Who is Nancy Pelosi? What does Progressive Democrat mean? Watch Obama, Hillary and Pelosi smile and talk with Ortega and Chavez, fellow socialists

OBEY OBAMA

OBEY OBAMA

You won’t see the mainstream media reporting who Nancy Pelosi is.

Citizens: Print,  clip and save this free Obey Obama poster (Void where prohibited by law).

By Mick Gregory

I know quite a bit about her, having lived and worked in her San Francisco district. You won’t see the San Francisco Chronicle or New York Times mentioning that she is a multi-millionaire from earnings on her non-union Napa Valley winerey and resort hotel. Yet, the soon-to-be-crowned Speaker, gets one of the largest shares of union campaign money.

Your 68-year-old grandmother hasn’t spent as much on her home as 68-year-old Nancy Pelosi has on facelifts.
Democrats are America’s neo-progressives, better known as socialists. I lived in Nancy Peloci’s San Francisco, where transsexuals are given special status along with all the other classes of minorities and the city is a “sactuary city” for illegals.

 

Do you think I am exagerating? Progressive Democrats are America’s Democrat/Socialists — Google it for yourself. Why doesn’t the LA Times with it’s 950-person newsroom devote an afternoon of a reporter’s time to check into this?

Socialism in America is growing. Aided by such influential Congressmen as John Conyers, Ranking Member of the House Judicial Committee, and the one who will start impeachment proceedings against George Bush in the coming months. Nancy Pelosi is one of the stars of the nearly 60 other Democrats advancing socialism in America behind the “Progressive” label.

Here are a few excerpts taken directly from the web page of the Democratic Socialists of America.

“The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is the largest socialist organization in the United States, and the principal U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International. DSA’s members are building progressive movements for social change while establishing an openly socialist presence in American communities and politics.

“At the root of our socialism is a profound commitment to democracy, as means and end. We are activists committed not only to extending political democracy but to demanding democratic empowerment in the economy, in gender relations, and in culture. Democracy is not simply one of our political values but our means of restructuring society. Our vision is of a society in which people have a real voice in the choices and relationships that affect the entirety of our lives. We call this vision democratic socialism – a vision of a more free, democratic and humane society.

0. We are socialists because we reject an international economic order sustained by private profit, alienated labor, race and gender discrimination, environmental destruction, and brutality and violence in defense of the status quo.
0. We are socialists because we share a vision of a humane international social order based both on democratic planning and market mechanisms to achieve equitable distribution of resources, meaningful work, a healthy environment, sustainable growth, gender and racial equality, and non-oppressive relationships.”
Here is what “Liberty” looks like to a socialist:
“A democratic commitment to a vibrant pluralist life assumes the need for a democratic, responsive, and representative government to regulate the market, protect the environment, and ensure a basic level of equality and equity for each citizen. In the 21st century, such regulation will increasingly occur through international, multilateral action. But while a democratic state can protect individuals from domination by inordinately powerful, undemocratic transnational corporations, people develop the social bonds that render life meaningful only through cooperative, voluntary relationships. Promoting such bonds is the responsibility of socialists and the government alike.
“The social welfare programs of government have been for the most part positive, if partial, responses to the genuine social needs of the great majority of Americans. The dismantling of such programs by conservative and corporate elites in the absence of any alternatives will be disastrous. Abandoning schools, health care, and housing, for example, to the control of an unregulated free market magnifies the existing harsh realities of inequality and injustice.”
The action agenda posted on the socialists’ web site very closely parallels Agenda 21, and the recommendations of the President’s Council on Sustainable Development. The web site boasts the creation of the “Progressive Caucus” in Congress, as well as the coalition that is working to promote the socialist agenda in Congress.

Now you know that the third person in line for the Presidency is a socialist.

Secret Service, please make sure that President Bush and Dick Chaney are not ever again with in a mile of each other for the next two years.

Imagine this, the Democrats impeach George Bush for invading Iraq, Dick Cheney becomes president, he dies of a heart attack within weeks because of his spike in blood pressure. Nancy Pelosi becomes the first women President of the United States, and another first of much more import, America’s first Progressive Democrat president.

Sources: http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html,
http://www.sovereignty.net/center/socialists.htm

Obama gets Kennedy endorsements and doubles Hillary’s votes in South Carolina

By Mick Gregory

This is a big story being downplayed by the Hillary Clinton machine and mainstream media which they pander to. In fact, Bill Clinton tried to persuade Ted and Caroline to hold off on their endorsements.

Why hold off on their own opinions? So that the Hillary machine can try and interfere in the big rust belt states and California to put up a final firewall against Barack Obama?

Senator Edward Kennedy will endorse Barack Obama for president tomorrow, breaking his year-long neutrality to send a powerful signal of where the Massachusetts Democrat elder sees his party going — and who he thinks should lead it.

Kennedy aids told the Boston Globe Sunday that the Bay State’s senior senator will appear with Obama and Kennedy’s niece, Caroline Kennedy, at a morning rally at American University in Washington tomorrow to announce his support.

This comes after Saturday’s triumphant win for Obama and very poor showing for Hillary and Edwards in South Carolina.

Obama is ahead on all convention-bound delegates awarded so far in primaries and caucuses. That’s because each state has its own method of counting votes cast into the awarding of pledged delegates. In Iowa, Obama got 38 percent of the vote to Clinton’s 30 percent, but that translated into only 16 delegates to Clinton’s 15. In New Hampshire, Clinton got 39 percent to Obama’s 37 percent. That translated into a delegate tie, with each candidate awarded nine delegates. In Nevada, Clinton got 51 percent to Obama’s 45 percent. That translated into 13 delegates for Obama and only 12 for Clinton, according to the Associated Press, a finding backed up by the chairman of the Nevada Democratic Party. That was because Obama did much better all over Nevada, while Hillary only did well in Las Vegas where her union bosses took charge. Now South Carolina gives 25 voting delegates to Obama in his landslide victory. Obama is well ahead. But is the mainstream media reporting this?
Obama is winning.

Next, the Clinton machine is trying to change the Democrat party rules in the middle of the game. She will try and win in Florida even though the party has decided against awarding any delegates to candidates in the Florida primary. That was a penalty for Florida’s delegates taking That is dirty machine politics and another blatant attempt to illegally win an election.

A long-time Hartford Courant Reporter and Democrat press secretary charged and jailed for murder

Mick Gregory
Leave the reporting and editorials to professionals like Robertson.

A career Hartford Courant reporter, editor and Democrat press secretary has been charged with murder in the shooting death of a man in his South End Hartford apartment building Thursday.

Robertson, who used the byline J. Greg Robertson for more than 20 years for the Courant, later became press secretary and chief of staff for Hartford Democrat Mayor Carrie Saxon Perry.

Police officers forced their way into Robertson’s apartment and found a handgun lying on the floor. It had been fired twice, police said. Colon was taken to Hartford Hospital for treatment of gunshot wounds to his abdomen. He died about 6 a.m. Friday morning. Continue reading

Now is time for all good stockholders to cut off the gravy train to the pockets of the New York Times playboys.

Shareholder Advisory Firm ISS Recommends Withholding Vote on New York Times Co. Board of Directors

Mick Gregory

A big time shareholder advisory firm, Institutional Shareholder Services, (ISS) is campaigning to investors to withhold their votes for four directors at The New York Times Co. as a way to push for corporate governance changes. The New York Times Co. is one of a very few using an outdated “robber baron” stock scheme.

The ISS report published this week, joins forces with a longtime shareholder, a Morgan Stanley investment fund, to roll back the dual-class share structure which allows the Sulzberger family to maintain dictatorial control of the company with only a minor share of the stock.

ISS analysts recommend separating the chairman and publisher roles, which are both currently held by Arthur Sulzberger Jr., “Pinchy,” as well as establishing key committees on the board that would be made up solely of directors elected by holders of the company’s publicly traded Class A shares.

The Class B shares, which are controlled by the Sulzberger family, have the right to elect nine of the company’s 13 directors. This is an blatantly undemocratic set up.

“Shareholders are left with few avenues through which to voice their opinion other than by withholding from Class A directors,” ISS said in its report. “While we do not advocate removal of the Class A directors, we believe that a strong message to effect change is necessary.”

The Times said in a public relations statement it was “disappointed” that the ISS had recommended a withhold vote for the four directors elected by Class A shareholders.

The Times’ annual meeting is scheduled for April 24. So watch for more positioning in the next two weeks.

Last year the Morgan Stanley fund and two other large shareholders withheld their vote for Class A directors, resulting in a 30 percent withhold rate. The votes are largely symbolic and are intended to signal shareholder dissatisfaction.

ISS also said that neither Sulzberger nor other managers are accountable to the company’s public shareholders “in any meaningful way.”

This is a democratic crisis. How long can the wealthy Sulzberger famiy (pronounced Sal-bur-jay among the inner-circle) soak the majority of their stockholders?

Newspapers killing Scripps profit picture

Mick Gregory

When did newspapers make 20 percent profits?

The Scripps Co. owner of several newspapers and the popular HGTV channel, sent out a press release to stock analysts stating it is “talking about options” for its newspaper division, which is dragging down the company’s stock price.

“We’ve reached no conclusions, it’s fair to say,” Chief Financial Officer Joseph NeCastro said at an investor conference late Tuesday. “But we do believe that there probably is some value to be created in looking at a structural alternative there . . . maybe some form of separating the newspapers out.”

Scripps has built its cable-networks business, which includes HGTV and the Food Network, into the company’s leading profit generator. It’s now entering e-commerce with acquisitions of Web sites Shopzilla and uSwitch.

Scripps’ newspapers are slow-growth or no-growth. In the first nine months of 2006, the Scripps Networks division, which includes its cable business, posted a 17.8 percent gain in revenue. Meanwhile, its Interactive Media division, aided by the uSwitch acquisition, grew 408 percent.

Newspapers, which account for less than 30 percent of the company’s revenue, saw sales drop by 0.1 percent in the same time period.

Compared to broadcast television, “Newspapers seem to be much more troubled, and it’s hard to call a bottom there,” NeCastro said. “I think up until this last year probably it wasn’t that clear. I think we collectively feel like there is some damage.”

The newspaper industry is in a death ride. The Knight Ridder chain sold itself last year after investor pressure, and the Tribune Co., which paid more than 8 billion dollars for Times Mirror, is now being pressured to break up its newspapers, especially by the Chandler family, (former owners of Times Mirror), to boost its stock.

Scripps’ comments cheered Wall Street, with analysts from Merrill Lynch and Goldman Sachs publishing positive analyses Wednesday. Scripps stock hit a 52-week high, closing up 3.8 percent to $51.92.

“We were positively surprised by the company’s comments, which indicate that management has given more serious consideration to this possibility than we had previously thought,” Goldman Sachs analyst Peter Appert said. “Elimination of the newspaper unit would meaningfully enhance the company’s growth prospects and likely translate into a higher valuation for the shares.”

Scripps has daily and community newspapers in 18 markets, including Denver; Memphis and Knoxville, Tenn.; and south Florida. Scripps is a 50-50 partner with MediaNews Group, the owner of the Denver Post, in the Denver Newspaper Agency.

Scripps executives did not say an investment banker has been hired to assist in the deliberations. But NeCastro said the company’s board has spent “a fair amount of time” discussing options.
One possibility is a spinoff, in which Scripps shareholders would receive shares in a new, “pure play” newspaper company. Investors could then choose to sell the newspaper company shares and stick with the higher-growth, new-economy Scripps — or vice-versa.
“We believe (Scripps) could spin out its non-newspaper businesses, could sell most of its papers, or likely pursue many other scenarios,” Merrill Lynch analyst Lauren Fine said.

— David Milstead, Rocky Mountain News

New York Times selling off TV stations en mass to keep afloat

The New York Times Co. stated after the stock market closed Thursday that it plans to sell its broadcast-media group, including nine television stations, to Robert M. Bass’s Oak Hill Capital Partners for $575 million.

Facing the prospect of further circulation and advertising declines and the growing threat of online competition, the newspaper giant said it needs to dispose of the properties to focus on core operations (the old gray lady).

“Over the years (the stations) have provided their communities with high-quality programming and have contributed significantly to our financial performance,” Janet L. Robinson, the company’s chief executive, said in a press release. “We believe, however, that our focus now should be on the development of our newspapers and our rapidly growing digital businesses and the increasing synergies between them.”
The lead investor for Oak Hill, Bass is part of the Bass family of Texas oil billionaires. His brother, Sid, recently held a large stake in Walt Disney Co. Robert Bass’s net worth is placed at more than $5 billion. Oak Hill’s committed capital stands at $4.6 billion, the company said.

The nine stations were expected to account for $150 million in 2006 sales, or 4 percent of New York Times’ overall revenue when the plan to sell was announced in September, spokeswoman Catherine Mathis said. At that time, 2006 operating earnings from the group was estimated at $33 million.

The stations are affiliates of ABC, CBS and NBC, as well as one member of the MyNetworkTV group, and are in Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Iowa, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and Virginia. Market sizes range from Memphis to Moline, Ill. They employ roughly 900 people, Mathis said.

While a number of media companies are disposing of assets in order to cut costs, don’t expect large newspaper companies to sell off their broadcast assets en masse like the Times has, said Steven Barlow, analyst for Prudential Securities in New York.

“I wouldn’t imagine you’ll see anything from (other media companies) on that front,” Barlow said.

Why did the LA Times ignore coverage of this hate crime?

Can a minority be a racist? Mainstream media journalists ask.
The LA Times and CNN stayed far away of this hate crime.

Again, a citizen journalist brought the truth to light.

The story broke on November 3, 2006, when an LA Web site editor William Pearl scooped other media on LBReport.com, quoting Long Beach police spokeswoman Jacqueline Bezart as saying a crowd of black attackers hurled racial taunts (“White bitches!” “We hate whites!”) at the young women, and the police were pursuing it as a hate crime.

At the Press-Telegram, reporter Tracy Manzer quickly landed an exclusive interview with the victims, introducing awkward issues of race and culture rarely (if ever) seen in California mainstream media. Said one victim, identified as Laura: “They asked us, ‘Are you down with it?’ We had no idea what that meant so we didn’t say anything and just walked by them up to the haunted house. They were grabbing their crotches — we didn’t know if it was a gang thing or what.”

Suddenly, newspaper editors, TV-news directors and other media faced an unsettling prospect of their own: If white-on-black hate crime is covered with an apologetic tone and references to the legacy of slavery, what’s the tone for covering black-on-white hate crime? Can a minority be a racist? And how can we, the media, get out of this?

As the Press-Telegram reported, three white women aged 19 to 21 emerged from a “maze” walk in a house and were confronted by up to 40 black teenagers who pelted them with pumpkins and lemons. The paper said, “The taunts and jeers grew more aggressive, the victims recalled, as did the size of the crowd. Now females joined in, and everyone began saying, ‘We hate white people, f— whites!’ ”

Notice there was not the around-the-clock coverage by CNN or any coverage by the LA Times.

Compare this “non story” with that of the Duke Lacrosse team. The alleged hate crime by a stripper and the Democrat prosecutor Nyfong.

Where will you read the followup? In the Mainstream Media?