Analysis

BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS

FOX FRAUDcasting

If you believe FOX is guilty, as charged, of FRAUDcasting, please join the BuzzFlash Brigade to get America to Turn Off FOX. Make your pledge by clicking here: TurnOffFox.com.

You will be personally involved in the campaign as you help to get people to abandon FOX and get it turned off in public areas, where it is now ubiquitous. Success stories are already coming in: one man got an owner of 12 fast food franchises in the Midwest to turn off FOX FRAUDcasting by pointing out that FOX is, well, a fraud as far as news is concerned.

And yes, one of our BuzzFlash readers, came up with the expression FOX FRAUDcasting,  which you will no doubt be seeing spring up in other media soon, but remember it started on BuzzFlash, thanks to a savvy reader.

Technorati Tags: Analysis FOX FRAUDcasting TURNOFFFOX.COM

BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS
by Meg White

Business sections across the country are all abuzz this week over the expected announcement that Comcast Corp. will acquire a controlling share of NBC Universal. But should MSNBC viewers be particularly concerned about the nation's largest cable provider and second largest Internet service provider obtaining one fourth of the media content available to U.S. audiences?

The process of the acquisition itself is somewhat complicated, and could take up to a year to complete. First, Vivendi SA must sell its 20 percent of NBC Universal to General Electric Co., which already owns 80 percent. Then GE would sell 51 percent of the company to Comcast.

Technorati Tags: Analysis media consolidation merger acquisition MSNBC comcast maddow olbermann obama antitrust monopoly

BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS
by Meg White

I got an e-mail from Josh Glasstetter of the People for the American Way's Right Wing Watch Thursday evening, letting me know how that ol' fashioned book burning went down in Dixie over Halloween.

In his words, it was the "Worst. Book burning. Ever." Watch the video; I'm guessing you'll agree:

You may have heard about the plan hatched at Amazing Grace Baptist Church in Canton, NC to burn not only your standard devil-worshiping music and porn, but also other people's bibles (and to chow down on some "fried chicken and all the sides," of course).

The group is part of a movement that believes only a certain interpretation of the Bible written down a few hundred years ago is the real version. They also believe that all the other versions were written by Satan to confuse believers. Often referred to as King James Onlyism, adherents are generally found among Baptists who crusade against other evils such as dancing.

(There are many different sects surrounding King James Onlyism, with varying degrees of adherence to textual dogma that I'm not going to get into here. These guys seem to be on the far end of the spectrum, but I'm no theological scholar.)

The problems with the planned book burning were three-fold: It was raining, there were protesters, police and media surrounding the event, and what they had planned was illegal. Hence, the tearing and the throwing into a tall kitchen garbage can the aforementioned evilness that you see in the video above.

But there's more than just confusion over the difference between burning and throwing away in this video. And there's something so much more down-to-earth about just throwing stuff away -- rather than dramatically burning it, which evokes the flames of Hell and all kinds of religious fervor with it -- which allows a deeper look at the meaning of the modern "book burning."

Technorati Tags: Analysis religion baptist book burning pastor king james only bible evil right wing religious burn halloween believer

BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS
by Meg White

Rep. Bart Stupak knows that the first rule of the Family is that you're not allowed to talk about the Family. And the Michigan Democrat's silence has been golden for the secretive group behind the infamous C Street House.

"I don’t belong to any such group," Stupak told reporters during a recent conference call. "I rent a room at a house in C Street. I do not belong to any such group. I don’t know what you’re talking about -- [The] Family and all this other stuff."

Stupak is consistent in his reticence as far back as 2002, when he told the Los Angeles Times, "We sort of don't talk to the press about the house."

But things haven't always been so quiet. The complex, which used to be a convent but now functions as a church that offers housing to Christian congressmen in Washington D.C., gained a great deal of media attention earlier this year, after three lawmaker-residents were marked by separate scandals.

Despite the way the organization rose to prominence in the 1940s by gathering as many influential men into its ranks and prayer circles as possible, the current leaders of what is sometimes referred to by members as The Fellowship and the Christian Mafia have decided their best course of action is to lay low. The Family's leader, Doug Coe, has been widely quoted as telling other evangelical organizations that "the more invisible you can make your organization, the more influence it will have."

I wonder how Coe and other Family members feel being about being mentioned as part of an effort to saddle the House's healthcare reform bill with a pro-abortion amendment. In succeeding in getting the Stupak-Pitts Amendment (which attempts to make abortion entirely inaccessible via both public and private insurance plans) added to the Affordable Health Care for America Act, Stupak may have inadvertently drawn unwanted attention to what some believe is one of the country's largest and most powerful unregistered lobbying firms.

Technorati Tags: Analysis bart stupak family stupak pitts amendment health care abortion sharlet c street house christian bill GOP

BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS
by Margaret Smith

If there's one game that could appropriately be defined as an American classic, it's Monopoly. After all, who hasn't played the famous board game that preaches the importance of hard work, smart economic strategy and the rag-to-riches American dream?

Hasbro has never before made a Monopoly game like Monopoly City, though.

I was watching TV the other day when the Monopoly City commercial flashed on the screen.

"He was building his perfect city," the announcer exclaimed as a 10-year-old boy walked around, awestruck, in the middle of towering skyscrapers and pure blue skies, "when someone put a stinking power plant next door and ruined his plans! Monopoly City! For the first time ever, build your 3D city of soaring towers and skyscrapers, and spoil others plans with power plants. Who will triumph to build the ultimate skyscraper? New Monopoly City... Build a city, your city."

Power plants, trash dumps, soaring skyscrapers, a small 10-year-old boy and a barking Toto-like dog... it was a lot to process in 30 seconds.

The Monopoly board game has a pretty deep history. Little known to the public, the first version of Monopoly was developed by a Quaker named Elizabeth Magie. Magie's version, called "The Landlord's Game", was developed in the early 1900s with the intention of teaching people the virtues of Henry George's Single Tax Theory and the evils of land monopoly. She patented her game in 1904, but when it was pitched to leading toy manufacturer Parker Brothers, they wouldn't buy it because it was "too complicated."

That didn't stop Magie's game from gaining popularity, however. "The Landlord's Game" soon found a strong following, and many people even took the game and made their own personalized versions at home.

Technorati Tags: Analysis Monopoly City Monopoly City Streets Environmental Racism Economics

BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS
by Meg White

President Obama is meeting again today with top advisers to mull four choices for what to do in Afghanistan, plus the pitch for a 40,000-troop surge requested by top Afghanistan commander Gen. Stanley McChrystal. Though details are sparse, reportedly all five options entail a troop increase of some kind.

A great deal of thought is no doubt going into these deliberations, from the recent flawed elections and widespread political corruption to the increasing instability and mounting the death toll in the country.

But another element must be considered by the president, and it is the reason you won't be getting a visit from your U.S. postal carrier today. Obama's decision in Afghanistan, and ultimately Iraq, should be based on the spirit of Veterans Day. Oh yes; and cold, hard cash as well.

The various arguments bouncing off the walls of the Capitol this session have centered upon funding. While many of the basic conflicts are about ideology, the easiest way to make one's point stick in a recession and amid a rising budget deficit is to evoke the practicality of either saving or spending.

This technique is evident in the fact sheet sent out by the House Energy and Commerce Committee yesterday afternoon, which sought to counter some of the myths circulated by health insurance reform critics over the way the Affordable Health Care for America Act would impact veterans. The release explained that the exchange had been expanded to include veterans, should they wish to seek insurance there. The press release also worked to dispel the notion that the proposal changes would impact Veterans Administration (VA) and TRICARE benefits (for military families), and that it would mandate shared responsibility requirement taxes be paid by those who are using such services. 

But these proposed healthcare reforms come too late for the 2,266 U.S. military veterans under the age of 65 who died last year due to a lack of healthcare insurance, amounting to six preventable deaths each day in 2008.

Technorati Tags: Analysis veterans day vet afghanistan iraq war health care VA military fort hood obama troop bill act fund uninsur

BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS
by Meg White

The news on the passage of HR 3962, a.k.a. the "Affordable Health Care for America Act," in the House this weekend brought me to something of a "What Would Jesus Do?" moment (without the Jesus, of course).

Much has been made of the 39 Democrats who voted "no" on the healthcare overhaul bill. Perhaps the most interesting case is that of Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH). Kucinich's problem with the bill was far removed from the concerns of the Blue Dogs who joined him in voting no. In a statement released after voting against the passage of the bill, Kucinich said that denying states the option of adopting a single-payer system and the collapse of a robust public option were two turning points in his support for the bill:

HR 3962 would put the government in the role of accelerating the privatization of health care.  In HR 3962, the government is requiring at least 21 million Americans to buy private health insurance from the very industry that causes costs to be so high, which will result in at least $70 billion in new annual revenue, much of which is coming from taxpayers.  This inevitably will lead to even more costs, more subsidies, and higher profits for insurance companies -- a bailout under a blue cross.

As a tireless advocate for single-payer healthcare, Kucinich decided to take a stand, and I respect that. Whether or not his brave stand was cleared with the office of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi beforehand, at least he was treating the vote as what it should be in an ideal world: a manifestation of one's core beliefs. That got me thinking: How would I have voted if I were in Congress this past Saturday night?

Frankly, the idealist in me despises this bill for all it represents. It is a sell out to insurance companies and a de facto admission of incompetence by a government that seems convinced it is incapable of administering anything larger than a bathtub.

But the idealist in me would never get elected, and the bill was better than nothing.

Technorati Tags: Analysis health care insurance abortion family women HR 3962 single payer obama house pelosi democrats bill reform

BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS
by Meg White

There's an internal and external fight over the direction of atheism. That the conflict between so-called "new atheism" and standard-bearers of the movement was a topic of discussion at the Atheist Alliance International annual convention is no surprise. But why were "high-profile defendants of faith convened" at Brigham Young University last month in search of a response to new atheism?

To get an idea of what religious experts are saying about this new movement, let's take a look at the "Think Again" segment of Foreign Policy magazine this month. Though the feature generally comes off as a provocative and thoughtful look at conventional wisdom, the latest submission has a ways to go in terms of challenging the status quo.

Karen Armstrong, an author of numerous books on religion, takes umbrage with the insistence of these so-called new atheists that God is dead, should be uninvolved in political affairs, breeds violence and intolerance, is the opiate of the masses, is misogynistic, the enemy of science and incompatible with democracy.

Technorati Tags: Analysis atheist new atheist religious fascist christian muslim dawkins hitchens evangelist god wrong belief creation

BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS
by Meg White

At the beginning of July, I posed a somewhat rhetorical question attempting to gauge exactly how much we should give up for robust healthcare reform, asking, "If it takes selling out pro-choice advocates in order to get a healthcare system that covers everyone adequately, is that a fair trade-off?"

I got a good bashing from readers who didn't get the point of my article that "to sacrifice low-income women for the sake of healthcare reform is a bastardization of the idea of healthcare reform as a whole." They were so upset that anyone would even ask that question on BuzzFlash that they immediately reacted to the headline as a "stupid idea" and asked why not just bring back slavery?

Despite the inattention to detail, I did appreciate the passion of our readers on the issue. That passion may not extend to your representatives in Washington, even if you live in Santa Barbara, CA.

Less than one month after I posed that question, Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA) decided that such a political calculus should be made. In explaining an amendment that she herself labels as a "compromise," she said that the "hope was that we could continue the current ban on federal funding for abortion so the issue wouldn't bog down the overall health reform legislation."

Technorati Tags: Analysis mandate capps amendment compromise NOW abortion choice life reproductive health care insurance family women

Scroll down for update

BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS
by Meg White

Now that she knows the Capitol so well, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) has decided she's going to use her spare time on the Hill to give tours. Along with a press conference this coming Thursday, she's inviting all of Sean Hannity's minions viewers to join her in a fun-filled field trip where she'll help them find their representatives (and more importantly, "the whites of their eyes") and talk to them about healthcare reform.

"We can walk together through Cannon, Longworth, Rayburn, walk through the capitol, sit in the gallery," Bachmann promised under a banner scrolling "Universal Nightmare" last Friday on Hannity's America. "I'm asking people to come to Washington D.C. by the carload, and next Thursday at noon I'll be at a press conference on the steps of the Capitol. I'd love to have every one of your viewers join me so we can go up and down through the halls, find members of Congress, look at the whites of their eyes and say, 'Don't take away my healthcare!'"

Awesome, I love guided tours! I'm not sure what this all has to do with healthcare, though. Maybe these friendly constituents are offering free glaucoma exams to their hard-working representatives?

Hmm. Maybe Bachmann is just trying to find a good way to spend all that extra time she has since she clearly isn't planning on reading the healthcare bill before she votes against it? Because there's most assuredly not enough time to do that (except there is, but whatever).

Well, see for yourself (the D.C. invite comes in at about the five-minute mark of this nine-minute interview, and the emphasis is mine):

Technorati Tags: Analysis bachmann. michele bachmann health care reform government lobby HR 3962 socialist nancy pelosi congress obama