RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Wright writes: "For reasons still unknown, a United States government owned and operated media outlet, Voice of America, published a hit piece on Democratic presidential candidate Senator Bernie Sanders."

Left: Still from 'Washington Forum.' Right: Photo of Jamie Kirchick (photo: Washington Forum/Wikipedia)
Left: Still from 'Washington Forum.' Right: Photo of Jamie Kirchick (photo: Washington Forum/Wikipedia)


US State Media Runs Hit Piece on Bernie Sanders

By Dan Wright, MintPress News

20 June 16

 

Americans are not particularly sanguine on having state media in the first place, let alone one running its own political program and meddling in US elections.??

or reasons still unknown, a United States government owned and operated media outlet, Voice of America, published a hit piece on Democratic presidential candidate Senator Bernie Sanders.

The story, titled “Does Bernie Sanders Believe in Democracy?,” was written by Jamie Kirchick, who has elsewhere openly advocated for the election of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as president.

As is characteristic of Kirchick’s polemical style, the piece includes numerous misleading and malicious claims, such as Senator Sanders has “scorn for basic democratic procedure,” and that Sanders “has spent his entire life extolling the virtue of left-wing dictatorships.”

Senator Sanders, according to this story in a US state media outlet, has been a “shill” for undemocratic regimes, with the conclusion being drawn that Sanders does not really believe in democracy, despite his own proclamations of being a democratic socialist.

While Kirchick is, of course, free to attack anyone he likes, for any reason he likes, that US taxpayers are picking up the tab and providing the platform is considerably problematic.

Voice of America was set up during World War II and took a leading role in producing US propaganda (or counter-propaganda, if you like) against the Soviet Union. Currently, VOA is overseen by Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG)—an agency within the US government, which has an annual budget around $700 million. The BBG also oversees other US state media organizations such as Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Alhurra TV, and Radio Free Asia.

Until 2013, it was illegal for US state media outlets like VOA and Radio Free Europe to broadcast within the US, due to a ban on using government propaganda on Americans. But even now, VOA is supposed to be an objective source for news.

Kirchick’s piece appears in the “Opinion and Commentary” section of the VOA website, which shows a quote from VOA’s charter at the top of the page, stating, “VOA will present the policies of the United States clearly and effectively, and will also present responsible discussion and opinion on these policies.”

As broad as that mandate may seem, electioneering and hit pieces on US citizens obviously fall outside those parameters. VOA does not have the right to advocate for a particular candidate or even to attack one. That is not within its charter, nor should any US citizen have to subsidize their own defamation.

This lurch by US state media from news to advocacy seems to be a trend, as Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty recently merged with the Interpreter Mag, a neoconservative outlet founded with money from Russian oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who has openly stated he wishes to violently overthrow the Putin government in Russia.

Americans are not particularly sanguine on having state media in the first place, let alone one running its own political program and meddling in US elections.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+162 # Dust 2016-06-20 14:08
Oh, I think most Americans are sufficiently ill-informed and lacking in the ability to reason logically that as long as the state media promote opinions with which they agree, they'll wholeheartedly endorse it as an objective, fact-based platform.
 
 
+249 # grandlakeguy 2016-06-20 15:38
The fact that a taxpayer funded "news" outlet must stoop to these kinds of lies demonstrates just how afraid of Bernie our status quo system has become.
This only solidifies my resolve to continue to support him and to never agree to the lesser of two evils false choice and vote for the war mongering Hillary the Hawk!
 
 
+84 # sashapyle 2016-06-20 19:34
Hillary probably instigated and/or paid for this Stalinesque moment in journalism.
 
 
+149 # Jim Rocket 2016-06-20 22:54
That's possible but she is not the only establishment figure that's afraid of Bernie. I think they're pretty much all afraid of Bernie. What if this democracy thing caught on? The easy money party would be over.
 
 
-126 # rocback 2016-06-20 23:24
Hey, wait a minute! Only Bernieistas can have opinions. Enough of dissenting views dammit!
 
 
+67 # bettysdad@yahoo.com 2016-06-21 01:25
I was wondering how long it would take for you to shill for Hillary by changing the subject.

Congrats, faster than I thought
 
 
+50 # Jim Rocket 2016-06-21 07:03
Is the point of this beyond you, rocback? Are you saying that if this guy or someone else on VOA wrote a hit piece on Hillary you'd be absolutely okay with it? I think you and your friends would be apoplectic. You have a hard enough time with negative opinions about her from regular people let alone paid for with your own tax dollars.
 
 
-50 # rocback 2016-06-21 08:19
It's an OPINION. You know like when someone writes an opinion letter to a newspaper. You people are a real scream.
 
 
+33 # Jim Rocket 2016-06-21 09:44
Clearly the nature of VOA is beyond your comprehension.
 
 
+2 # reiverpacific 2016-06-23 10:25
Quoting rocback:
It's an OPINION. You know like when someone writes an opinion letter to a newspaper. You people are a real scream.


Better a "real scream" than a boringly predictable, opinionated, stiff-necked, blue dawg dempublican like yer smug, warmongering boss, who seems to enjoy isolation.
 
 
+2 # CL38 2016-06-23 19:14
YOU'RE a MORON.
 
 
-38 # lights 2016-06-21 10:22
Or the heavy bias from Amy Goodman of "Democracy Now?" ...stop...I get the point....but still - it IS an opinion piece?

Going to go look for Kirchick's piece now. Thanks for promoting it with your commentary. It will be a breath of fresh unspoken Sander's AIR to read!
 
 
-36 # lights 2016-06-21 10:55
Does Bernie Sanders Believe in Democracy
http://blogs.voanews.com/us-opinion/2016/06/14/does-bernie-sanders-believe-in-democracy/

What is so untrue about this piece? Go to YouTube and you can find a LONG video interview of Sanders saying many of these things.

And why is it called or considered a HIT PIECE when it is the truth? Especially when Bernie followers on this and many other forums jump for joy about the UNTRUTHS and REAL hit pieces printed about Hillary Rodham Clinton? Many HIT pieces on this very FORUM!

Indeed, it IS an OPINION piece!
 
 
+25 # grandlakeguy 2016-06-21 11:09
Dear rokback, lights etc. as the stream of Hillary's and the DNC's hacked emails will reveal in the next few weeks it will become ever more apparent that:

HILLARY CLINTON IS NO MORE OF A LEGITIMATE NOMINEE
THAN
GEORGE W BUSH WAS A LEGITIMATELY ELECTED PRESIDENT!

Of course fairness and honesty mean nothing to you folks, you will stand by your stunningly dishonest Queen to the bitter end...even if it is the end of civilization as we know it when her wars spiral out of control.
 
 
-31 # lights 2016-06-21 11:31
Listen up, grandlakeguy! You are a SINGLE minded misogynist! And that is exactly why so many of us OBJECT to your outrageous posts that have little to do with REALITY~! Just your sexist, HIT piece, HATE filled opinions and greatly limited "opinions" at best....

The only thing you've got going on this forum is your thumbs up by the crowd in the schoolyard who love bullies and cheer you on for being one!

Most everything you say about Hillary Rodham Clinton or her supporters are totally emotional and (irrationally) FEAR based! And many on this forum simply respond in like to it!
 
 
+2 # reiverpacific 2016-06-23 10:32
Quoting lights:
Listen up, grandlakeguy! You are a SINGLE minded misogynist! And that is exactly why so many of us OBJECT to your outrageous posts that have little to do with REALITY~! Just your sexist, HIT piece, HATE filled opinions and greatly limited "opinions" at best....

The only thing you've got going on this forum is your thumbs up by the crowd in the schoolyard who love bullies and cheer you on for being one!

Most everything you say about Hillary Rodham Clinton or her supporters are totally emotional and (irrationally) FEAR based! And many on this forum simply respond in like to it!


Almost EVERY opinion in 21st century US of Anger is fear-driven, thanks to the appalling, commercially-dr iven owner-media and their pundits, like the subject of this article and the absolute rule of Wall Street and the Military-corpor ate export of American jobs to sweat-shop economy and no universal Healthcare, making job loss more terrifying.
Can't see Clinton MK11 doing much about it; she's a born Oligarch.
 
 
+2 # CL38 2016-06-23 19:17
I'm a 40 year feminist. Criticizing Clinton's corruption is NOT misogyny.

If you dislike this website and people's justified criticism of an extremely corrupt Clinton, why not post elsewhere. Believe me, YOU WON'T be missed..
 
 
+3 # MendoChuck 2016-06-21 11:30
Thanks for the link . . . .
I appreciate it.
 
 
+1 # reiverpacific 2016-06-23 10:27
Quoting lights:
Does Bernie Sanders Believe in Democracy
http://blogs.voanews.com/us-opinion/2016/06/14/does-bernie-sanders-believe-in-democracy/

What is so untrue about this piece? Go to YouTube and you can find a LONG video interview of Sanders saying many of these things.

And why is it called or considered a HIT PIECE when it is the truth? Especially when Bernie followers on this and many other forums jump for joy about the UNTRUTHS and REAL hit pieces printed about Hillary Rodham Clinton? Many HIT pieces on this very FORUM!

Indeed, it IS an OPINION piece!



More to the point, do YOU (and roc head) believe that y'all live in a Democracy?
 
 
+25 # Jim Rocket 2016-06-21 10:57
I didn't realize that Democracy Now was a branch of the US government.
 
 
+1 # rxfxworld 2016-06-22 21:18
No it's only Clntonista clits that get to speak, right old Rocky?
 
 
+18 # Darthvadersmom 2016-06-21 11:46
Clinton Lies Matter
 
 
+18 # karenvista 2016-06-21 13:49
Quoting sashapyle:
Hillary probably instigated and/or paid for this Stalinesque moment in journalism.


Oh, she coouldn't have influenced a U.S. government paid propaganda institution, could she?

From Wikipedia: :

"When the USIA was abolished in 1999, the VOA was placed under the Broadcasting Board of Governors, or BBG, which is an autonomous U.S. government agency, with bipartisan membership. The SECRETARY OF STATE has a seat on the BBG."

I know she's no longer SOS but that doesn't mean she has lost all influence there.

It was made possible for VOA to propagandize in the U.S. in 2013 although policy changes in that direction had been made under George W. Bush as well. Why should we have USG propaganda here? Isn't the MSM doing a goodd enough job for them?
 
 
+4 # JJS 2016-06-23 04:36
Quoting sashapyle:
Hillary probably instigated and/or paid for this Stalinesque moment in journalism.


Dick Cheney's propaganda machine puts the Third Reich, or Hillary for that matter, to shame. He brought propaganda to a whole new level.

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/8/31/cheney_rumsfeld_and_the_dark_art_of_propaganda
 
 
-111 # ojg 2016-06-20 22:58
Now folks, watch your blood pressure! It appears you all are not very adept in reading OR you like to spin tales. Did you not notice that this article says Kirchick's piece was on the "Opinions and Commentary" section? Or, does he not have a right to have an opinion? The only outrageous one here is Dan Wright, who in an effort to get your blood to boil made a mountain out of nothing! You Bernie guys are funny!
 
 
+126 # jwb110 2016-06-20 23:19
Quoting ojg:
Now folks, watch your blood pressure! It appears you all are not very adept in reading OR you like to spin tales. Did you not notice that this article says Kirchick's piece was on the "Opinions and Commentary" section? Or, does he not have a right to have an opinion? The only outrageous one here is Dan Wright, who in an effort to get your blood to boil made a mountain out of nothing! You Bernie guys are funny!

There really is no place for "Opinions and Commentary" on a State run news broadcast because that would, by nature, be propaganda. And to be honest Radio Free Europe and the rest were started as propaganda machines. No matter the heading under which Kirchick has written this piece, it has no place in a state run agency. The US is already on one too many slippery slopes where the lines are blurring between what is and isn't unethical and dangerous to our Democracy. And this has nothing to do with Sanders past a certain point and everything to do with what could happen to the "next guy" who gets in Kirchick's sites.
 
 
+8 # goodsensecynic 2016-06-21 12:45
Re: "There really is no place for 'Opinions and Commentary' on a State run news broadcast."

It depends on what's meant by a "state-run news broadcast." In Canada, for example, there is a publicly owned radio and television network called the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. It is mainly funded by parliament and accountable to a national board of appointed citizens.

It is also far more "independent" than the privately owned corporate networks and conducts a good deal of investigative journalism, sometimes very embarrassing and highly critical of government (think "60 Minutes" for adults).

True - especially during the dark days of Stephen Harper's "Conservative" government - the party in power slashed to CBC budget and appointed party hacks to the governing board; however, there is every reason to believe it's critical edge will be sharpened in the future.

The point is that a public system is not necessarily an instrument of political propaganda; but, having watched both Canadian and American private TV, I am convinced that corporate-owned broadcasting media are almost always apologists for the "establishment" - whether in or out of political office.
 
 
-84 # rocback 2016-06-20 23:21
shhh, ojg. You will interupt these clowns preconceived biases with facts.
 
 
+56 # USADUDE 2016-06-20 23:54
Quoting rocback:
shhh, ojg. You will interupt these clowns preconceived biases with facts.

Facts like correct the record having to buy a million dollars worth of online shills to shill for HRC. Fact HRC is under federal criminal investigation by the FBI. Fact HRC. Didn't cooperate with the inspector general of the very department she once was in charge of. Fact. The day this criminal investigation was confirmed by Josh Earnest the presidents own Baghdad Bob, the Obama endorsement video came out wherein we hear the president say "earlier this WEEK I met with Senator Sanders" blah blah, the key her being that Bernie had left the Oval an hour and a half before this hasty endorsement was released to dominate the news cycle and lose the "Confirmation of a criminal investigation". So desperate was the HRC crime syndicate to dominate the news cycle that day. They got Elizabeth Warren to get off the fence and lose credibility, oops, I mean jump on the HRC bandwagon and make sure that pesky FBI criminal investigation story got drowned out in a deluge of endorsement fever and that's a fact jack. Fact the Democratic Party would be foolish to nominate a candidate who is under investigation. Fact HRC needs to meet with FBI ASAP. Fact HRC has been running for president since blowjobbill left office. Fact the birther meme came out during democratic presidential primaries of 2007. Fact Trump picked it up and ran with it. Fact 10s of millions of Dem voters will not vote HRC ever
 
 
+29 # bettysdad@yahoo.com 2016-06-21 01:27
Do you think anything you could post could possibly have any effect on a Hillary shill like Rocback?
 
 
+1 # CL38 2016-06-23 19:20
No. But it's important to correct their lies and misinformation and set the record straight.
 
 
+1 # reiverpacific 2016-06-23 10:33
Quoting rocback:
shhh, ojg. You will interupt these clowns preconceived biases with facts.


Takes a clown to throw around mass insults.
 
 
+16 # dascher 2016-06-21 10:38
Are you trying to say that the "Opinions and Commentary" section is open to anybody, like this comment section?? And Kirchick has as much right as any other person on earth to express their opinion in the VOA's "Opinions and Commentary"?

If not, then the section reflects opinions selected for publication by VOA, which seems inappropriate for a govt. funded and run "information source".
 
 
+2 # pappajohn15@Gmail.com 2016-06-22 06:26
Why is the guy from Monty Python* doing American opinion political commentary?


* Terry Jones
 
 
+84 # Buddha 2016-06-20 15:26
And all 5 people in the USA who actually get content from "Voice of America" read it. eye-roll. There were plenty of anti-Bernie hit pieces being put out by the Mainstream Media to short-circuit Bernie's threat, a hit piece on VOI would sort of be a bit of a dog pile.
 
 
+64 # Thomas Martin 2016-06-20 22:36
Re: Buddha - even though Kirchick's piece would normally get little exposure, it's important for RSN readers to see Clinton's tentacles in controlling news and commentary - even commentary expressed through taxpayer supported VOA, that misrepresents the position of most, if not all, RSN readers!
 
 
+11 # Buddha 2016-06-21 10:44
You think it is CLINTON'S tentacles controlling everything? Oh please. HRC is just a tool, a bought and paid-for-tool. It is the American Oligarchy who owns our Mainstream Media, just as they have bought both political parties. If a single one of these billionaires woke up with the wealth that the Clinton's have, they'd commit suicide. The Clintons, like so many Oligarch wannabe's, have simply aligned themselves with our Oligarchy and woven themselves into positions of power serving their Masters in making our corrupt system "work".
 
 
+8 # MendoChuck 2016-06-21 11:36
Sorry to burst your bubble . . . .
Hillary is part of the American Oligarchy . . . . Sure she may only be in the bottom 80% but she most certainly is part of, and must be included in the count.
I agree she is a paid-for-fool but being bought and paid for doesn't make her any less complacent.
 
 
+6 # karenvista 2016-06-21 14:01
Quoting Buddha:
And all 5 people in the USA who actually get content from "Voice of America" read it. eye-roll. There were plenty of anti-Bernie hit pieces being put out by the Mainstream Media to short-circuit Bernie's threat, a hit piece on VOI would sort of be a bit of a dog pile.


Yes, that's when they talked about him at all. Even when he had rallies with 30K supporters they ignored him.

How much cover have they given the election fraud lawsuits that have been filed against the DNC, including the Rico lawsuit?
 
 
-3 # rocback 2016-06-23 16:24
Those weren't "supporters". They were kids living off their daddy's money who couldn't get a date that night.
 
 
+38 # Logic 2016-06-20 16:14
The 98-2008 president of NPR previously ran Radio Free Europe/ Radio Liberty.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Klose

Kevin Klose

25 years at Washington Post
94-97 president of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
97-98 director of International Broadcasting Bureau at the U.S. Information Agency

98-2008 president of NPR
 
 
+67 # SHK 2016-06-20 17:09
That is NOT in anyway a statement a state supported media outlet has any business making. PERIOD. If it isn't state supported then it has the right. PERIOD. Now the question: Which is it? Does it get money from the state? Jerk it's license and stop the $$ flow immediately. Is it just supported by the individuals in the listening public? Then it has the right to say whatever it pleases that is legal. Stupid, but legal.
 
 
+47 # tedrey 2016-06-20 22:03
VOA is a government program, taxpayer supported. It was never set up to be objective, but to further US foreign policy.
 
 
+54 # jwb110 2016-06-20 23:21
Quoting tedrey:
VOA is a government program, taxpayer supported. It was never set up to be objective, but to further US foreign policy.


Yes, Foreign Policy. In this case it is domestic policy and has no business there.
 
 
+69 # Macserp 2016-06-20 21:54
[quote name="SHK"]That is NOT in anyway a statement a state supported media outlet has any business making. PERIOD.

Unless of course we're living in an undemocratic society in which state sponsored propaganda is held as truth.

We've become our own worst enemy.
 
 
+46 # Radscal 2016-06-20 22:08
“Voice of America was set up during World War II and took a leading role in producing US propaganda”

And remember that the person in charge of the US Army Psychological Warfare radio propaganda program was William Paley. Paley, of course founded CBS, which was owned by Westinghouse, one of the world’s largest military contractors.
 
 
+9 # bettysdad@yahoo.com 2016-06-21 01:29
I don't believe Westinghouse owned CBS at the time Paley was doing propaganda work
 
 
+2 # Radscal 2016-06-21 23:22
That's true. Officially, Westinghouse bought CBS in 1995.

But Paley's CBS was connected to the Westinghouse Broadcasting Company from pre-war years.
 
 
+39 # danireland46 2016-06-20 22:19
Just another example of how dysfunctional our US news sources have become. On the other hand, it's an important example of the length our propaganda spin-masters will go to do serve their plutocratic masters.
 
 
+14 # Anonymot 2016-06-20 22:37
I can't find it. Do you have the link? I write very strong commentary on the VOA from time to time and I'd be happy to do it again.
 
 
+10 # HahliHohli 2016-06-20 22:49
[quote name="Anonymot" ]I can't find it. Do you have the link?

http://blogs.voanews.com/us-opinion/2016/06/14/does-bernie-sanders-believe-in-democracy/
 
 
+7 # jimallyn 2016-06-20 22:53
Quoting Anonymot:
Do you have the link?


http://blogs.voanews.com/us-opinion/2016/06/14/does-bernie-sanders-believe-in-democracy/
 
 
-48 # ojg 2016-06-20 23:41
Oh, Anon, so you can write Commentary/Opin ions but Kirchick can't? That doesn't seem quite fair. You Bernie guys are funny!
 
 
+24 # bettysdad@yahoo.com 2016-06-21 01:32
He said he wrote "I write very strong commentary on the VOA from time to time,:

Only a Hillary troll could twist that into him writing "for" VOA.

But what can one expect?
 
 
+4 # Jim Rocket 2016-06-21 07:00
Congratulations on missing the point.
 
 
+22 # Painter 2016-06-20 23:06
If you want to complain to VoA, you can write to publicaffairs@bbg.gov.
 
 
+1 # bubbiesue 2016-06-20 23:32
That sounds crazy to me. What ever for????
 
 
+6 # Painter 2016-06-21 12:31
Why crazy? You don't want to let them know they should not dabble in domestic partisan politics?
 
 
+23 # logical1 2016-06-20 23:37
Having read Kirchick's article, I do not know of Bernie supporting Sandinista government in Nicauragua although that is what the article states. The only other fact was he was sympathetic to Castro Cuba observing there were no hungry children or homeless people seen in his visit to Cuba. That sounds like an interesting observance that we should like to know and maybe even emulate. Kirchick chooses to still be caught up in the Cold War attitudes.
 
 
+9 # Salus Populi 2016-06-21 14:45
Keep in mind that the Nicaraguan government held elections in 1984 that the international community observers found to be fair and transparent; that UNESCO congratulated the Sandinistas for raising the literacy rate by a large percentage through their "each one teach one" program; that the very first law promulgated by the revolutionary government in 1979 was to abolish the death penalty; that the World Health Organization also gave them awards for their health program; and that the monstrous state terrorists aka the Reagan Administration funded, armed and trained the Somocista Contras, who openly stated that they would not fight the Nicaraguan army, but would concentrate on "soft" targets, namely farmers, priests, educators, shop owners, and other unarmed civilians, whom they brutalized by such methods as hanging women upside down from trees and cutting off their breasts to let them bleed to death.

Reagan called these Nazi-like criminals "the moral equivalent of our founding fathers"; Oliver North joked in his diary about their brutality and drug dealing. George H.W. Bush, when he became president, openly interfered in their second election, announcing that unless they elected his candidate, Violeta Chamorro, the U.S. would continue to target Nicaragua for the terrorist acts the Contras had become infamous for.

The U.S. was charged by Nicaragua with violations of international law before the ICC, which found against the U.S., which then withdrew from the ICC.
 
 
+6 # Radscal 2016-06-21 23:26
All true, and the UN passed a Resolution condemning the US mining of Nicaraguan harbors. Of course, with the US' veto, nothing could be done to stop it.

Oh, and the US Congress passed a law banning spending money on the Contras, which is how they came to be funded by the Iran/Contra/Coc aine and guns crime spress.
 
 
+15 # USuncutMN 2016-06-21 00:14
Hillary was on the VOA board, and although she had many opinions about it, rarely attended the meetings.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/4/absentee-overseer-hillary-clinton-neglected-voice-/
 
 
+33 # USADUDE 2016-06-21 00:19
Just finished reading the voice of distortion attack against Bernie. The implication being he wants to transform the USA into some state central planning kind of classical socialist state. But that's lies and distortions. Our government has been high jacked by businessmen not civil servants. These business types call the Political Capitalists, sell access, influence and favors to the highest bidder. I believe Bernie and take him at his word he wants our government to serve the public interest. Imagine that, government serving the needs of its people not just the rich donor class and the corporations. This prick Kirchik ignored Bernie's entire career in the Congress. The foresight he demonstrated time again on issue after issue. But no this savage attack is the Obama administrations position now? It's government policy? It's sanctioned? It's bull shit that's for sure. I want my money back.
#BernieorBust
"The peaceful political revolution begins between your ears " unless your head is full of shit like this guy Kirchik.
 
 
+15 # banichi 2016-06-21 00:27
This is a direct quote from Wikipedia on the VOA:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_of_America

Agencies
The Voice of America has been a part of several agencies. From its founding in 1942 to 1945, it was part of the Office of War Information, and then from 1945 to 1953 as a function of the State Department. The VOA was placed under the U.S. Information Agency in 1953. When the USIA was abolished in 1999, the VOA was placed under the Broadcasting Board of Governors, or BBG, which is an autonomous U.S. government agency, with bipartisan membership. The Secretary of State has a seat on the BBG.[34] The BBG was established as a buffer to protect the VOA and other U.S.-sponsored, non-military, international broadcasters from political interference. It replaced the Board for International Broadcasting (BIB) that oversaw the funding and operation of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, a branch of the VOA."

Note where the preceding quote from Wikipedia states that the Secretary of State has a seat on the governing Board of the VOA.

There is no proof that Hillary having been a board member of the governing Board for the VOA would have any way of affecting anyone writing for the agency, but...it could be as tenuous as the 'help' given by Nevada's Lange in declaring a win for Hillary while changing the rules to suit that outcome, which she did. Rather blatantly in that case, but we know really nothing about the writer of this hit piece. So far.
 
 
+29 # lorenbliss 2016-06-21 00:36
What we are witnessing here is obviously another giant step toward the transmogrificat ion of the United States into the Fourth Reich.

Now as in Josef Goebbels' Germany, the media increasingly speak with one voice -- no surprise since media and government are owned by the same Wall Street tyrants.

Which brings to mind a quote from the man whose murder began the slow-motion coup that will now be fulfilled by genuine Nazis, either Hillary or Trump.

The quote -- an expression of the very idealism for which the speaker was slain -- is this:

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."

-- President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, 13 March 1962.
 
 
+15 # economagic 2016-06-21 06:00
Wait, WHAT?!?

"Until 2013, it was illegal for US state media outlets like VOA and Radio Free Europe to broadcast within the US, due to a ban on using government propaganda on Americans."

So now it IS legal for US state media outlets to propagandize US citizens directly?

Yup: just click the link. An interesting web site that grew out of "Foreign Policy" magazine, originally a bit leftish but now owned by WaPo, with a lot of rightish contributors.
 
 
+8 # Kootenay Coyote 2016-06-21 07:22
When was VOA ever anything but a propaganda Yellow Press rag/radio?
 
 
+5 # Radscal 2016-06-21 14:24
Clearly, it was designed to be, and always functioned as a propaganda organ.

What's different is the President CareBear Administration' s decision to allow the government to propagandize IN the US.

Now, the reality is that the Federal government has been propagandizing US citizens for a long time. When Bush II was confronted about "Video News Releases" the government created and were then aired as "news stories" by TV stations across the country, he correctly noted that agencies such as the Department of Agriculture had been producing such propaganda pieces for decades.

Of course, the difference is those earlier pieces specifically stated who produced them, while the VNRs are presented as independent news pieces.
 
 
+12 # walt 2016-06-21 07:41
"The business of America is business" was supposedly said by Calvin Coolidge This is the USA, Inc. We can be sure that corporate powers will attack Bernie at every opportunity and this looks like one of those attacks. Sanders wants government of, by, and for the people. Corporate powers want government to continue being controlled by their big lobby money. It's really that simple and nothing new in US politics where business "trumps" people. (Pun intended)
 
 
+11 # Patriot 2016-06-21 07:50
Sent to VOA 6/21 at 0950:

Not only is VOA prohibited from using taxpayer money to attack U.S. taxpayers--of whom Senator Sanders is one--but also, Kirchick's "opinions" are false, inaccurate, and misleading.

For one, Hillary Clinton did not WIN election; Senator Sanders did. See https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/04/13/17564/.

For another, Sen. Sanders enjoys the respect of members of both parties in the Senate, and enjoys a higher constituent approval rate than any other member of Congress.

I demand that you retract Kirchick's libelous atricle at once, and publish an apology.

You have gone too far, and done so with canards and with appaling disregard for either fact or the spirit of truth.

You have disgraced the name of the VOA--and proven to be nothing but another shill for the oligarchy which now controls the Unitied States and is plainly terrified that Sen. Sanders' form of democratic socialism, like Franklin D. Roosevelt's, will rock their boat.

And so it shall.
 
 
+11 # progressiveguy 2016-06-21 08:02
Conservatives still fear that Bernie might wind up being the candidate if HRC is indicted by the Justice department. That's the reason for the attack article. Yes it is opinion and propaganda. Conservatives of both major political parties not only dislike Bernie, they also fear him. Poles indicate that he could easily beat Trump and that's why Republicans fear him. The more conservative Democrats would rather have a candidate like Biden who by the way, regrets that he didn't enter the primaries but is probably hoping that Hillary will still be indited before the convention. The way Trump is self destructing his campaign I believe Biden would beat him in the election and that sanders would beat him badly.
 
 
+8 # Patriot 2016-06-21 08:25
Could you manage your life on half pay?

Well, neither can RSN and the members of its staff.

So, if you're not already a contributor, how about making a small contribution TODAY?

We will lose RSN if we don't begin taking some responsibility for OUR part in its continued operation, which is paying the bills.

Please, help out!

Thanks very much. We can't keep our favorite reading site without you.
 
 
-15 # Barbara K 2016-06-21 08:51
I have been a member of RSN for many years. I just gave a donation a few weeks ago. But I decided that I will not fund this Sanders site any more. I'll donate again after the election and send my donations to the candidate of MY choice until then. I'd like to see the aforementioned hit piece on him, anyone want to send the link to me?

..
 
 
+13 # Helen Marshall 2016-06-21 09:10
If you had clicked on the link provided at the top of the story you would have found it yourself, but as you apparently cannot do that, here it is:

http://blogs.voanews.com/us-opinion/2016/06/14/does-bernie-sanders-believe-in-democracy/

As for this being a "Sanders site," I have not been tracking all the articles and cannot discuss that. The publication of this article is not to promote Sanders. It is to raise the question of what kind of state-run media, i.e. paid for by the taxpayers (which excludes many corporations), is fair? That's all.
 
 
-11 # Barbara K 2016-06-21 13:18
If it is not a Sanders site then why are comments in favor of him the only ones that are not all red? Why am I not allowed my opinion without being attacked by the Sanders bunch? It seems clearly taken over by the Sanders gang.

..
 
 
+9 # Radscal 2016-06-21 14:35
RSN endorsed the Sanders campaign many months ago. Although numerous articles here also argue for settling for HRC if she manages to get the nomination, RSN continues to publish articles pointing out some of the most egregious anti-Sanders propaganda out there.

Note that RSN does NOT publish much about the evidence of widespread election fraud in the Democratic Primary. It would be hard to convince readers to settle for HRC if they were fully informed about how her team has run this campaign.

But of course, RSN isn't responsible for the views of their readership. And it is we readers who vote up or down on comments.

There are very few sites where pro-Sanders articles outnumber anti-Sanders ones. And there are few where comments sections include more pro-Sanders avatars than anti-Sanders ones.

We cherish RSN for being one of those rare sites.
 
 
# Guest 2016-06-21 22:29
This comment has been deleted by Administrator
 
 
-10 # lights 2016-06-21 22:47
Consider it a compliment Barbara K. Your words threaten them. Seriously.

Hillary Rodham Clinton - First Woman President of the United States of America.

On the news all the time TAKING CHARGE!

:-)
 
 
+3 # Patriot 2016-06-23 02:44
A thumbs-down doesn't exactly equate to an attack, but some of your comments about Sen. Sanders' certainly have. Since RSN has endorsed Sen. Sanders, to the delight of most readers, your critical remarks about him, most of which have bsolutely no basis in fact, are likely to earn you thumbs-downs, and, very possibly, some negative comments, too.
 
 
+3 # Patriot 2016-06-23 02:45
Barbara's words threaten us, Lights? Hardly! But canards do not exactly make us chummy!
 
 
+8 # GreenBee 2016-06-21 22:26
Has anyone here blocked you? Has RSN? Then your opinions are "allowed" here. When other readers give you a thumbs up or down that is their opinion which is also allowed here.

This site has always been very Progressive and pretty far left. Thus it is only logical that most of its readers would not care much for Ms. Clinton's policies. If you are uncomfortable with conversing with such a group that largely disagrees with you, why do you come here?

I find it highly ironic that you are expressing unhappiness about free expression of opinions on an independent news site, while the article we are discussing is about a public, government funded site that is displaying the kind of bias you seem to be offended by here.
 
 
-13 # lights 2016-06-21 22:52
GreenBee: i can't help but wonder why since Bernie has LOST the nomination that you are still around talking about Sanders as if he were still relevant.

Sanders has let his EGO get in the way of a legacy. So why do you still come here since it is OVER!
 
 
+6 # Jim Rocket 2016-06-21 23:48
Bernie can't possibly lose the nomination until the convention. The Democratic party rules are different from the Republican party rules. Depending on what happens at the Republican convention the super delegates may switch to Bernie because that's the right move. It ain't over till it's over.

There is very little ego involved in what Bernie is doing. He's trying to create an actual political movement that will carry on after he's gone because he's aware that he is 74. It's interesting that that's what he's accused of because his accusers can't possibly imagine any other reason for going against big money. In their minds there only is ego and money so if it's not one it has to be the other. They don't have enough imagination to think of any other possibilities.
It's interesting to note the ego accusation is actually projection because ego is certainly the number one thing driving Hillary.
 
 
-1 # rocback 2016-06-23 16:32
Sanders is the ZOMBIE candidate and these lemmings are his minions following him looking for BBRRAAIINNSS
 
 
-8 # lights 2016-06-21 23:00
Barbara K:

Here's the link.

Thing of it is - it is the TRUTH about Sanders!
http://blogs.voanews.com/us-opinion/2016/06/14/does-bernie-sanders-believe-in-democracy/
 
 
+1 # Patriot 2016-06-23 02:49
Only to you, because it's what you WANT to believe.

So tell us, please, what makes you so anxious to see Clinton in the White House? What do you expect her to do that will make you (or anyone else) happy?

I've asked you before to tell us why you support Clinton but I don't think you've ever answered. You just complain because so many of us support Senator Sanders.

Let's hear from you, please!
 
 
+18 # Blackjack 2016-06-21 09:55
Switzerland is one of those countries that Bernie sometimes makes reference to that has a social democracy form of government. In a recent T.V. segment, hosted by a U.S. travel company, the interviewer wanted to know why there seemed to be so little crime and poverty in Switzerland. The answer: "because we invest in our people; when they do well individually, the entire country does well." Imagine living in a country that actually believed in investing in its people! That's the "radical idea" that Bernie is trying so hard to sell.
 
 
-9 # lights 2016-06-21 22:44
With a lack of instinct - Bernie has actually lost the sale, Blackjack. Best of wishes getting over it.
 
 
+2 # Patriot 2016-06-23 02:51
No, Lights, he didn't lose. The DNC, DLC, and Democratic party hacks fraudulently reported election results to make it SEEM that Clinton won. How could she? She never drew audiences like Sen. Sanders did, sometimes several in one day. Do you really think people stayed away from her in droves, then rushed to vote for her?

I don't. I'm not gullible.
 
 
-1 # rocback 2016-06-23 16:34
Not only did he LOSE but he and his supporters are losing more credibility everyday he doesn't concede making it more and more about just HIM.
 
 
-16 # coulterbooks 2016-06-21 12:26
OMG, you Bernie sanders people are SUCH HYPOCRITES!!! Living in your own BUBBLES, you only want to believe what is told to you by Bernie people who are NOT LIVING WITH THE REAL WORLD FACTS!!! This article exposes the REAL Bernie and what his career has been... deal with the facts!! Don't get in our faces with your Hillary demonization, you just look so pathetic and ridiculous to those of us that are dealing with the FACTS in our perspectives. You people are such morons, grasping to hang on to Bernie promises that he can never fulfill; and by labeling everything and everyone that doesn't agree with your worldview "neoliberalism" and "neoliberal" is such a denial of reality... YOU ARE BEING BAMBOOZLED!! YOU ARE ALL WALKING AROUND WITH SACKS OVER YOUR EMPTY HEADS!!!
 
 
+9 # Jim Rocket 2016-06-21 12:39
Sigh....another Hillarista unable to grasp advanced concepts like why government employees are forbidden from using their office for partisan political activities. This "triangulation" thing really worked well in that it allowed the Democrats to scoop up low-information voters and voters who are weak in the critical thinking department...vo ters that used to lean Republican.
 
 
-10 # coulterbooks 2016-06-21 12:53
You don't even know what you're talking about!! I guess that, in your messed up world, every administration change should fire everyone that isn't the party of the president and hire all people of their party!!! Well there are hundreds and thousands of employees that work for government of differing parties... THAT IS WHY THERE ARE RULES FOR THE PUBLIC WORKPLACE NOT TO PIT CO-WORKERS AGAINST EACH OTHER!!! Would that please you more?? Then you could really whine and complain that no work is getting done!
 
 
+7 # dsepeczi 2016-06-21 13:04
Quoting Jim Rocket:
Sigh....another Hillarista unable to grasp advanced concepts like why government employees are forbidden from using their office for partisan political activities. This "triangulation" thing really worked well in that it allowed the Democrats to scoop up low-information voters and voters who are weak in the critical thinking department...voters that used to lean Republican.


In the case of "coulterbooks", a voter that probably still does lean Republican. coulterbooks ? As in ... Ann Coulter books ?
 
 
-7 # coulterbooks 2016-06-21 13:15
I'm a LIBERAL DEMOCRAT, through and through!!
 
 
+1 # Patriot 2016-06-23 02:56
That you are not, or you could never support anyone BUT Senator Sanders.

I think what you must be is simply...delude d.
 
 
-6 # lights 2016-06-21 22:42
dspeczi or is it desperate? Do you feel better now? Amazing what HATE will make you do, isn't it? it will also kill your spirit and soul. Clearly you are also jealous!
 
 
+3 # Jim Rocket 2016-06-21 23:52
Come back when you finish High School.
 
 
+1 # Patriot 2016-06-23 03:00
Desperate, jealous, and hatefilled? Come off it, lights. We disagree with you, but that doesn't make either of us demons.

Someone, please tell me WHY people who loathe Sen. Sanders persist in reading every word posted on a site that has enthusiasticall y endorsed Senator Sanders. Is that masochism, self-loathing, combativeness, or pleasure in tilting at windmills? Help me out here, friends.

I'm not trying to run them off--I just cannot figure out why they keep banging their heads against a brick wall. Does it feel good or something?
 
 
+1 # Patriot 2016-06-23 02:54
That article is full of flat-out lies; it's a not-very-subtle , pitiful, malicious attempt to discredit Senator Sanders.

If you believe it contains the "truth at last", you're too gullible to be trusted to make an informed choice at the polls.

You believe what you WANT to believe; try facing facts for a change.

Meanwhile, do tell us, please, why you support Clinton. Facts only, please, but let's have them right now!
 
 
+6 # Blackjack 2016-06-21 13:06
Hey colulterbooks, do you really think any of us gives one tinker's damn about what you think of us? Even if you made any sense? Which you don't!
 
 
-15 # coulterbooks 2016-06-21 13:15
I just believe that you Bernie Sanders people are STUPID and lazy... period!! You just don't want to work for a living and you want free stuff, End of story.
 
 
+6 # Caliban 2016-06-21 14:14
Does "coulterbooks" read any books? Can she/he "read" at all?
 
 
-5 # lights 2016-06-21 22:36
I think she actually writes the books - and a LOT of them. Of course, that no doubt arouses your resentment and jealousy which is typical of Bernie followers - they resent ANYONE who has money.
 
 
+4 # Jim Rocket 2016-06-21 14:15
That's a very Republican viewpoint...if not an actual talking point. Try some critical thinking sometime. It's difficult and the results will make you feel very uncomfortable at first but it's the way to becoming an actual adult.
 
 
0 # rocback 2016-06-23 16:38
Since when do Democrats not have any money? Maybe in YOUR world. I think you are talking about lazy people who don't work and THINK they are democrats because their leader just joined the party.
 
 
+8 # Salus Populi 2016-06-21 15:11
Yet another "want free stuff" meme. I think that the paid trolls have to use that at least once in the commentary section of each article in order to get paid. The fact that virtually all of the commenters who support Sanders have definitively refuted it at least once, and some of us multiple times, makes no difference. The trolls, who are a rather unimaginative bunch who prefer simple smears, go by the Josef Göbbels playbook, wherein if you repeat a lie often enough, eventually people will start to believe it.
 
 
-7 # lights 2016-06-21 22:07
dear coulterbooks:

End of story, is right. But you forgot envious, jealous, resentful, deceitful, frustrated and angry. Absolutely zero self-examinatio n about their condition, so they blame everyone else, hatefully target women to rid their misery and put all their naive faith in Bernie to SAVE them.

I'm beginning to realize that many of these especially older guys here must have been rooting for Ralph Nader - thinking that Ralphie guy would actually win that election for them and much like they feel, (not think) about Bernie Sanders now. And that's part of where the STUPID comes in. Not ignorant. Stupid. The Nader loss is the source of their misery.

Nader is another sour puss, like Sanders and his followers. I don't know how Nader sleeps at night but then I don't know how some of these Sanders followers do either.

ON SPEAKING FEES: I wonder once Sanders and Cornell West are "out of the election picture" will they be getting big speaking FEES for spreading the word after the election? Someone needs to follow up on that one! Hypocrites! I forgot hypocrites, coulterbooks!
 
 
+5 # Jim Rocket 2016-06-21 23:54
Ask your teacher to explain "projection" to you.
 
 
# Guest 2016-06-23 03:19
This comment has been deleted by Administrator
 
 
+1 # Patriot 2016-06-23 03:20
Nope, coulterbooks, we aren't and we don't. What we want is to stop having everything everyone works for wind up in the bank accounts of the already filthy-rich. We want an economy that invests in us, in the future of our children, in their education, and in the health of both humans and the planet.

Do you like having the economy continuously enrich the already obscenely rich while the rest of us grow poorer and poorer, no matter how hard we work? Are you one of the greedy 1% who have more money than they could possibly spend, yet begrudge the rest of us reasonable compensation for our labor? Do you want to see the next generation become the first in the country that has not become more economically advanced than its parents? WE already are the first generation to be less well-educated than its parents.

We don't want "free stuff"; we're not asking for TVS, cars, and cell phones. We want what most of the rest of the industrialized nations of world have agreed is due their populace: a fair share of our nation's prosperity; a good job that pays fairly; an affordable way to take care of our health; an education for our children in schools that aren't falling down, and college at a rate we and they can afford; a safe, modern transportation system in good repair; taxation at a rate that's relatively equal at every income level; law that respects and protects our right to dignity and opportunity.

Do you object to those things? Obviously, you do. Why? ARE you one of the 1%?
 
 
-6 # lights 2016-06-21 22:38
Hey Carol Blackjack....cu t the hateful claws!
 
 
+7 # Blackjack 2016-06-21 14:31
Actually, I'm beginning to believe that coulterbooks is a Trumpster. . .falls right into the pattern of bullying and name calling because his/her thought processes are so poorly developed that this is the only vocabulary he/she possesses.
 
 
-1 # rocback 2016-06-23 16:43
Bill Maher:
"Sanders Supporters are used to getting shit for Free. That's not socialism. Thats Santa-ism

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/06/11/bill_maher_sanders_supporters_are_used_to_getting_shit_for_free_thats_not_socialism_its_santa-ism.html
 
 
+5 # Timshel 2016-06-21 16:18
While they mock Bernie Sanders and will not admit it, the MSM, corporate America and Wall Street are afraid of the sleeping giant that he has awoken and how much form he is giving to the American People's objections to an economic system dedicated to benefit a few at the expense of the rest of us.

What concerns me most is how little informed most Clintonites really are. I am willing to bet very very few of them have read the TPP or know that much about the toxic effects of fracking or likely still think Wall Street is dedicated to investors giving money to expand industry and create jobs. Having worked on Wall Street I know how laughable that last illusion is.

there is nothing like being comfortable or hoping to be rich when it comes to willful blindness. Many Clintonites may not even wake up when its their pensions that are being stolen and their quality of life declines as prices go up imperceptibly each day and yet add up.

In any case, what do you say to Clintonites who insist all those speaking fees mean nothing?
 
 
-8 # lights 2016-06-21 22:17
Oh, please. No one in the DNC or Hillary or Hillary supporters - are the LEAST BIT afraid of Bernie Sanders. If anything at this point he has become an annoying fly. And completely let his legacy pass him by with his self-centered will and now overblown ego.

Well, the revolution wasn't his in the first place, he borrowed it from Elizabeth Warren and others - which is why so many are so happy to have Elizabeth Warren in there fighting to beat TRUMP, SUPPORT Hillary Rodham Clinton and together along with a whole lot of other revolutionaries are going to kick some... yep.
 
 
-9 # lights 2016-06-21 22:22
Can't wait for Sanders and Cornell West to start collecting speaking fees! Someone needs to follow the story! What hypocrites!
 
 
+5 # angelfish 2016-06-21 19:52
Hillary REMAINS terrified of Bernie and the mere possibility of him snatching the Nomination away from her at the Convention! I'm hoping and praying that he DOES and the fools who wrote this drivel go back under the rocks from which they crawled!
 
 
-10 # lights 2016-06-21 22:27
Dear, dear angelfish: Thought you might enjoy - they had a great cartoon on the cover of "The Week" magazine recently - Hillary and Bernie were on the racetrack together. Sanders was flat on the ground being dragged while desperately holding on to Hillary's leg.

He has become a nuisance, an albatross at this point and the cartoon said it all. Not to mention, that he clearly didn't have the smarts to know when it was over for him and his BS revolution.

In the meantime, can't wait for Hillary Rodham Clinton to be in the White House as President of the United States of America - getting things done! None of you will be invited to dinner. Or hey - on the other hand she probably will make sure you get an invitation. Hillary is much more forgiving than me... but that's just another one of her extraordinary gifts!
 
 
+6 # angelfish 2016-06-22 14:25
I'm with Bernie! It ain't over til it's OVER and there is STILL a possibility of his winning. She is A DINO who is Business as Usual, aligning with the MONEY and BIG BUSINESS, she doesn't give a Fig for the average working American! I wouldn't GO to her dinner if she did invite me. I saw her in action in Las Vegas and Bernie won my Loyalty to the Bittersweet, if not Bitter, End! She's a Shmoozer and Coniver and her sychophants have stolen or tied to steal the result of EVERY Primary, discounting his popularity and ability at every turn! Hopefully, once California's votes are ALL counted, Bernie WILL prevail! Failing that, it's more doom and gloom for the Working man while the rich get Richer and the poor have children!
 
 
+3 # rxfxworld 2016-06-22 21:47
Lights and Rocky while you're counting HRC's extraordinary gifts--I do mean the $225,000 per hour in speaking fees--perhaps you could tell me just what significant legislation she got passed in 8 years of Senator and one positive diplomatic achievement in 4 years of Sec State. You drank the Kool-aide but can't answer that simple question.
 
 
0 # Patriot 2016-06-23 03:24
Hear, hear!!
 
 
+1 # Salus Populi 2016-06-23 09:09
David Brock's million dollar budget for paying trolls and liars is being wasted. So far, I have yet to see a single rational argument or factual statement from even one of them; they seem to know nothing of real history, even recent history during which they were presumably alive, if not sentient; their smears and pointless name calling and deliberate obfuscation are tediously repeated over and over as if just saying them will magically transform them into a cogent argument; they have no refutation for the endless documented and linked facts presented by Bernie supporters; and even their name calling is at a sandbox, third-grade level. Frankly, if Brock expects them to convert anyone from supporting Bernie to supporting Hillary, his funds are having either no effect or the opposite one from what he presumably desires.

I don't much care for Librarian 1984's empty and snide ripostes, which lower hirm towards the level of those s/he is criticizing; but first, s/he also posts logical arguments and dialogue, when not distracted by the annoying mosquito-buzz of the trollary-bots; and second, in terms of what Brock gets for his money, I have to agree.

Perhaps because RSN isn't a major player in the blog-o-sphere, he may be saving his better mercs for more prominent venues, and sending us the slackers. Either that, or his standards and vetting could use a great deal of improvement.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN