New York Times
June 3, 2015
by Lenny Leonard
WASHINGTON--The Supreme Court decided in a 5 to 4 decision that Apple and IBM should be allowed to enter into the bonds of matrimony. The case stemmed from the fact that federal regulators refused to allow the two corporations to merge. Federal regulators were worried that this merger would result anti-trust violations. At that point IBM and Apple applied for a marriage license citing the 19th century court decision that a corporation is a person and the 2007 decision that allowed same-sex couples to get married. When the State of California refused to grant the license the corporate lovers went to court.
The language of the 2007 Limbaugh vs. Texas decision states that denying any two "persons" of legal age the right to marry is a violation of civil rights. The nation's highest court had a choice. Either it had to revisit hundreds of previous decisions regarding corporate personhood or it could grant IBM and Apple the right to live together as a family. This has been a very controversial issue during the last several months and many Americans will be trying to deal with it for some time.
In a press conference last week President Nader said, "Not only have the courts allowed corporations to destroy our economy and environment but now they have the right to destroy the American family." Talking to people on the street echoes gives the same impression. Jessi L. Pigeon says, "God made Adam and Eve not Microsoft and Starbucks." In a TrottPoll relased this week it was found that 64% of Americans agreed with Ms. Pigeon.
Not all people have been critical of the court's decision. Former President Dick Cheney felt the decision was one whose time had come. He said, "Finally, the lowly corporation has a way to fight back against individuals and state governments who discriminate against corporations. No longer can you prevent two people of any kind from being a business family." President Cheney compares public opposition to corporate marriage to the opposition against same-sex marriage in 2007. "The public will come around to this once they see what an advantage corporate marriage will have for the American business family."
This is a fake article written by a fake journalist. Nothing here is true. It is just my lame attempt at satire. I just thought of this after seeing the film The Corporation. Again, this is just meant to be funny. I would also like to credit my sister (Jessi Bencloski with a great jab that is included.
This movie was very well done. I like it a lot. It showed some of the techniques used by FOX to create news that is not news. For instance the common use of the phrase "some people say" or "I've heard people say things like" by anchors and reporters to interject opinion. Traditionally journalists used the phrases "people say" or "a person said" to add information while keeping the source anonymous not for the purpose of adding editorial opinion.
Contrived Example #1:
People close to the CEO claim that Dutchie's Pickles are made from cucumbers which are preserved in vinegar and spices such as dill.
Contrived Example #2:
People say that Dutchie's use of cucumbers to make pickles is offensive and some could belive that they are doing this just to upset the zucchini industry.
Do you see the difference between these two? Example #2 is very close to the way FOX adds opinion to their news. I don't really have issue with that being used on shows such as O'Reilley's because that is an opinion show. But it should not be used during a standard newscast.
Another thing that FOX News does that this film illustrates is that it doesn't do real journalism like our other news outlets. For instance, instead of reporting "news" (notice the word 'new' in 'news' do you think that's just a coincidence?) FOX will order its affiliates to air retrospectives about things long past during their standard news broadcasts rather than doing the 'news.' I recall a conservative commentator a few weeks back lamenting the fact that American news outlets spent a great deal of time reporting bad news from Iraq instead of the Aniversary of D-Day. But really folks, is something that happened 60 years ago "news"?
These are just a couple of the techniques explored in the film Outfoxed. See it, it's pretty cool.
A friend linked to a website that got me thinking about rodents and politics. I mean I know that my pets are too stupid to think about these things but I have a fever and can therefore at least try to be funny.
Ad by Hamsters for Kerry:
My name is Licorice. One day my cage was knocked into deep water by a hyper dog. I would have met my demise that day if it weren't for the action of John Kerry. He jumped into that water and pulled me to safety. He also performed emergency first aid to make sure that I would survive. His bravery is proof that he is fit to be commander-in-chief of this great nation. That's why I'm endorsing John Kerry for president.
Ad by Chinchillas for Truth:
My name is Muffintail and I know that John Kerry is lying about his bravery on the day of the hamster incident. I was on that pier where the incident occurred and the water was not that deep. In fact, Licorice was merely damp when he came out of the water he hadn't nearly drowned. That's why I'm endorsing George W. Bush for president.
My name is Cinnamon and I feel that John Kerry lied about the hamster incident to receive the Human Society of Massachusetts Award. Not only did Licorice not come close to drowning, Licorice had no water in his lungs when he came to the veterinary clinic where I work. Obviously John Kerry is embellishing the facts of this incident once again to gain votes. Vote Bush.
Statement by Sen. Ratty McCain:
This ad by Chinchillas for Truth is misleading and wrong. I feel that the Bush Administration should publicly renounce this ad. This reminds me of what the Bush 2000 campaign did during the primaries. This sort of negative politics must not be allowed.
Statement by President Bush:
I believe that this is a wonderful and free country. I believe that all rodents--hamsters, chinchillas and rats have the right to voice their opinions on the political issues. I know nothing about whether or not the facts in the ad are true or not. I will leave that up to the American critters.
Statements by Gerbils on the street:
"This is why I don't vote. These guys just try to posture to look cool in front of the TV cameras. That's why I'll just continue to chew on my wheel in November."
"I'm going to vote for Bush because Rupert Rabbit has shown me that that is the best thing for the country. The liberal media has poisoned so many people into thinking that war and corporate cronyism are bad. Boy am I glad that we have Rupert to show the way."
This entry was inspired by the website Hamsters for Kerry. If it isn't funny or doesn't make sense, I'm sorry but I'm sick and feverish. It seemed like a good idea at the time
Wow. This is definitely worth the attention of the country. It's a nice graphic from the New York Times showing how $144 billion dollars we have spent so far in Iraq could have been used to make Americans safer by improving security at home.
Op-Chart by Michael Pan, Amanda Terkel, Rober Boorstin, P.J. Crowley and Nigel Holmes.