In theory, a democracy could vote out the constitution and vote itself into a fascist state as its last act of democracy.
How many people in this country understand that this is actually possible?
There is a reason for the media to be "liberal" in a nature, and a definite purpose for the media to be a watchdog.
Who else is going to do it if not the media?
The administration is in power, to stay in power. The congress is in power, to stay in power. The Supreme court members are not subject to voting by the people, or a recall process.
It is the nature of power to corrupt, anyone want to question that theory?
If that is the case, it only makes sense for some institution in this country to continually take a suspicious perspective toward men and women, fragile ego driven creatures that we are, who hold positions of power, power that can corrupt, and can be easily used to manipulate the citizens.
In times of fear among the people, it becomes even easier to manipulate and control information under the heading of "national security." So in times of fear, it becomes even more important for a free press and careful examination of the leadership to ensure they are not taking advantage of the situation.
There is precedent historically for the abuse of power in this country, and in other countries.
What harm does it do to keep vigil at the door of democracy, and let the leaders know that we are watching everything they do, with a healthy skepticism in the process of doing so?
It keeps them honest. Without a vigilant press, we are cooked.
Control the press, you control public opinion, you control the next election, you control everything.
You call this liberal, I call it preservation of civil liberties, that if controlled end our concept of a democratic society.
"So now if the President's national security policy is broadly accepted and seen as reasonable and necessary by most of the electorate, that is not only not good, but it is bad. It means we are only one step from a fascist dictatorship, which would be bad here but for some reason is seen as a good thing for Cuba."
The issue is that if the national security policy is viewed reasonable by the electorate, because false and misleading information was given to support the agenda of the administration....well, Houston, we have a problem.
Every administation should be transparent, and welcome scrutiny and skepticism by the electorate. If the adminstration is squeaky clean, the more we know, the more we will trust.
As long as the administration is playing by the rules, they have nothing to fear, right?
Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
One reason I have trouble with liberal arguments is that liberals tend to turn everything on its head. What is good somehow becomes suspect, but what is bad cannot be called bad because that would be intolerant.
So now if the President's national security policy is broadly accepted and seen as reasonable and necessary by most of the electorate, that is not only not good, but it is bad. It means we are only one step from a fascist dictatorship, which would be bad here but for some reason is seen as a good thing for Cuba.
In the runup to the war, there were mass demonstrations of over 100,000 protestors in major cities. Many leading politicians were openly dubious, and basically accused the President of orchestrating a war to shore up his popularity. Most of the country's leading newspapers were either negative on the war, or took a dovish nonposition, such as giving the inspectors more time. Now that the war is over, the Democrats are accusing the President of making up intelligence reports to justify war.
The Democrats have a nearly even division of power in the congress, and have been able to frustrate the President on many important items. Of the major media outlets, ABC, NBC, CBS and virtually every major newspaper except for the Washington Times and WSJ openly oppose the President and take every opportunity to try to undermine him and his party.
I agree that popular passions can boil over and lead to excess in countries without functioning checks and balances. I can't see how that applies here however.
RS