Rating: 
Summary: Readable and Informative
Review: Despite its comic book appearance, Banana Republicans is chock-full of hard facts and useful information for anyone who values democracy and is concerned with the changing face of our nation. Some might regard Public Relations as an obscure business practice, but Rampton and Stauber demonstrate that the "hundreds of millions of dollars" spent by mega-corporations and our own government (at taxpayer expense) is money well-spent by those who want to control public and Congressional opinion. One chapter of the book, Traitor Baiters, lists specific instances of inflammatory rhetoric by Republic leaders and pundits accusing those who disagree with them of hating America, undermining America, presenting a threat to America. These are potentially dangerous words to anyone who questions this administration and its nearly total acquiescence to corporate control. The writing style is clear, concise, and unburdened with the thick satire of writers such as Michael Moore and Al Franken. A great introduction to the ongoing hard work of the folks at the Center for Media and Democracy. It could change your life, or at least your political perceptions.
Rating: 
Summary: Consistent with their other books
Review: First, I'm an admirer of the authors of this volume. In their "Toxic Waste is Good For You," I learned even more than I wanted to about the public relations "industry." I thought their "Trust Us, We're Experts" was even better, and on a similar subject. Their "Weapons of Mass Deception" was, while on the same wavelength, more focused on the PR dimensions of a particular subject, the present "war" and what led up to it.
This particular volume is relevant to me today as I've been discussing with associates much of what is going on in the world today: Iraq, even the recent referendum in Venezuela. And I'm frequently referred to as "unpatriotic," boarding on "traitor" because I have the audacity to disagree with the party line. And that's scary.
While the "majority" claims to defend freedom, free thought, free exchange, they're so dumbfounded by those with a different mind frames that these allegations come about. That's where the "one party" element of this text's title comes in handy.
Then, when one watches television pundits like Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and others, if their "guests" disagree with them, the "hosts" simply turn off the microphone. So there is ONE opinion heard and accepted.
This, ultimately, is the theme of this book.
Where does one start? Perhaps a good place is to agree with the authors that some of those pundits, e.g., David Horowitz, while being former radical leftists, and now cheerleaders for the new right, are really Leninist, probably the ultimate antithesis of the "conservatism" they claim to represent. If one disagrees with pundits such as these, he or she is decried, again, as treasonous, to a degree to make Joe McCarthy turn over in his grave.
As usual, the authors put some emphasis on the institutions related to the pundits they refer to. For instance, John Stosell, that alleged skeptic who challenges, among other things, the health value of organic farming, is funded by various right wing foundations. His comments are, therefore, biased by those who pay his bills. (Because of his status as a media "personality," unfortunately, though, gives him a pulpit from which to preach, despite those biases.) Oh, and he never rescinds his "statements," even when they're proven wrong.
There are even ideological journalistic cabals--unknown to most of us who read the materials produced by their beneficiaries--which have an inordinate amount of influence on the writers who, then appear to be credible, i.e, not driven by their ideological benefactors.
Even hiring of lobbyists, for example, is limited to those of the same ideological perspective, i.e., dyed-in-the-wool Republicans, in some of the nation's leading lobbying firms.
As with most of their books, there is a lot in this one. Indeed, I read this over after I get into arguments with colleagues whom I would otherwise consider reasonable, who're so influenced by propaganda as to be reactionary. Maybe it's sort of an underscore of the perceptions of those of us who feel the "mainstream" media are not so "objective" as we'd like, and certainly not as "liberal" as the right makes them out to be.
The authors end with advice as to what to do to counter this one-party state to which we're headed. While reading that, I get depressed, frankly. Such actions seem naïve. But I am happy they suggest that something be done.
I guess this is a book best read by "the choir" as most others won't believe it, or will be more cynical than I. It might be more effective if read after the other books by the same authors. That would provide a context into which the material would fit more comfortably, i.e., that we're products of a PR and marketing environment of which we need to be wary to survive.
Read it, then decide what can be
Rating:
Summary: Every young person needs to read this book
Review: I am believe myself to be a well-informed young voter. I believe that anyone who writes a review downing the information needs to read the back of the book called the "notes" and go to the websites of the newspaper articles that they were taken from. This information is publically accessed. Also, searching on Google for the 911 timeline by Paul Thompson will help you out to make informed decisions, taken from newspapers and so on. I believe that most of us that have read this book have made up our minds about the issues in which we stand. This book, however, opens your eyes up to the bigger picture. I, for one, see this book as a learning tool and a tool in which to educate my fellow college students to go out and vote. Why should we go against our moral judgement? Why should we lie to ourselves and vote against our own best interests? Food for thought.
Rating: 
Summary: US already a 1 Party State : Republicratic
Review: I tried following the reasoning (what of this precious commodity there was) here, but can only agree with Mr. Steven Tooley: Left-turners already dominate much of society so who does this book think it's enlightening? It's like the Left Wing doesn't know what the Left Wing is doing.
An objective observer can plainly see America moving to a more polarized condition of Redness vs. Blueness. But all the while Redness has a lot of Blueness around the edges and Blueness some Redness.
Yes there are the core Bluers and core Redders, but overall, the nation is becoming more homogeneous: Republicratic or Demopublican. Just recall the recent conventions and what each candidate is promising voters to get elected. Sometimes the Redness fella sounds downright Bluish, while Mr. Blueness can wield Reddish rhetoric to appeal to the edges of his dominant color scheme.
In the end this book is not helpful in labeling the GOP as the bad guy or off-color. America is not just Banana-republican, but equally Bananas-democrat. Main point missed with this one-sided Politiconcoction: it all comes from the same Banana plant.
Rating:
Summary: A Gorilla In The China Shop
Review: If ever there was a book that screamed the old cliché not to judge a book by its cover this is it. What were these guys thinking putting this comical and some might say juvenal cover on a book that begs to be taken seriously is beyond me. I read this book because of an accident, I picked up and read the authors other work on the Iraq war thinking it would be a sharply pointed stick in the eye of the Bush administration based on the doggy cover art. It turned out to be a well written and serious book. I then decided to give this book a try, hoping that this book would also fall in the must read category based on substance. It turns out I was lucky again, this book is a well written and adequately deep look at how the right wing of the GOP has taken over, step by step, many of the opinion making organs of the U.S. media and thought industry.
The book hits all the high points of the GOP grand plan, from a look at the gerrymandering that the Democrats have allowed to happen, to the ever increasing conservative media and the far right think tank machine that is mixing corporate and political access at an accelerated pace. Step by step the authors detail out what has happened over the last 35 or so years that leaves you with no doubt how we have come to this current political position. Reading the book you want to keep hitting your forehead and exclaiming Of Course. The one question I had at the end of the book was are the Democrats that stupid to sit back and let this happen to them or were the Conservatives just that smart. Either way the future is looking a far bit more dogmatic then most people might be comfortable with.
A nice book to accompany this one would be The Republican Noise Machine by David Brock. It covers many of the same topics as this book, but with more detail. The advantage of this book is that the authors really do try and keep the reporting as fair as possible. I have a read a good number of anti Bush rant books, and these authors steer clear of the cheep pot shots and name calling that even Brock succumbed to using. Overall I enjoyed the book. It comes across as an even handed and calm look at the topic. The authors could have gone deeper into the sections of the book, but the reader gets a good broad view with what is provided. If you are interested in the rise of the GOP to the almost total control they now have, this is a good starting point.
Rating: 
Summary: How the Right Wing is turning America into a TWO Party State
Review: Let's see if we can get this straight. The authors admit that 40 years ago the Democrats had a monopoly on the following:
1. Academia
2. Executive Branch
3. Grass Roots movements
4. Judicial Branch
5. Legislative Branch
6. Media
7. Money Raising - Business
8. Money Raising - Personal
9. Think Tanks
So lets take a look at who controls the following now
Academia - Without a doubt Liberal
Executive Branch - Conservative (after 8 years of liberal rule)
Grass Roots Movements - about 50/50
Judicial Branch - Liberal (Supreme Court 5 liberal or liberal leaning justices vs. 4 conservative or conservative leaning justices. State and District courts are overwhelmingly liberal)
Legislative Branch - Just barely Conservative
Media - Liberal
Money Raising (Business) - (for the first time in 40 years it's 50/50 - the conservatives have finally bowed down to being bought just like the liberals)
Money Raising (Personal) - Again about the same 50/50 with most of the big dollars going to liberals and the populist putting the money behind the conservatives.
Think Tanks - Liberal with conservatives catching up.
So let's do the math
4 Liberal
3 Split
2 Conservative
Now can somebody please explain to me:
"How the right wing is turning America into a one-party state?"
That is the subtitle of this book!
I think the answer lies in the fact that the authors have become so complacent over the years knowing that the leftist controlled and monopolized this country, that they believed it would always be. What the authors and those on the left didn't think about was that with the advent of the internet and the deregulation of media, a new powerful force was about to be unleashed upon the people. No longer would the citizens be subjected to the nightly leftwing propaganda known as news, instead they would have free access to information. The internet has dispelled a cornucopia of left wing myths while alternate news sources that are winning droves of people and causing the left wing major news outlets to soften the political slant.
What the authors and those on the left have also not considered is that the populist have watched the democrat party pander to every fringe radical belief, they have watched these radical movements push from the left while the republicans, squashed without a voice and without the mighty political machine that the left has, silently slide further and further to the center. This has had an effect over time of redefining the center further to the left. Now however, the populist are fed up with programs that have failed over and over again. They are tired of the propaganda that has been fed to them and the people have woken up. These `new' Democrats are a foreign entity to most Americans. While we are happy embolden the ideologies of the JFK's of the world it is startling to us in the center how similar JFK's policies are to the modern day Republicans.
Sorry Mr. Rampton and Mr. Stauber, your tome is farcical for too long this country has been driven to the left by one party controlling everything. It has only been recently that the people are getting fed up and have started pushing the pendulum back. It is now JUST BEGINNING to swing the other way. Quit your crying that you don't have totalitarian control anymore, a little bit of opposition will pull America back to the center and make her great again.
Rating:
Summary: Some useful observations about the right wing
Review: Right wing think tanks set the agenda, the authors write. Foundations like Gates, Rockefeller and Ford have huge budgets dwarfing those of right wing foundations that subsidize the think tanks but they devote themselves to charity and education, while right wing think foundations concentrate exclusively on funding right wing intellectual work.
The Koch family funds the Cato Institute. The authors report a story from the mid-90's, where two teenagers were blown up in a butane gas explosion caused by a leak in a Koch industries pipeline beneath their Texas town. The company has caused innumerable oil spills and got fined 35 million dollars by the EPA in the 90's.. In early 2001, Koch was facing 97 counts of releasing 91 metric tons of the carcinogen Benzene from its Corpus Christi TX plant. Ashcroft's people let them off with a 20 million dollar fine. The company has assets of more than 25 billion dollars. Koch also funds Citizens For A Sound Economy(CSE).
A typical example of think tank intellectual standards. As CSE wrote position papers arguing against preserving Everglades land, Florida sugar growers that would loose land in such preservation were giving it $700,000;; it got $175,000 from ExxonMobil as it was dismissing Global Warming as "junk science"; a million from U.S. West as it argued for phone regulation, and so on.
. The authors write about the compromised relationship intellectuals like William Buckley and George Will had, serving as heavily paid informal advisors to the now disgraced reactionary Canadian newspaper mogul Congrad Black, while praising Black's books and public commentaries and not letting their association with him be known.
The authors go over the Bush administrations effort to suppress reports of toxic chemicals, which have caused respiratory problems in many, released into the NYC air after the WTC collapse and the industry "experts' they appoint for government oversight bodies. The authors quote the Health institute of the National Academy of Sciences that 18,000 people die unnecessarily each year in this country because of poor health care coverage.
The authors quote an episode where John Stossel in one of his documentaries showed a protest against inflated CEO salaries and criticized this on the ground that factory wages were up 70 percent since the early 80's. The authors note that Stossel did not adjust his 70% figure for inflation which would reduces the factory worker wage rise to three percent, while the Boss's income went up 360 percent. Then it appears that Stossel resorted to outright forgery in 2000. He claimed that no pesticides were found on tests of organic and regular produce and that organic food had a much higher concentration of E Coli than regular produce. The pesticide tests were never taken and the scientists who did the tests claimed that the bacteria tests they took were not equipped to show E-Coli presence.
The authors write that New York Times reporters concluded that James Baker's team in 2000 was able to have countedmilitary ballot and other ballots in counties where Bush had an advantage that were turned in late, didn't have the right signature, etc. Katherine Harris used the database company to kick off people from the voting rolls who had names similar to black felons, and numerous other eligible people. 54 percent of the names kicked off were black, though only 15 percent of Florida is. Majority black counties in Florida showed a high rate of ballot rejection in contrast to white majority counties. The report of the Center for opinion at the University of Chicago, which commissioned news organizations to count the ballots, found that in six of nine counting scenarios Gore would have won Florida.
The authors note the story of Ed Rollins claiming that he bribed democratic workers and black preachers not to get out the vote in the New Jersey governors race in 1992. . Rollins later claimed he was trying to have some fun with J. Carville but Whitman's brother Dan and a campaign spokesman implicitly confirmed this... In 1990, the Jesse Helms senate campaign produced leaflets in black neighborhoods claiming people would be arrested if they voted and had moved less than a month before and in a black neighborhood in Baltimore, leaflets were distributed telling people, the wrong day for an election and saying they would be arrested if they tried to vote and had overdue rent, outstanding parking tickets, or outstanding warrants. Republican polling place observers (like Chief Justice Rehnquist in 1964 in Arizona) have been known to stop black voters, take their picture and harass them. The authors quote racist caricatures of blacks that appeared in a Dartmouth paper when Dinesh D'souza edited it and in a college paper Ann Coulter once wrote for. Dinesh of course, wrote some really astounding things about matters such as segregation in "The End of Racism."
The authors point out how Republican sponsored redistricting in Pennsylvania and Illinois, where democrats represent the highest number of registered voters, has led the majority of congresspersons in these states to be Republicans. In Texas, the Republicans eventually prevailed in 2003 in getting a second redistricting scheme that favored them even more to replace the one implemented after the 2000 census. This was the first time in Texas history that a second redistricting plan was implemented between censuses.
The authors point how the Center For Public Integrity reported that Bush had wealthy campaign contributors' stay in the Lincoln bedroom. Republicans were silent about this in contrast to the holy uproar over the CPI's reports on similar violations by Clinton.
Rating:
Summary: Salutory
Review: The country has been so bombarded for deacdes by the claim that the media is liberal, readers like the one from Syracuse believe it, ignoring the power, reach and influence of the Wall Street Journal; talk radio, especially Rush Limbaugh; and MSNBC and Fox. Furthermore, the campaign has shifted all media rightward. But even Republicans have admitted the claims of a liberal media are a shell game, and a brilliantly successful one at that. This book and David Brock's The Republican Noise Machine and Eric Alterman's What Liberal Media should be read by all citizens who want to maintain and strengthen American democracy.
Rating:
Summary: A Bitter Pill to Swallow
Review: This book is as scary as it is informative. While this book may look like it's some kind of pulp-fiction with its bright orange cover and its "cute" cartoon cover graphic, it packs a serious message that should be heard by the Americans that still desire democracy and the freedom to make an informed choice.
There are a few "reviewers" here that call it "bunk" because it makes the claim that the media is not as "liberal" as we have been spun into believing. Let's take a serious look at this for a moment and look at what Rupert Murdoch, owner of Fox News and right-wing supporter, owns:
9 satellite television networks
175 newspapers
100 cable channels
40 book imprints
40 television stations
1 movie studio
*with an estimated total audience of 4.7 billion people that are receiving the message that he and his allies want.
The numbers that I have given are only a clue as to the fact that there is a dark hole in what the American public relies on for truth. If you want to truly see how powerful the gravitation towards this hole is and how deep the hole goes, please read this book and research its claims for yourself.
Since the word "liberal" seems to be being tossed around by some people as if it's an insult, let's review the definition from dictionary.com for a minute:
a. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
c. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
d. Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.
Me, I believe in truth, justice, the US Constitution, and the protection of the American worker and economy. Does this make me a "liberal?" I guess so because the modern "conservative" calls me "liberal" since I believe these ideas should be applied equally and without prejudice.
One of my favorite quotes by a president:
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president ... right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Teddy Roosevelt (Republican), 1918
Rating:
Summary: Painfully relevant
Review: This book is, as others have mentioned, a well documented litany of organizations, supporters, schemes, scams, tactics and objectives of the neocon right. Unfortunately, the sheer volume of information presented requires considerable effort to digest. In addition, the book brings to light a large number of very unpleasant facts and exposes many unsavory characters. This is not an enjoyable book but it is an important book and should be required reading for anyone who still believes the Republican Party stands for strong national defense, fiscal conservatism and smaller government.
|
