This Sunday, at 1:00 p.m. EST, I’ll be on C-SPAN’s “Book TV,” discussing Fooled Again. They taped it last Friday up at UMASS Amherst, where I gave the keynote at a conference (“Communication in Crisis”).


0 thoughts on “MCM on C-SPAN”

  1. Hey man … will tune in, tape and as usual, pass onto friends. Always easier to get people to watch than it is to read. Thanks for the heads up…

  2. Mark,

    I’m watching this now, on C-Span, but I missed the beginning. (Book TV)

    I can’t find a link to a streaming or otherwise accessible online method to view it again or pass it along to others.

    Do you, or does anyone know how view this talk online? I want my slumbering siblings to listen to you, and I’d like to hear it in its entirety.

    Thank you.

  3. C-Span 2 will be rebroadcasting at 10PM CST. Hopefully they will have it online with their other shows soon.

  4. I just finished watching your lecture on C-span. You covered quite a lot of territory. From the elections of 2004, in which you talk about the fanatical lunatic fringe in the relgious right who have visisons of apocalypse, to the Kennedy assassination. The lecture was riveting. I do, however, have a bone of contention with you on your criticism of the left.

    You referred to “Mother Jones” as a leftist publication. I have never saw it as that. It is mostly wishy-washy liberal journal, replete with stories about this problem or that problem. It is not a general critique of capitalism, like, say, “Monthly Review.” It is not suprising that your book did not meet with a postive reception by these liberal journals. If you will recall, the “Nation” printed some very harsh articles about Ralph Nader running for president in 2008. Again, no big surprise that these “left” journals dissed your book.

    A website I go to for my news and analysis, WSWS.ORG, mentioned your book on a number of occassions and had some positive things to say about it. It is mainly because they weren’t motivated by monetary or materialist concerns.

    Overall, good talk and I am going to reserve your book at the public libary.

  5. I just saw the tail-end of the morning broadcast on C-SPAN (4/9/06). I will watch the whole thing this evening, but can you make that video available on your web site? It is frequently difficult to track it down on C-SPAN & I would like to disseminate it to some friends of mine who will not be able to view it tonight.

  6. I just saw your talk on a re-broadcast on C-span.

    Your talk was very good but I don’t like your conclusions.

    If the Neo-cons are hell bent on destroying our world then where does that put us that would like to live in harmony with the world?

    If the elections are to be taken by these radicals then what is our hope to overcome?

    With the Patriot Act redefining our rights to a sub-set that we started with the slippery slope of oppression is just ahead…or is it here?

    Is insanity the new political platfrom?

    How does one argue with crazy people?

    And if we win the argument what have we won?

    Meanwhile our rights and freedoms are being rewritten to allow blasphemy to be a death penalty event. Won’t this tend to limit speech?

    How can we return to sanity…if that is where we in fact did come from?

  7. Just saw you on C-SPAN2 and although I had been aware of vote fraud in ’04, I see that I had not fully grasped the gravity of our current situation.

    It is no longer difficult to see that 9/11 too was a plot by this Bush administration. Without 9/11 Bush would not have gained the impregnable status of “wartime president” which definitely helped him get the votes he did.

    I dearly hope you will turn your great investigative skills to how and why 9/11 was carried out as an inside job.

  8. Mark,
    I just watched your presentation on C-SPAN. I have some comments.
    1. I am a computer programmer with CMM level 3 certification. Your comments on the hackability of the voting systems are innaccurate at best and paranoid at worst.
    I think what is going on here is a “face on Mars” thing. You want to see something, so you do. You can’t accept that what you are seeing is a pile of rocks (the GW Bush victory) so you imagine a face (the Kerry victory). If it’s not chads, it’s code. Liberals just can’t accept that the American people don’t agree with them.
    2. I am not religious. I have 2 degrees and over 230 post-secondary units. I live in a blue state. I voted for Bush because I don’t think the democrats have any idea how to wage a campaign against terrorism.
    3. Do you believe in separation of church and state? Are you willing to oppose the liberal church influences in the southern black churches or in NY and LA synagogues? I have heard a lot of political speech from the bemas of synagogues. I’ll let you guess which side they take.
    4. Your paranoia is treatable. :)
    5. Roy Moore is in Alabama, not Arkansas.

  9. I caught the last few minutes and was very impressed. I hope C-Span will repeat the taping.

  10. Hey come down to Memphis Tennessee
    and do some snooping around. We had
    a Democrat precinct (27-1) where dead people voted, a Democrat poll worker committed fraud, and “surprisingly” a Democrat “won” the election by 13 votes.

    After that check out Democrats in West Virginia and East St. Louis for vote buying…

  11. Looking forward to watching your lecture on C-Span again at 11PM EST. I had been trying to figure out the Republican homophobia with Mehlman, Rove and Bolten running things and I thought you explained it quite well.

  12. Realizing these questions are put to MCM by forex5x, a few comments as I found them to be thought provoking:

    “If the Neo-cons are hell bent on destroying our world then where does that put us that would like to live in harmony with the world?”

    It would help if one could pinpoint exactly who and why so many people across many institutions, corporations, organizations, gov, military, etc have allowed for, have served as enablers of this “cultish” fringe aspect of the right wing, wouldn’t it?

    Because what disturbs me is, if it’s truly a minority fringe element, they sure have servers, protectors and enablers EVERYWHERE. It’s not accidental or coincidental, sooooo……what is it exactly?

    I know it sounds nutty, but I lean toward a broad faction of shadow gov, or Illuminati, if you will, with insane geopolitical plans.

    Unfortunately, this line of speculation tends toward what Mark referred to while discussing JFK. If the want of apocalyptic, “faith based” gov appears too overwhelming to confront, to thwart, people naturally take on a sense of fatalism …a sounding of the death knell for humanity that, for instance, key figures Chomsky and Zinn have long fought against. And yes, I place MCM alongside them.

    “If the elections are to be taken by these radicals then what is our hope to overcome?”

    Again, the key rests in determining how and why so many across a broad spectrum have allowed and enabled the grim reality thus far.

    “With the Patriot Act redefining our rights to a sub-set that we started with the slippery slope of oppression is just ahead…or is it here?”

    People have fought endlessly for the rights taken for granted, and now lost. They’ll either remain in an unreality-state-of-consciousness resembling sleep, and our species will end in war and madness ….or, and there is good reason to believe this – once fully aware of the scope of the dilemma, will fight tooth and nail to get back those rights.

    Will enough snap out of denial before the fascists trigger life-ending war, or has that in fact already happened?

    “Is insanity the new political platfrom? How does one argue with crazy people?”

    Again, this speaks directly to how and why so many people – aside from wanting to protect their careers – have enabled and allowed what has happened.

    Mark spoke of this in his presentation: not enough people can accept, can “take to heart,” as he phrased it, that so much of what they hold dear, accept as a given reality, is fabrication designed to disguise the apocalyptic nature and plans at the highest levels of power. Coupled with this is the sense of familiarity: if the TV and newspapers largely present one view, and if that view is largely amplified in one’s daily round of living, the unreality is more easily accepted as “reality.”

    “And if we win the argument what have we won?”

    At this point the argument won’t be won – we the people have to reclaim the procedures. This is where I tend to become fatalistic, because with no fact-based, indie media reaching large masses of our populace, well….as we already know, most people will sit there and accept the situation. Eventually people will be forced to rise up and protest, and then, likely intertwined with the next false flag “terror” attack, you’ll see power attempt to implement the draconian structures now being established, and anyone opposed will be deemed “terrorists.”

    Now, I can’t see large numbers of Americans going along with that. However, if you’d have asked me ten years ago if I thought people would accept what’s already taken place, I would’ve had serious doubts about that as well.

    Couple that with what the psychotic panic of a country that’s just had an unprecedented, mass-casualty attack, and sure, plenty of horrifying shit could go down with virtually none of what we accept as routine bulletins or safeguards in place.

    “Meanwhile our rights and freedoms are being rewritten to allow blasphemy to be a death penalty event. Won’t this tend to limit speech?”

    Only if enough people allow it to. That’s how it works: if a fallacy takes or fails is in direct relation to public acceptance, or the size and the strength of opposition to it.

    Good presentation Mark!

    Something that struck me lie in two questions from the audience.

    One, a woman voiced her support, but admitted that when she has debates with others concerning what’s happening/yet not really being discussed or acknowledged, it’s with “rational”{denial}types who insist on evidence. You then sited several good books.

    However, with mainline media generally pimping favored Bushco newspeak only, the facts, the evidence, reality, takes on a shadowy, esoteric, conspiratorial feel – only because those facts are unfamiliar to most.

    This is what is so frustrating …as I’m sure you know all too well, it’s easy to sound nutbar-ish if you try to dump too much reality on the average person whose political and worldviews are formed through exposure to mainline media.

    And most people won’t bother reading or embarking on a research project …so they’ll ask for “facts” or sources, merely as a tactic, and you can offer them endless examples knowing full well they’ll never bother looking into it. Ugh…

    The other troubling question was posed by a young lady, likely a student representative, who, after hearing your entire talk, asked “what is your message to young people?”

    Maybe it was me, but you did seem a bit taken aback. I mean, in all seriousness, it’s easy to see how the “unreality” of phony elections, phony terror attacks and phony wars have been accepted by so many, so easily, if her question, and the timing of it, is any qualitative example of average dedudictive reasoning skills.

    Guess I thought that your message to people old or young was why you were giving the talk in the first place.

    Excellent presentation though. And for anyone wondering, C-SPAN will repeat it tonight.

  13. I watched Professor Miller on Book TV. If his book is of the same bent as his lecture, then I shall not read it. If Professor Miller were a plaintiff in court, then the defendant, in this case, President Bush would win a summary judgment motion. There is no triable issue of fact.

    The left, personified by the good Professor in this case, has some suspicions, but nothing else. There is no direct evidence that any of the events Professor Miller occurred, and the circumstantial evidence is very weak at best.

    Let’s examine one of his contentions covered in the Book TV lecture. He claims that the pre-election polls showed Bush winning Ohio by 6%, but ended up winning, I believe he said, by 11%. Yet, the Pre-vote (?) and the absentees showed the 6%. There is an explanation. Many people may have switched due to the Massachusetts Supreme Court decision on gay marriage, the discredited CBS report on President Bush and the fear of Kerry.

    Professor Miller is like Judith Crisp of the New Yorker, who could not understand how President Nixon won in 1972, because everyone she knew voted for Senator McGovern. If a Republican wins, and a conservative one at that, then something must be wrong with the voting.

    I also could not believe that Professor Miller accused the so-called Religious Right of paranoia, and blamed that paranoia for their “regressive” agenda. Then he mentioned that some reviewer accused him of paranoia, but that is not a valid criticism.

    He condemned ad hominem attacks, then engaged in nothing else.

    No, Professor, I will not read your book, and your Woody Allen act is not so good either.

  14. Very well said, right wing nut. And let me suggest another C-SPAN viewing for you. If they ever replay lectures from Michelle Malkin on her latest book “Unhinged”, be sure to catch it. She is a national treasure.

  15. I’m watching MCM’s BookTV replay.
    I’m waiting for the “evidence” of Republican malfeasance in 2004. Haven’t heard any yet. I am rather enjoying his paranoid rantings – particularly when accuses the other side of projecting and then doing just that, projecting – his own anger and paranoia onto the right.

    Amusing… he just made a comment to the effect of ‘we don’t have freedom of speech in the country’ – he seems to be speaking rather freely for someone who doesn’t have freedom of speech.

    The Democratic Party is broken and, as long as you folks keep listening to crazies like this guy, it will remain broken. Stop drinking the kool-aid, people; fix your damn party so you can be viable again. We need you back.

  16. I just watched the C-SPAN broadcast and was once again highly impressed with your arguments and observations.

    As I sat there during the Q&A period, I was wishing to ask about the exit pollster who immediately renounced his work due to the disparities between his results and those of the vote count. So I am glad that a questioner brought up the issue and that you addressed it well. I too continue to find it odd that the phenomenon of the “taciturn Republican voter” had obviously never been taken into account as a mitigating polling factor and had only suddenly cropped up for the first time in 2004.

    I await on tenterhooks for the piece by a major public figure that will seriously address the issue of rigged electronic voting.

  17. To Sirebral:

    1) Voter machines not hackable? You have got to be kidding. Anything computer program is hackable and tweakable. More easily, of course, by the backenders.

    2) You live in a Blue State because Blue States are open minded. Red States are bunch of god-fearing mongers, but nonetheless, we needs their vote.

    3) Dude! Wake up! The neoconidiots like yourselves, have blurred it so much there is no separation of church and state.

    4) Your skewwed belief and thinking are treatable. Get some help, and by the way, stop hacking them ‘puters, and also you should know about .htaccess, c’mon now.

    5) Roy Moore will go to hell. “Thou shall not create false images.”

  18. wow.
    i just saw you on cspan and was amazed to hear finally someone speak clearly about this country.
    i want you to know that when kerry conceded so quickly, i felt like i had been physically punched in the stomach for a week or so. it was such a letdown. who will rise up for us, or do we have to do it for ourselves?
    ignore your detractors, they just don’t want to see the truth.

    i will be buying at least one of your books in the morning, don’t spend it all in one place.

    thanks for the truth

  19. I just watched you on C-Span and I am going to buy the Fooled Again book. I’ve read that the Diebold machines were not used in California because of software that was not certified, among other things. Why doesn’t anyone talk about this? You made some very good points and observations and I am going to look into them and verify what I can. It kills me that if you question something like voting fraud, you are automatically some kind of nutjob. It just takes all the rational out of any good argument. How convenient.

  20. About the machines, they were used in the Chicago Cook County, and there was a major flare up, when several hours after poll closing they did not have the votes. The votes had to be counted through the night and the next morning. Listening to the news, there were excuses from the Board of Elections that they had problems transmitting from church basements to headquarters, and therefore had to transport tapes. Most polling stations in Church basements are scoped out ahead of time, why did someone not test to see if they could transmit? Why was there no back up plan, i.e. send the results via telephone? Why does a simple programming task like voting have to be propietary, yet most of our internet nodes utilize through an open source operating system(Linux)? Was this system even tested?

  21. I always enjoy it when you folks on the left rip on red-staters. You’re better at recruiting for us than we are…

    “Hi there Mr. & Mrs. Red-stater, I’m from the Democratic Party and you’re unsophisticated, irrational, stupid rubes. Please vote for us.”


    Keep it up, you’ll stay out of power another 20 years even with the R’s constantly screwing up.

    btw, Keith Kinion-
    “A website I go to for my news and analysis, WSWS.ORG…”
    ??? WTF? That’s like starting a sentence with “A news channel I go to for my news and analysis, Fox News…”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *