From The River To The Sea?

“No one can take pleasure from seeing bayonets in an American community or on a college campus, but the arrival of the (National) Guard with bayonets brought total de-escalation of hand-to-hand fighting and violence.” — California Governor Ronald Reagan on sending in both the California Highway Patrol and the National Guard to quell escalating rioting at UC Berkeley, May 15, 1969

“Today, our university held firm, enforcing our rules while protecting the constitutional right to free speech. Peaceful protests within our rules are acceptable. Breaking our rules and policies and disrupting others’ ability to learn are not allowed. The group that led this protest stated it was going to violate Institutional Rules. Our rules matter, and they will be enforced. Our university will not be occupied.” — University of Texas at Austin President Jay Hartzell, April 24, 2024

Wondering why the word Progressive became synonymous with Antisemitic?

Are some research university presidents finally standing-up and being counted, when it comes to actually defending the teaching of the best and brightest? How long has it taken for coordinated student campus occupiers to meet their match?

Did university leaders learn from the cashiering of former Harvard president Christine Gay and UPenn president Liz Magill, both guilty of not standing up against raging Antisemitism on their respective campuses.

Is there a growing societal response finally taking a stand against permissive counterculture? Do these peaceful occupation/riots help or hurt the campaign of former President Donald Trump?

Hearts and Minds

Almost DailyBrett grew up during the student riots against the Vietnam War. The conflict was not as simple and clear as the response to the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor.

Vietnam was never adequately explained to the American public. The draft was literally pulling hundreds of thousands out of society and packing them off to Southeast Asia. The student protests questioned American foreign policy in the 1960s and 1970s.

Some of these gatherings (e.g., most notably UC Berkeley) were completely out of control. California Governor Reagan deployed the National Guard. The peaceful protesters, sympathetic faculty and elite media didn’t approve, but the public was overwhelmingly supportive.

The same scenario is being played out for Texas Governor Greg Abbott. The decision to send in the National Guard is never easy, but it’s part of the job. The primary responsibility of government is to provide protection and to ensure safety for its citizens.

Remember the peaceful protesters four years ago? Will campuses likewise burn, if the adults in society don’t or won’t intercede?

Today’s campus riots … err protests from Columbia University on the east coast to your author’s undergraduate alma mater, USC, on the west coast — and many universities in between — concern the actions of a long-time ally beyond America’s borders, 10-time-zones away.

USC has now canceled its university graduation ceremony. Who won? How about student storm troopers, practicing horrific Antisemitism?

Students Supporting Hamas?

“College life today is a day spa, combined with a North Korean re-education camp. It’s a daycare center with a meal plan, except the toddlers can fire the adults. The fact that college presidents, who like to speak out about anything, couldn’t find their voice to condemn the worst attacks since the Holocaust says a lot about who really controls colleges.” — Bill Maher, “Real Time With Bill Maher,” host

Almost DailyBrett attending a football game last November was greeted by dozens of student agitators chanting “From the River to the Sea” as in from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.

Translated: Israel will cease to exist.

Aren’t the termination of Israel and by extension, America, the stated goals of terrorist Hamas (Hezbollah, Iran)? Didn’t they all start the conflagration last October?

Are these Antisemitic students familiar with the Teutonic compound noun, Sturmabteilung? These illiberal campus Braunhemden are knowingly or unknowingly calling for the extermination of Jews, and many of them just don’t understand the evil meaning behind these benign sounding words.

As a former tenure track professor of public relations, marketing, corporate communications and investor relations, Almost DailyBrett clearly comprehends the mission of Research 1 universities: Educate Z-Gens (born 1997 to 2012) and provide them with the skill sets and credentials to succeed in the marketplace and life.

If campuses become unsafe for particular students (e.g., Jewish) and the learning experience is severely diminished/curtailed because of narrow-minded political agendas, society must intercede to restore the beautiful purpose of our university environments.

Ronald Reagan was severely criticized back in the 1960s for sending in the National Guard. Texas Governor Greg Abbott is the target of media elites today.

Guess that goes with the job.

https://www.statesman.com/story/news/politics/state/2024/04/25/free-speech-ut-austin-protest-greg-abbott-tweet-response-protests-contrast-2019-stance/73447192007/

https://www.foxnews.com/us/ut-austin-president-defends-shutting-down-anti-israel-protests-our-rules-matter-enforced

https://www.thejc.com/news/usa/us-university-students-do-not-understand-full-meaning-of-from-the-river-to-the-sea-chant-survey-reveals-bq5o3sz7

‘Writing About The Jews Again’?

Bi-Coastal Elites Abandon Israel

“Journalists” Telling Their Truth, Not The Truth

When Was It Past-Time For The National Guard?

Permissible Plagiarism? Acceptable Anti Semitism?

Kicking Elite Universities In The Endowment?

Bi-Coastal Elites Abandon Israel

Who Started It?

Never Acknowledge, Admit Or Concede

“The man who does nothing cuts the same sordid figure in the pages of history, whether he be cynic, or fop, or voluptuary. There is little use for the being whose tepid soul knows nothing of the great and generous emotion, of the high pride, the stern belief, the lofty enthusiasm, of the men who quell the storm and ride the thunder.” — President Teddy Roosevelt, ‘The Man in the Arena,’ The Sorbonne, April 23, 1910

There are no critics on Mt. Rushmore.

Every time a tepid soul journalist would ask Almost DailyBrett to acknowledge, admit or concede, the answer was an automatic, ‘no.’

The reason is simple: There was and still is a 99 percent chance that anything and everything acknowledged, admitted or conceded will be immediately seized by a carnivorous partisan reporter, correspondent, editor or anchor.

It’s the beastly nature of the nattering nabobs of negativism.

Ever wonder why Donald Trump refuses to apologize, and never will? Acknowledging, admitting or conceding — let alone apologizing — demonstrates sniveling weakness to be immediately devoured by predatory cat-nip journalists.

Would you rather be seen in the vain of Teddy Roosevelt’s “Man in the Arena” or appeasing Neville Chamberlain?

What about the truth? A Man or a Woman in the Arena should always tell the truth. That does not mean allowing reporters with prescribed political agendas to put incendiary words into your mouth. Part of the 1st Amendment Rights to Free Speech is the prerogative to disagree and to actually displease the Fourth Estate.

As Almost DailyBrett has repeatedly lamented about political reporters taking sides. They will advance stories that work against you, and ignore those that advance your cause. If they can put words in your mouth that coincide with their litmus-test, they will happily do so.

As a former Republican press secretary for eight years, your author knows the vast majority of journalists wanted us to fail big time. The undeniable fact that California is now a one-party basket case is partially attributable to the loss of objectivity in the Sacramento Press Corps. That has not always been the case, but it’s true right now.

Almost DailyBrett pointed out the journalists of yesteryear (e.g., 1980s and earlier) were better, fairer and open to both sides. They gathered the facts and reported the news.

Analysis, Commentary and Interpretation

“I’m certain that the truth exists for you and probably for the person sitting next to you. But this may not be the same truth. This is because the truth of the matter is very often, for many people, what happens when we merge facts about the world with our beliefs about the world. So we all have different truths.” — NPR chief executive officer Katherine Maher

Different truths?

Is Ms. Maher saying that all truths are not created the same or that some are more equal than others? Are elite media beliefs and infallible truths the same? At least they don’t cause a distraction to getting things done.

Isn’t the job of fair, objective, both sides, professional journalists to separate truths from beliefs and report on the real truths whatever they may be? It’s used to be called, fact-based Journalism.

Ever heard of editorials in drag? They’re all around you, particularly in this age of digital/social media.

Who decides? Increasing it’s those who arrogantly craft analysis, prepare commentaries and offer interpretations as in their own analysis, their own commentary and their own interpretations. Who elected these journalists? Where are their statues?

At their best they are Devil’s advocates posing questions to elicit quotable responses. That’s fair game.

When they are trying to infuse incendiary language on to the lips of message developers/spokesperson to advance their self-serving analysis, commentary and interpretation that practice is further contributing to the record loss of American trust in today’s so-called journalists.

https://www.theodorerooseveltcenter.org/Learn-About-TR/TR-Encyclopedia/Culture-and-Society/Man-in-the-Arena.aspx

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/npr-ceo-calls-first-amendment-the-number-one-challenge-in-america/ar-BB1lOi3s

Were Yesteryear’s Journalists, Better People?

“Dirty Debutantes”?

“Independent Journalism for Independent Thinking”

Defund Police? Yes! Defund NPR? No!!

MSNBC Knows Best

Collapse in Public Trust In America’s Media

Who Started It?

“I’d rather have bad press and no eulogies, better a bad press than a good eulogy.” — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to PBS host Charlie Rose, October 2, 2013 

“If you start it, I’ll finish it.” — Oft heard declaration of adolescent males

Nazi Germany invaded Poland, September 1, 1939.

Imperial Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, December 7, 1941.

Iran-Hamas-Hezbollah started the latest war with Israel, October 7, 2023.

There is zero doubt about who initiated these conflagrations (e.g., Putin-Russia’s latest invasion of Ukraine, February, 2022).

The question in each case: How come there is more — much more — legacy and social media pontificating and bloviating about justified retaliations, particular two dropped atomic bombs nearly 80-years ago?

Almost DailyBrett would be very wealthy, if he was paid for every time a team was penalized 15-yards for a personal foul, every time flagrant 1’s are called, and every time a trip to the penalty box is signaled all because of … retaliation.

Quite possibly the most noteworthy retribution were the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki three days apart, August 1945. The Pearl Harbor debt was paid back, and then some.

The 2024 Oscar for Best Picture went to “Oppenheimer.” The epic film about “The Bomb,” generated $950 million worldwide and counting.

Besides winning a total of seven Oscars including director (e.g., Christopher Nolan) best actor (e.g., Cillian Murphy played nuclear physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer), best supporting actor (Robert Downey, Jr.) and awards for cinematography, film editing and original score, the film re-triggered an intense nationwide debate about the ethics of America dropping “The Bomb” on Japan.

Certainly Oppenheimer was not the first Hollywood flick about The Manhattan Project, Paul Newman’s 1989 “Fat Man and Little Boy” comes immediately to mind. Almost DailyBrett vividly remembers being required to read John Hersey’s “Hiroshima” in high school.

Many social media rocket scientists (no pun intended) take a 21st Century virtue signaling stance against the very concept of retribution or worse, revenge. One should simply turn the other cheek.

Wasn’t Pearl Harbor just a big misunderstanding? Israel just shot down all the Iranian missiles, rockets and drones. Shouldn’t Israelis just accept their collective fate? If not, are there bridges to shutdown and freeways to be blocked?

Was Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) just proven to be technologically sound?

Slaughterhouse Five?

Almost DailyBrett is heading next month to Dresden, Germany, a restored beautiful imperial city that was fire bombed in February 1945. The awful story was vividly recounted in Kurt Vonnegut’s “Slaughterhouse Five.”

Should Americans be sheepish touring this now thriving metropolis?

Should present day Germans refrain from visiting Warsaw, Rotterdam, Conventry and in particular, London. They were all blitzed by the Luftwaffe with little concern for collateral damage of civilian populations.

Almost DailyBrett understands nuances and not everything is necessarily white hats vs. black hats in real life. For your author the questions always comes back to the following: Who ended the peace? Who started the war?

The perpetrators then and now need to clearly understand a terrible price that undoubtedly will be a paid for their hateful hubris. The retribution and retaliation will never be pretty.

“Who Started It” may not be universally accepted to justify a military response. To mere mortal Almost DailyBrett the specific question provides clarity about who is right and who is not. History is never on the side of those who engage in conspiracy to wage aggressive war.

If there are any doubts, there is a tribunal in Nürnberg that tells a story about what happened to those, ‘Who Started It.’

https://www.nbcuniversal.com/article/universal-talent-shines-8-wins-academy-awards-oppenheimer-and-holdovers

https://en.globes.co.il/en/article-1000882864

Ending War With A Sudden Flash Of Light

Putin Judgment At Nürnberg?

Amerika’s Vergangenheitsbewältigung?

Roosevelt and Reagan for Rushmore

Tell ‘Em To ‘Pound Sand,’ Harry

Did Personal PR Save Albert Speer From The Hangman’s Noose?

“Independent Journalism for Independent Thinking”

“The reason why we landed on that … is because we’re in this world now of all-time high, low trust in the news, a proliferation of fake news and disinformation. So this cacophony of noise is the moment for us to come in and reinforce what we’ve been doing for 180 years, which is providing clarity in this world of somewhat chaotic swirl.” — Nada Arnot, The Economist Group executive vice president of Marketing on the magazine’s new ad campaign targeting Millennials and Z-Gens

Almost DailyBrett is a huge fan of Southwest Airlines,’ “Bags Fly Free” marketing campaign. It transforms competitors greed into a corresponding attribute for The Low Fare Airline, and relieves pressure on the overhead bins.

The Economist is doing the same in this unfortunate day-and-time of noisy partisan media (i.e., CNN, MSNBC, NBC News, New York Times, Washington Post …)

Does “The Economist” view independent journalism as an Out-of-Home Advertising (OOH) differentiator, targeting tomorrow’s decision makers? You bet ya.

Instead of journalism mimicking the politics of selected partisan audiences, the stately UK magazine (“newspaper”) breaks through the cacophony of noise, taking direct aim at younger generations (i.e., Millennials, Z-Gens).

How can an august print publication, originated in 1843, be relevant as we approach the middle years of the 21st Century? The answer lies with going back to the future, and being as clever as ever.

Almost DailyBrett knows first-hand as a former professor teaching public relations, marketing, corporate communications and investor relations to Millennials, they have zero interest in being poor. They will put on their own mask first before assisting others.

The Economist Group provides clarity by advocating economic liberalism (neo-liberalism) and promoting “radical centrism.” The Economist knows that divisive journalism is untenable, as it directly contributes to the decline of democracy.

Can a non-digital inner core of the city advertising campaign break through with young executives? Where are these people (Hint: the vast majority returned to their offices)? Are they satisfied with the miserable state of affairs of today’s journalism? Is anyone preferential with the status quo?

Don’t think so.

Imagine A World With Independent Journalism?

“The Times’ problem has metastasized from liberal bias to illiberal bias, from an inclination to favor one side of the national debate to an impulse to shut debate down altogether. All the empathy and humility in the world will not mean much against the pressures of intolerance and tribalism without an invaluable quality that (publisher A.G.) Sulzberger did not emphasize: courage.” — James Bennet, former New York Times editorial page editor and Lexington columnist for The Economist

“Writers and editors at the New York Times apparently believe they have earned the privilege to slant hard news coverage to tell ‘their truth,’ not ‘the truth.'” — Jeffrey Blehar, National Review

The Economist wants the world to know its in no-one’s pocket (e.g., Donald Trump’s call for nose-bleed protectionist tariffs). It wants to be the weekly journal of choice of the best-and-the-brightest with the majority of their careers still before them. They do not want to be the victims supposed protected by Social Justice.

They have zero interest in Occupying Wall Street, and thus hurting their portfolio. It’s Buy Low Sell High. They want information that’s objective, fair and professional, which does not correspond with someone’s political agenda.

Almost DailyBrett is a multi-year digital and print version of The Economist subscriber, the only publication that enjoys that vote of confidence. The magazine covers the world with solid fact gathering and reporting.

There are no bylines on its stories, therefore the number of clicks and social media mentions really don’t matter. What does matter is jealously guarding independent journalism. Believe it or not, smart readers can make up their own minds when exposed to more than one point of view.

The Economist’s Nada Arnot on why publishers should be running more brand campaigns

https://www.campaignasia.com/article/the-economist-targets-younger-audience-with-ooh-campaign/494666

https://bmoutdoor.com/the-economist

“Journalists” Telling Their Truth, Not The Truth

Is “Journalism” Dividing America?

Buy Low And Sell High Millennials

Collapse in Public Trust In America’s Media

Illiberal Activists With Microphones and Notepads?

Getting Cozy With Kamala

Out-Of-Sight, Out-The-Door?

“Dirty Debutantes”?

“I’m not going to let you attack young people, and there were some things in this commentary that you should be offended by as women. It was so sexist. It was good versus evil in that game today. Evil? Called us dirty debutantes? Are you kidding me?” — LSU Women’s Basketball Coach Kim Mulkey

“Words matter. As a journalist, no one should know this more than me. Yet I have failed miserably in my choice of words. In my column previewing the LSU-UCLA women’s basketball game, I tried to be clever in my phrasing about one team’s attitude, using alliteration while not understanding the deeply offensive connotation or associations. I also used metaphors that were not appropriate.” — Public apology by Los Angeles Times columnist Ben Bolch

FILE -LSU’s Angel Reese reacts in front of Iowa’s Caitlin Clark during the second half of the NCAA Women’s Final Four championship basketball game April 2, 2023, in Dallas. . (AP Photo/Tony Gutierrez, File)

Are today’s divisive journalists leading America’s race to the bottom?

Can a columnist be sexist and racist at the same time with just two words? Where are the guardrails? Where are the editors? Who controls the alliterations and metaphors?

How can any elite mass media outlet tolerate publishing or broadcasting, “dirty debutantes” about a women’s basketball team in which the majority of its players are African-American? Is there any wonder why public trust in American journalism continues to plummet regardless of which quantitative research firm conducts the survey?

Almost DailyBrett is not taking aim exclusively at the Los Angeles Times. The publication has already removed the offending references from the online version of Bolch’s column, saying they did not meet Times’ editorial standards.

What happened to these same standards last Friday in publishing: “Commentary: UCLA-LSU is America’s sweethearts vs. its basketball villains?” Is Bolch exclusively at fault or should the blame also apply to everyone in charge, who works under the august masthead of the Los Angles Times?

Have the inmates taken over the asylum?

Sweethearts?

Was society advanced with this particular commentary?

When the “profession” eschews accuracy, debunks news gathering and dismisses old-fashioned objective reporting of both sides, and replaces it with supposed clever interpretation and opinion — Houston, we have a problem.

Why did Ben Bolch apologize (a trait not normally associated with journalists or Donald Trump)? The columnist was clever on Thursday/Friday, and underwent a personal epiphany during the weekend.

Even though Almost DailyBrett is not an attorney, he knows that Mulkey and her team are public persons. Absolving Bolch from charges of actual malice (New York Times v Sullivan) is a hill the lawyers at the Times may not want to climb.

Is there anyone in charge in Romper Room?

Certainly Coach Mulkey and her taunting, brawling and mocking team are difficult to love. They are not paragons of virtue. The Washington Post also published a hit piece against Mulkey at approximately the same time that Ben Bolch’s commentary hit the streets.

Was the timing intentional? Sure. Women’s basketball is gaining strength and viewership. How can you miss Coach Mulkey?

Almost DailyBrett is not advocating a chilling remedy to out-of-control Journalism, thus endangering the First Amendment. What your author is saying is the profession is now despised by even the people it particularly states it’s trying to protect under the auspices of Social Justice: Women and People of Color.

How “dirty debutantes” even made it past the copy desk onto the front of the sports page is beyond this humble reporter. Hopefully it will never happen again.

https://www.latimes.com/sports/ucla/story/2024-03-29/ucla-lsu-america-sweethearts-versus-basketball-villains

https://www.espn.com/womens-college-basketball/story/_/id/39855695/la-s-reporter-apologizes-mulkey-rips-column

https://www.forbes.com/sites/shaunharper/2024/03/31/dirty-debutantes-and-other-racist-mischaracterizations-of-lsu-womens-basketball-team/?sh=2d60f50a1be1

Were Yesteryear’s Journalists, Better People?

The Public Won’t Pay For Journalism

MSNBC Knows Best

“Republican Journalists:” An Extinct Species?

“Journalists” Telling Their Truth, Not The Truth

Journalism’s Blind Faith

Has Russia Always Been A Pain In The Backside?

“Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate. Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.” — President Ronald Reagan speaking before the Brandenburg Gate and the Berlin Wall, June 12, 1987

“I will be calm and confident. My children are watching me. I will be next to them. And next to my husband. And with you. I love you! I love Ukraine!” — First Lady of Ukraine Olena Zelenska

Let’s face it, with the exception of brief spell during Mikhail Gorbachev’s reign as the leader of the former USSR, Russia has always been a pain in the butt in the relatively long life of Almost DailyBrett. Nothing has changed. Russia is still a pariah.

Netflix’ relatively new nine-part documentary series — “Turning Point: The Bomb and The Cold War ” — brings back memories spanning a lifetime. Who can forget huddling under our elementary school desks in preparation for incoming radioactive nuclear annihilation?

Wouldn’t the desks be among the first to be incinerated?

Maybe it’s the algorithms. Maybe Netflix is changing it emphasis. Is the Silicon Valley streaming provider becoming a little bit more educational, a little more serious? For Almost DailyBrett, watching a nine-part documentary series on the history of the Cold War is his definition of fun.

The main heroes in alphabetical order: Mikhail Gorbachev, John F. Kennedy, Reagan and Volodymyr Zelenskyy. The villain of all villains: Vladimir Putin.

Netflix is bringing back the lifetimes of every Baby Boomer with the exception of Sex, Drugs and Rock n’ Roll. Maybe the former were more hedonistic, but just a few ICBMs can literally ruin your day. We won’t care about climate change, because the climate changed forever.

For Almost DailyBrett the origin of the Cold War starts with Adolf Hitler’s foolish 1941 invasion of Russia. Your author did not serve in the military, but you don’t have to a West Point graduate to understand that frontal attack too late in the year — against the world’s largest geography and coldest nation — with inferior numbers is not going to turn out well.

The Rodina roared back, gained strength, imposed Communism, built the Iron Curtain and set off a nuclear-tipped confrontation with the free world.

Your author will not attempt to recall every highlight (or lowlight) during the course of nearly 80 years, but the building and fall of the Berlin Wall, the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Reagan-Gorbachev intermediate nuclear arms elimination treaty and Ukraine’s defiance in the face of Putin’s aggression deserve special recognition.

One of the key recurring questions was whether Russia or its proxies will employ lethal force (Nikita Khrushchev, Hungary and Leonid Brezhnev, Czechoslovakia) or will not (Mikhail Gorbachev, East Germany) against millions of people under its control?

When you live by the gun …

The Mushroom Shaped Cloud

“Their (Reagan and Gorbachev) meetings marked the beginnings of an even brighter period in U.S.-Soviet relations that would be ushered in during the Bush administration, when Gorbachev released the Soviet grip on Eastern Europe and allowed the Germans to tear down the Berlin Wall.” — Washington Post White House correspondent Lou Cannon, ‘President Reagan, The Role of a Lifetime’

“In our obsessions with antagonisms of the moment, we often forget how much unites all the members of humanity. Perhaps we need some outside, universal threat to make us recognize this common bond. I occasionally think how quickly our differences worldwide would vanish if we were facing an alien threat from outside this world. And yet I ask you, is not an alien force already among us? What could be more alien to the universal aspirations of our peoples that war and the threat of war?” — President Ronald Reagan, UN General Assembly, September 21, 1987

The Netflix docuseries begins with the Manhattan Project and ends nine installments later with the remembrance ceremonies at Hiroshima. The backdrop of nuclear annihilation has always been there, it will always be there.

ABC’s “The Day After” riveted the populace of the USA in November, 1983. The very real prospects of a thermo-nuclear exchange was brought home, including President Ronald Reagan and Nancy Reagan watching at the White House.

Many mocked former movie actor Reagan for his infatuation with science fiction, including the 1951 film “The Day The Earth Stood Still” with peace loving aliens coming down and cautioning earthlings about destructive war.

Reagan even brought up this premise in his 1985 first meeting with Gorbachev in Geneva, asking the General Secretary wouldn’t the USA and USSR cooperate, if there was an invasion from outer space? It was not the first time that Reagan went off script, but the exchange illustrated how the prospects of nuclear holocaust was squarely on the mind of Reagan, and as it turned out, Gorbachev as well.

Three years later after some fits and starts, Reagan and Gorbachev signed a comprehensive agreement completely eliminating intermediate nuclear missiles, particularly in Europe.

As we justifiably fret about the third year of Russia’s brazen attack on Ukraine, the prospects of China annexing Taiwan, combatting Middle Eastern terrorists, we should remember that Kennedy stood up to Khrushchev, Reagan reached an historic agreement with Gorbachev, and Zelenskyy continues to this day to defy Putin.

Wonder how the next chapters (to be written) of “Turning Point: The Bomb and The Cold War” will turn out. Almost DailyBrett hopes we have a cool peace, not a continuation of the Cold War or worse yet, a Hot War.

Make Russia Cool Again

Gorbachev-Reagan vs Putin-Biden?

Can Russia Ever Be A Normal Country?

Putin’s Pooch und Merkel’s Dog-O-Phobia

Back to the 1980s

“The World Is Quiet Today, Mr. President”

Were Yesteryear’s Journalists, Better People?

“I detest totalitarian dictatorships in principle and came to loathe this one the more I lived through it and watched its ugly assault on the human spirit. Nevertheless in this book I have tried to be severely objective, letting the facts speak for themselves and noting the sources for each.” — Two-time Pulitzer Prize winner William L. Shirer forward to his 1960 “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich”

“I don’t wear anyone’s jersey, but I get that many see fairness as obsolete, old-fashioned in this era of toxic divisiveness. … To me, its Journalism. At times you don’t make either side happy with Journalism.” — Baby Boomer media critic Howard Kurtz, 70, MA in journalism from Columbia University in 1975

Are today’s journalists objective, let alone severely objective?

Is Almost DailyBrett suggesting out loud that yesteryear’s journalists were more open minded, more fair, more professional and yes … better people than today’s “Me Generation” iteration? Yes indeed.

Is your author a retired Baby Boomer journalist/PR dude and thus, may be a tad biased? Guilty as charged.

A modern-day observer with the added advantage of the perspective of history may easily be tempted to ask: ‘How could Shirer as a CBS Radio correspondent accurately, fairly and objectively cover the Third Reich?’

How could Shirer be embedded into the Wehrmacht in its conquest of Paris? How could he literally be in earshot of a conquering Adolf Hitler at the Tomb of Napoleon? And yet he was there to cover the story, and later to recall history.

Shirer detested Hitler, the Nazis and the Third Reich, and yet he was true to his profession. His dedication to getting the story right and being objective lasted to his last days. He actually read “Mein Kampf” in die Deutsche Sprache to ensure he clearly understood the total evil context.

Can today’s journalists do the same? Will they do the same? Your author believes it’s not a question of can’t, but won’t.

Are they more interested in garnering social media “clicks,” online followers, and offering their own opinions in the form of analysis?

Did today’s journalists go to med school? How about passing the Bar exam? Were they elected to public office? Why are we being subjected to their personal opinions (or is that what they are being taught in modern-day university journalism schools)?

Are they journalists or polemics? Long-time Chicago columnist Mike Royko (1932-1997) lovingly referred to Manhattan and Beltway pundits as “political proctologists.” Is that label still relevant today?

Yesteryear featured the aforementioned Shirer, Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite.

Today we have Rachel Maddow, Jake Tapper, George Stephanopoulos, Stephen Colbert and Jimmy Kimmel.

Are they all comedians? Are they all journalists? Hard to tell these days.

We do know they are all stars on social media.

Not Covering Both Sides On Public Airwaves

“The reason I’m saying this is, of course, there is a reason that we and other news organizations (CNN) have generally stopped giving an unfiltered, live platform to remarks by former President Trump. It is not out of spite, it is not a decision that we relish, it is a decision that we regularly revisit. And, honestly, earnestly, it is not an easy decision.” — Rachel Maddow commenting on MSNBC’s editorial decision to protect the network’s audience from another point of view

“In seeking truth you have to get both sides of a story.” – Walter Cronkite, CBS anchor from 1962-1981

When Almost DailyBrett graduated from journalism school at USC just a few years after the aforementioned Howard Kurtz received his master’s degree at Columbia, the prevailing model in the business was Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein peeling back the Watergate coverup.

Our models were Edward R. Murrow and Shirer at CBS Radio, Cronkite at the anchor desk of the CBS Evening News (who covered the infamous Nürnberg Tribunals for United Press International). Didn’t Joseph Pulitzer say the three most vital word in journalism are: “Accuracy, Accuracy, Accuracy?”

Reporters didn’t interview reporters. Why would anyone do that? Weren’t correspondents assigned to cover actual newsmakers?

It seems that today’s Journalism Elite are dedicated (and they say as much) to serving their select partisan audiences. If that means not broadcasting historic victory speeches, taking incendiary words (e.g., “Bloodbath”) deliberately out of context and suppressing legitimate news stories, they will use the public airwaves for their self-serving purposes.

What about the needs of the American public?

Where’s the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), when you need it?

Covering Both Sides From London And Berlin

MSNBC Knows Best

The Death of Objective Journalism?

Not Pretending To Be Fair Anymore

Collapse in Public Trust In America’s Media

Let’s Take Hitler Out Of American Politics

Did a Perfect Storm Lead to the Gathering Storm?

Should Reporters Register As Lobbyists?

Will DOJ Sue ESPN For Its Football Monopoly?

“Consumers should not have to pay higher prices because companies violate the antitrust laws. If left unchallenged, Apple will only continue to strengthen its smartphone monopoly.” — Attorney General Merrick B. Garland, March 21, 2024

(Former Washington Coach Chris Petersen) “should be thanking ESPN for actually having a relationship.” – ESPN’s Kirk Herbstreit

“Congrats to both sides in getting the deal done.” — ESPN sports analyst Pat McAfee, March 19, 2024

Almost DailyBrett must ask: ‘Who pray tell is the other side of ESPN’s monopoly six-year $7.8 billion deal?’ The College Football Playoff (CFP) Committee?

Isn’t ESPN’s Rece Davis, Kirk Herbstreit, Joey Galloway, Jesse Palmer, Greg McElroy — all from SEC or Big Ten schools — the (real) playoff committee?

Isn’t ESPN consummating an agreement to exclusively broadcast its own generative College Football Playoff (CFP) through 2031/2032, even expanding the lucrative list of participants from 12-to-14 schools?

Heck, why not 68 schools? Maybe Oregon State can compete in the “First Four?”

Today the federal Department of Justice and 16 state attorneys general are suing Apple for uncompetitive practices revolving around the company’s incredible popular consumer platforms (e.g., iPhone).

What about Disney’s increasingly arrogant ESPN business unit? Disney boss Robert Iger must be blushing, the axe is coming down on Apple’s Tim Cook.

Isn’t the Sherman Anti-Trust Act (employed today against Apple), the Sherman Anti-Trust Act (1890)?

Almost DailyBrett is not an attorney, and will never spend a nanosecond in law school. Your author has been around oodles of attorneys, and knows how they think and speak.

Won’t the ESPN (Disney’s ABC) attorneys contend there is plenty of competition, including Fox Sports, NBC and CBS? Count on it.

Next question your honor: How many of these competitors have or will broadcast even a single nanosecond of CFP playoff games since its inception in 2015, and most likely through 2032 (and conceivably beyond that date)?

Isn’t a monopoly, just that a monopoly? Does Iger have a Mickey Mouse agreement with DOJ?

ESPN’s TV Money Is Destroying College Football

“The old question of: How long would it take TV money to destroy college football? Maybe we’re here. To think even remotely five years ago, the Pac-12 would be in this position, it’s unthinkable to think we’re here today. To think local rivalries are at risk and fans driving four hours to watch their team play in a road game is at risk, to me, is unbelievable. … We’ll look back at college football in 20 years and say, ‘What are we doing?'” — WSU Head Coach Jake Dickert

“I think we could ultimately end up with two conferences: one called ESPN and one called FOX.” — LSU Chancellor Michael Martin, 2011

“I have absolute certainty that they (ESPN) have been involved in manipulating other conferences to go after our members.” — Big 12 Commissioner Bob Bowlsby sending a cease-and-desist letter to ESPN after Oklahoma and Texas announced their respective departures for the Southeastern Conference

Growing up in So Cal, Almost DailyBrett used to dream about going to the Rose Bowl as a fan. The first time was roaming the sidelines as a football manager for the USC Trojans against Michigan in the 1977 Rose Bowl. The beauty of the New Year’s Day Tournament of Roses was the annual game between the winner of the (then) Pac-8 Conference vs. the beast from the Big Ten.

There was a beauty to college football (no ESPN, no transfer portals, no multi-million NIL payments, no monopolies).

It’s more than ESPN using its considerable monopoly resources to dominate college football broadcasting and minimalize (if not destroy) competition. The arrogant network is also guilty of manipulating the landscape of college football to ensure only two conferences will ultimately survive (e.g., SEC and Big Ten).

Even Florida State and Clemson are presently suing to secede the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC) to join ESPN’s Southeastern Conference.

Count on it: ESPN is already prepared to contend that no harm has been inflicted on student athletes, digging deeper in their wallets fans and its remaining competitors.

Will the DOJ care about potential injury to Fox Sports? Will Garland and blue state attorneys general shed a tear for Rupert Murdoch? They want into his wallet, forget about adding revenues to his largesse.

Maybe ESPN is proving there really is an acceptable monopoly.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/39766079/college-football-playoff-espn-agree-deal-2031-32

https://variety.com/2024/tv/news/espn-college-football-playoff-rights-deal-renewal-2032-1235946237

https://www.npr.org/2024/03/21/1239802162/apple-iphone-doj-monopoly-antitrust-lawsuit

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-apple-monopolizing-smartphone-markets

Will Arrogant Linear Legacy ESPN Laugh Last?

Is ESPN Nationalizing “College” Football?

Are ESPN and Fox Sports Guilty of Racketeering?

Did ESPN Steal Texas and Oklahoma?

Burying The 109-Year-Still-Young Pac-10

Has ESPN Ruined College Football?

Chip Kelly Never Cared About Opinions

“I say it all the time, but the best part of football is football. “ — New Ohio State offensive coordinator and quarterbacks coach Chip Kelly

“I think my wife remarked, she’s like, ‘I haven’t seen you this happy in a long time.'” —  Former Oregon Head Football Coach with the best record ever (46-7) with the Ducks, Chip Kelly

“Opinions are like assholes. Everybody has one.” — Clint Eastwood as Dirty Harry

Those who don’t know Chip Kelly are mystified about his decision to give up the head coaching reins at UCLA to become offensive coordinator at Ohio State under the auspices of his protege Ryan Day. Those who just can’t or won’t understand are shocked by Kelly’s self-imposed “demotion.”

There is a deep dark secret about college football, which predates by decades 12-team playoffs, transfer portals and Wild Wild West NIL deals: Assistant coaches are the ones (and always have been), who actually prepare position groups to play big games.

Former Oregon Head Coach and earlier Duck offensive coordinator Chip Kelly, 60, completely comprehends this premise. As one approaches the sunset of a career, the mantra should be: ‘Do what you want to do, not what someone else wants you to do.’

Been there done that.

To a much lesser extent Almost DailyBrett learned about the vital roles played by position coaches to whether a team wins or loses on Saturdays.

Your author was a football manager at Oregon assigned offensive line coach John Marshall, and the following season at USC serving offensive coordinator/quarterback coach Paul Hackett.

Marshall would implore his big and uglies with his own memorable lines of poetry including: “You have to give blood, piss and snot on this play.”

Guess there is a different orifice for every snap of the ball.

Football is not a democracy. Each team is a strict line-of-command para-military organization, charged with acquiring territory at the expense of a given opponent. The head football coach is the exulted ruler. Behind the scenes are offensive and defensive coordinators and the position coaches, who actually take the players through the paces.

One could easily surmise never warm-and-fuzzy Chip Kelly had enough of kissing rings. What’s worse is today’s college football requires bribing little junior and his slobbering parents, tampering with other teams’ players (with even more NIL inducements) and then re-recruiting your own team again and again.

The only thing that is certain in today’s ESPN dominated for confiscatory advertising rates college football era is uncertainty. High school recruiting, which used to be the bane of university coaching staffs, is now yesterday’s news. It’s now, how can we raid another school’s roster and how much will it cost?

Do Head Coaches Actually Coach The Team Anymore?

“I say it all the time, but the best part of football is football. As the game has changed at the collegiate level, we’ve talked about that, I think the head coaching role has turned a lot more into being a CEO than a coach. And I understand that and that comes with the territory. But I was at a point in time where I could make a decision about what I wanted to do.”

There’s a basic beauty that comes from teaching X’s and O’s.

When he came to Oregon in 2007 as the offensive coordinator under former Head Coach Mike Bellotti, he revolutionized college football with his high-speed spread offense. Kelly’s offenses would literally run the same play five consecutive times, and knew these formations would be successful because the gassed defenses never had the opportunity to substitute.

Kelly as a four-year Oregon head coach was 33-3 in the Pac-12. As a two-year offensive coordinator, the Ducks were 19-7 overall, including 12-6 in conference. Overall in six years on the sidelines at Autzen Stadium and on the road, Kelly was 65-14, including 45-9 against Pac-12 competition.

As a totally biased Oregon season ticket holder and Duck Athletic Fund member (and MA in Communication and Society), Almost DailyBrett always found Chip as an acerbic quick-witted, right-to-the-point, New Englander, who left zero doubt about what was on his mind.

He really doesn’t care what you think about him. If he wants to go back to actually coaching football players, who is going to stop him? At his refined age he is doing what he wants to do, not what someone else wants him to do.

Who needs boss-holes anyway?

https://www.latimes.com/sports/ucla/story/2024-03-05/analysis-chip-kelly-didnt-want-to-coach-ucla

https://www.latimes.com/sports/ucla/story/2024-02-09/chip-kelly-selfish-leaving-ucla-football

https://www.si.com/college/ohiostate/football/ohio-state-buckeyesi-just-want-to-be-happy-chip-kelly-reveals-ucla-departure-reason

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

Oregon Geography Matters

Oregon: Prime Destination Not A Stepping Stone

Dumping Notre Dame?

“The Grass Is Damn Green In Eugene”

The Last Real Republican Nominee?

“I would not protect you (NATO). In fact, I would encourage them (Russia) to do whatever the hell they want. You got to pay. You got to pay your bills.” — Former President Donald Trump to NATO nations not reaching the required 2 percent of national gross domestic product (GDP) defense expenditure requirement

“This is to Russia, this is, without question, our number one geopolitical foe. They fight every cause for the world’s worst actors. The idea that (the White House) has some more flexibility in mind for Russia is very, very troubling, indeed.” — Senator Mitt Romney perceived media ‘gaffe’ in his third 2012 presidential debate with President Barack Obama, October 22, 2012

Former GOP presidential standard bearer Senator Mitt Romney wrote-in his wife Ann for the White House in 2016, and once again four years later. We know for certain he is not casting his vote for Donald Trump in 2024.

Another write-in vote for Ann?

Wonder if Almost DailyBrett should write-in his wife Jeanne? She’s not a Republican, but neither is Donald Trump.

The last time your author as a four-decade Republican pulled the lever for the party nominee was for Mitt in 2012.

To make it clear, there was no vote for the Clinton Restoration in 2016. There was zero nod four years later for doddering Joe Biden and his scary heartbeat-away-from-the-presidency running mate Kamala Harris.

Can’t stand the upcoming choice this November 5. Sure wish there was an option to vote for Mitt Romney again.

Having finished “Romney: A Reckoning” by The Atlantic staff writer McKay Coppins, your author came away with a renewed appreciation of Romney as a flawed, but principled over-achiever. Consider Romney’s curricula vitae: Boston Consulting, Bain Capital, Salt Lake Winter Olympic Games rescuer, Republican Governor of Massachusetts, GOP presidential nominee and now retiring Utah U.S. Senator.

As Reagan would say: “Not bad, not bad at all.”

His Reaganesque character — appealing to our best hopes, not our worst fears — is one of Romney’s strengths. Mitt received a John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award for his lonely Republican vote to convict Trump for abuse of power.

Caroline Kennedy praised Romney as a senator, who “reminds us that our democracy depends on courage, conscience and character of our elected officials.” Amen.

As a mackerel snapper, Almost DailyBrett is well versed in the 1960 concerns about a Papist occupying the Oval Office. Your author did not even blink in voting for a Mormon (Romney) in 2012. It not escape this strategic communications blog’s attention that both Coppins and Romney are BYU alums.

Moms have told their children for eons about the perils of publicly discussing politics and religion. It was no surprise the Secret Service repeatedly briefed Romney on the credible threats on his life.

“Romney asked them to stop unless there were specific precautions he could take. He rather not think about of the people who were plotting his death: The Ron Paul wackos, the crazed anti-Mormons, the crazed anti-Romney Mormons, the Muslim jihadists, the Russians, the Chinese, the conspiracy theorists, the union thugs — once he started listing them, it was alarmingly easy to keep going.” — Coppins’ listing the litany of threats outlined by the Secret Service, even before he voted to convict Donald Trump.

“Chaos Follows Him”

“You (media) guys are exhausting. You are exhausting in your obsession with him (Trump). The normal people are not as obsessed with Trump as you are. Life would be a whole lot different, if the media stopped its obsession with Trump.” — Former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley interview with Jonathan Karl of ABC News

Unfortunately Coppins’ book falls into the same Trump obsession. He goes overboard when it comes to All Things Trump. Considering the historical overlap and how Trump sucks all the oxygen out of the room, some poetry about the former president and most likely 2024 (ostensible) Republican nominee is to be expected.

Almost DailyBrett many times pondered: ‘Is this book about Romney or is it about Trump?’

The Donald delights in labeling Romney as a RINO (Republican in Name Only), only failing to take a gander at his comb-over face in the mirror.

Your author was embarrassed for Romney reading the account of how Trump led him into a frog legs and lamb chops trap at the three-star Michelin restaurant Jean-Georges with the prospects of serving as Secretary of State (and media photographers) on the menu.

Shocking, the dinner was not private. Predatory Trump sported a Cheshire Cat grin on his face. Romney was the prey. Your author winced reading Coppins’ account of how Romney was set up for public humiliation.

The caper says more about Trump than Romney.

As Almost DailyBrett concluded, Romney is not without his flaws. He is not the second coming of Ronald Reagan, no one can be so charming, so genuine. Mitt is a real Republican, despite what his troglodyte critics may contend.

Mitt is an overachieving American patriot of proven accomplishment, character and integrity. He is a real Republican in the Reagan mold. The world would be better off with more Mitt Romneys populating the landscape from sea-to-shining sea.

https://www.politico.com/blogs/donald-trump-administration/2016/11/dinner-for-3-trump-romney-and-reince-231976

Trump Is The Anti-Reagan

Republicans Are Not Monolithic

Donald Trump Is A Rhino

Biden vs. Trump: Who Sucks Less?

Back In The Sane Lane

Trump Issues Mea Culpa; Suspends Campaign