTard-Child'...

And for Libertarians to denounce her IS :
Like Bastard-Child denouncing their un-Wed- Mother.

BESIDES :
Ayn Rand endorsed Barry Goldwater in his 1964
bid for president.
Check-it-OUT :
http://www.noblesoul.com/orc/texts/goldwater.html


NOW ,
let's read about Barry Goldwater :

"Goldwater is the politician most often credited
for sparking the resurgence of the American conservative
political movement in the 1960s.

He also had a substantial impact on
the libertarian movement."

Now click on link...
THEN click-On hyperlink : Libertarian-Movement
In 2nd paragraph :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Goldwater



LIBERTARIAN :



BTW ,
JBS ALSO Endored Goldwater
For President

DON'T Ya'
Just LUV 'Em....
JBS-
Ayn-RAND-
Liberterians ???