Thursday, July 30, 2009

Lou Dobbs & CNN, still promoting the President needs to provide a Birth Certificate

The president of CNN, Jonathan Klein, still defends Lou Dobbs' contention that President Obama needs to provide a birth certificate. Klein claims that Dobbs is simply reporting on the conspiracy theories.

This is not true.

Dobbs has consistently claimed that the President needs to provide a birth certificate (by the way he has posted it on the internet). Dobbs suggests that the birther conspiracys have legitimacy.

As president of CNN, Klein sets their tone. He is now part of the legitimization of this ridiculous conspiracy movement.

The transcript of Kleins comments on the LA Times is here:

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

Lou Dobbs is NOT a legitimate reporter or news commentator

Lou Dobbs is making a mockery of CNN and news reporting by claiming that President Obama needs to provide a birth certificate (he already has and posted it on the internet). Would Dobbs be making this claim if the President had more "mainstream" name? CNN needs to censure Dobbs. This is not a freedom of speech issue, Dobbs can say whatever he wants on his own radio show. Its his credibility on CNN that needs to be challenged.

The following is an article from David Brock of Media Matters:

From David Brock of Media Matters:
Recently, CNN's Lou Dobbs has repeatedly used his prominent platform as a prime-time host on CNN, as well as his daily nationally syndicated radio show, to legitimize paranoid conspiracy theories about President Barack Obama's birth certificate. Despite the fact that these fringe ideas have been thoroughly debunked, he continues to mainstream extreme right-wing rhetoric by asserting that Obama needs to "produce a birth certificate" and giving birther conspiracies airtime on his shows.

In response to Dobbs' relentless trafficking in these fringe conspiracy theories, CNN President Jon Klein initially declared the story "dead," saying anyone who "is not convinced doesn't really have a legitimate beef." But less than 24 hours later, Klein caved in to Dobbs, reversing himself completely. He even went so far as to reportedly call Dobb's coverage of the birther movement "legitimate."

Klein's caving to Dobbs raises a serious, troubling question: Who is really calling the shots at CNN? We need your help today to publicly pressure CNN credibly address its Dobbs problem.

Contrary to Klein's description of Dobbs' birth certificate coverage as "legitimate," CNN's own hosts have debunked and ridiculed the story as "ludicrous," "nutty," and "conspiratorial."

Nevertheless, Dobbs has repeatedly claimed on both his television and radio shows that President Obama has failed to adequately address the claims of birther conspiracy theorists. He has said that Obama needs to "produce a birth certificate" and that the birth certificate the president posted online more than a year ago has "some issues." Rather than correct the record in response to criticism of his coverage of birther theories, Dobbs has lashed out at "lily-livered lefties" who criticized him because he "had the temerity to inquire as to where the birth certificate was." He even claims a "national left-wing media conspiracy" is attacking him over the birther issue.

We need to present CNN with an overwhelming public response to Dobbs' relentless promotion of these conspiracy theories tinged with racism.
So, please sign the following petition today and demand that CNN address its Lou Dobbs problem in a credible manner.

Thank you for your help in holding CNN accountable,

David Brock
Founder & CEO
Media Matters for America

Saturday, July 25, 2009

Marriage rights

"Legal" marriage is an historically NEW concept. 500 years ago (and less in lots of places) marriages between the lowly peasants did not happen (and lets be honest now, we are not all related to Lords, Ladies, Royalty and Peerage). There was no written document. There was no where to file it, no bureau of vital statistics. People just got married, period. Sometimes a church ceremony, sometimes not. They lived together and provided for themselves & their families. No fuss, no muss, just get married and get on with the business of providing for your family.

Then the "gentrification" of society happened. The industrial revolution, cottage industries, factories, and everyone starts reading and writing. Voila, the ceremony is codified, the procedures and legitimacy sanctified by "registration" with the state.

Ok, I have over simplified the historical perspective. However, you get the idea. Marriage was not always codified as between a man and a woman.

If a white man married an Indian woman, she was no longer allowed to live on a reserve. She lost her Indian status and her children were not deemed to be Indian. In some states a black man or woman could not "legally" marry a white man or woman.

My point: these ideas of marriage changed over time. It changed to reflect the changes in society. Operative word: changed.

We need to ackowledge that people have a right to marry. Period. Get over ourselves as being the sole arbiter of the definition of "marriage". If you believe that marriage should only be between a man and a woman, then don't marry someone of the same sex as yourself, and leave others alone to do as they wish. No one is going to force you to marry someone of the same sex.

Now in the US, there are over 1,000 federal statutes that will affect the government's and a person's rights and responsibilities, based on the definition of marriage. This fact alone suggests to me that there is a HUGE difference between a civil union and a marriage.

Same sex unions happen. They are NOT illegal any more. Lets recognize the fact that marriage is a right and a responsibility, not an operation of prejudice and bigotry.

Happy Pride :)