Discussion Groups / English Usage / February 2010

I can direct you to a picture of Bush the chimp using a teleprompter
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleprompter
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SOU2007.jpg

those two stands on either side of the chimpler are teleprompters.
every President since LBJ has  used them when on TV.

On Jan 31, 11:50 pm, Free Imposter For Sale <illegal&d...@verizon.net>
wrote:

Didn't need a teleprompter to rhetorically kick the a.s of the entire
Republican House delegation last friday did he? You might not have
noticed in as much as Fox news decided to cut away and just sit around
lyin' about hime.

x

    It is interesting to note how the Progressives consider any media
organization which doesn't prostrate before the One to be Treasonous.

    What ever happened to "dissent is the greatest form of
Patriotism"?  Or is that statement no longer operative?
-
pyotr Filipivich
"Bother," said Pooh, "Eeyore, ready two photon torpedoes and
lock phasers on the Heffalump. Piglet, meet me in transporter
room three. Christopher Robin, you have the bridge."

True. In principle he should have then lost his Australian citizenship,
which would in turn have limited his rights to own Australian news media.

Australia used to have rules whose intent was to prevent the formation
of monopolies or near-monopolies in the news media, but successive
governments have weakened those rules. It appears that Murdoch still
owns about 2/3 of the Australian newspaper market, despite his not being
an Australian citizen. I'm not sure about radio and TV - the rules used
to say that a newspaper owner could not also own a TV station, and vice
versa - but I have a feeling that he also has his claws into some of
those. Partly because of Murdoch, and partly because of anti-terrorism
laws, Australia is now considered to have relatively poor freedom of the
press.

Australian laws concerning dual citizenship were relaxed in 2002.
Murdoch changed his citizenship in 1985. It remains a mystery to many of
us why Rupert Murdoch continues to exercise rights - relative to media
ownership, for example - that would normally be available only to
Australian citizens. Well, not entirely a mystery. There might still be
idealists in the general populace, but those of us who have probed
further have concluded that the rich are exempt from the laws that apply
to ordinary mortals. It probably depends on how much money you have
donated to the ruling party.

The question of a pro-Republican bias was raised above. The person who
mentioned it (Jared?) is probably right in saying that Murdoch is too
new to US politics to have a party affiliation. In any case, my
experience of his political views as expressed in Australian news media
lead me to believe that he probably considers the US Republican party to
be a left-wing conspiracy. Fox News supports the Republican Party - of
that there can be no doubt, based on what I have seen - only because
parties even further to the right are probably unelectable.

You have to understand that Rupert Murdoch is a pragmatist. In Australia
he even built alliances within the Labor Party, a party whose policies
had* practically nothing in common with what he believed.

*I'm using the past tense because the Australian Labor Party can no
longer be considered to be a left-wing party. It remains to the left of
its main opposition, but only because the opposition has moved somewhat
to the right of Genghis Khan. British readers will understand what I
mean. I'm not sure that I could ever explain it to people whose country
has never had a left-wing party.