Media, Murdoch, and poor Ron Paul

Who are you voting for? Don't tell me (rhetorical)!

But please be advised, your vote is and will be shaped by the media. So who is in charge of the country? You? Me? The Populous? Rupert Murdoch?

I'll go with Rupert Murdoch. Murdoch has a personal vendetta against Republican candidate Ron Paul. Even though Ron Paul was polling higher than other Republican candidates, Murdoch barred Paul from participating in the FOX (the syndicate he and his money control) News Republican Forum. In fact, Murdoch applied a filter to his email account to bar and bounce back to the sender any email with "Ron Paul" in the subject from reaching his inbox, to keep from hearing the protests of Paul supporters. But it should not surprise us that Murdoch, a war monger, who makes truckloads of cash when America is embroiled in conflict, opposes the Republican who wants to end the conflict in the Middle East. Read this to see how Murdoch has wielded his monetary power in the past to manipulate political climates.

Murdoch is not the only figure in the media to unfairly rig the polls. Think about it...who is front and center at every Republican debate? Gulianni, Huckabee, Romney, and McCain. Can you even name any of the other candidates? And what about the Democratic candidates? Obama, Clinton, and Edwards are in the middle of the stage at every debate. On both sides of the partisan divide, the candidates that the media deems unworthy have to stand on the edges of the stage, being given only one or two questions, each trivial and non-defining in nature.

I may be late in posting this, but I doubt any New Hampshire residents read this blog, so at least my warning might sink in to the few bloggers who follow My Friend Ivan before they influence the already rigged Primary system in their respective states.

My advice: Go to each candidates web site and figure out for yourself what stands on their platform, because you will not be able to make an informed decision based on the advice from the American god in your living room. I'm no conspiracy theorists...this is just too obvious.

Caucus Schmaukus (and Ivan's book club)

First and foremost, Ivan's Book Club is finally here. I know, I know...I am almost as excited as you!

Having had the chance to thumb through the first beast to be sacrificed on the altar of my ego (Are We Rome?: The Fall of an Empire and the Fate of America), I must say excitement bubbled up inside of me at the thought of interacting with friends and fellow bloggers on an interesting and pertinent subject. The book, political in nature, has got my political juices flowing in the form of tonight's blog post:

I am sick of second best, personally--not in the materialistic sense of things, but in the sense of helpless political dependence. Don't get me wrong, the political freedom in America is to die for (in the global scheme of things). Shoot, with my taken-for-granted-citizenship in the bag, give me eight years (presidential candidates must be at least 35) and you might see me making a fool of myself with the best of them in Dearborn, MI too.

But unfortunately, a manipulated system forces me to vote for the lesser of two evils every four years. You see, every year the Democratic and Republicans National conventions nominate their best guy or gal for the coveted position. And let's face it, the prominent parties nominate the guy or gal with the biggest guns; that is, the one who they feel stands the best chance at defeating their opponent. And how do they do this?

In a presidential caucus (primary) voters make their mark for who they feel will best fill the office. This vote is taken directly to the national convention, right? Wrong. Realistically, depending on state law, your primary vote is actually "represented" to the convention by delegates. In fact, both major parties have provisions for "super delegates" chosen outside the primary system. Yep, representing you without your input.

Let's say Hilary Clinton stands the best for beating any republican, securing her a nomination. Millions of Democrats across the US who are in love with Obama will vote against their conscience for fear of seeing another republican in office. Vice-versa, it's possible that Giuliani will stand the best chance for beating Clinton. With the blessing of the Convention, he will receive a nominee and millions of Americans will vote against their morals. They know there is a better candidate, but the Convention has spoken. Since most Americans' vote reflects sole trust in the Convention (the party), with blind faith they will punch the Giuliani button. The supporters of other qualified candidates know this. Thus, in order to see Clinton anywhere but the white house, they vote for second best.

I have decided not to vote for second best this year. Hopefully I won't have to. Hopefully my conscience will match that of the majority of super delegates...but I doubt it. Bureaucratic casualty...count me out.

The Sky is Falling, The Sky is Falling!

A recent Newsday post brought to light yet another round of attacks between opposing parties common to pre-election campaigning. However, Newsday's focus was not the candidates but the bias of the carrier, in this case The New York times, notoriously left wing.

The Times apparently should have charged MoveOn.org $142,083.00 instead of the $64,575 deal of the lifetime they received. A disgruntled Giuliani demanded and received the same deal for his rebutle to the ad by MoveOn.

Here is where the beauty of a free market econemy and the first ammendment meet to make the Newsday article not so newsworthy. The New York Times have the freedom to publish whatever they desire per the first ammendment and have the flexibility of the free market econemy to charge what they wish. The fact that The Times gave both sides of the fence the same deal (smart move) coupled with the fact that New Yorkers have the choice of reading the right wing bias of the New York Post deems Newsdays article less controversial than they had hoped.

I am looking forward to my opportunity to help determine the course of the country in the up and coming election--don't get me wrong. But I am equally, if not more looking forward to interesting and worthwhile reporting on real issues!