• Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.

Republican death trip

New posts

Bob

SoWal Insider
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/14/opinion/14krugman.html?em By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: August 13, 2009

?I am in this race because I don?t want to see us spend the next year re-fighting the Washington battles of the 1990s. I don?t want to pit Blue America against Red America; I want to lead a United States of America.? So declared Barack Obama in November 2007, making the case that Democrats should nominate him, rather than one of his rivals, because he could free the nation from the bitter partisanship of the past.

Some of us were skeptical. A couple of months after Mr. Obama gave that speech, I warned that his vision of a ?different kind of politics? was a vain hope, that any Democrat who made it to the White House would face ?an unending procession of wild charges and fake scandals, dutifully given credence by major media organizations that somehow can?t bring themselves to declare the accusations unequivocally false.?

So, how?s it going?

Sure enough, President Obama is now facing the same kind of opposition that President Bill Clinton had to deal with: an enraged right that denies the legitimacy of his presidency, that eagerly seizes on every wild rumor manufactured by the right-wing media complex.

This opposition cannot be appeased. Some pundits claim that Mr. Obama has polarized the country by following too liberal an agenda. But the truth is that the attacks on the president have no relationship to anything he is actually doing or proposing.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/14/opinion/14krugman.html?em By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: August 13, 2009

?I am in this race because I don?t want to see us spend the next year re-fighting the Washington battles of the 1990s. I don?t want to pit Blue America against Red America; I want to lead a United States of America.? So declared Barack Obama in November 2007, making the case that Democrats should nominate him, rather than one of his rivals, because he could free the nation from the bitter partisanship of the past.

Some of us were skeptical. A couple of months after Mr. Obama gave that speech, I warned that his vision of a ?different kind of politics? was a vain hope, that any Democrat who made it to the White House would face ?an unending procession of wild charges and fake scandals, dutifully given credence by major media organizations that somehow can?t bring themselves to declare the accusations unequivocally false.?

So, how?s it going?

Sure enough, President Obama is now facing the same kind of opposition that President Bill Clinton had to deal with: an enraged right that denies the legitimacy of his presidency, that eagerly seizes on every wild rumor manufactured by the right-wing media complex.

This opposition cannot be appeased. Some pundits claim that Mr. Obama has polarized the country by following too liberal an agenda. But the truth is that the attacks on the president have no relationship to anything he is actually doing or proposing.

You could not be more wrong. This is not hope and change tht he said he would bring, this is tyranny plan and simple.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/14/opinion/14krugman.html?em By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: August 13, 2009

?I am in this race because I don?t want to see us spend the next year re-fighting the Washington battles of the 1990s. I don?t want to pit Blue America against Red America; I want to lead a United States of America.? So declared Barack Obama in November 2007, making the case that Democrats should nominate him, rather than one of his rivals, because he could free the nation from the bitter partisanship of the past.

Some of us were skeptical. A couple of months after Mr. Obama gave that speech, I warned that his vision of a ?different kind of politics? was a vain hope, that any Democrat who made it to the White House would face ?an unending procession of wild charges and fake scandals, dutifully given credence by major media organizations that somehow can?t bring themselves to declare the accusations unequivocally false.?

So, how?s it going?

Sure enough, President Obama is now facing the same kind of opposition that President Bill Clinton had to deal with: an enraged right that denies the legitimacy of his presidency, that eagerly seizes on every wild rumor manufactured by the right-wing media complex.

This opposition cannot be appeased. Some pundits claim that Mr. Obama has polarized the country by following too liberal an agenda. But the truth is that the attacks on the president have no relationship to anything he is actually doing or proposing.

If the wingnuts hate Obama so much, why do they try to make him look like their favorite white man? I'll never understand it.
 
Posters

If the Obamabots would take the time and have the courage to search for the truth in other places besides the Magesterium Hierarchy of Politifact and Fact-Check, who by their very nature, are nearly religious in their setting themselves up as the final authority on truth- (which nullifes their credibility immediately), they might see through all the clutter. Here's who is responsible for the Hitler posters.


NBC's August 7 Nightly News comes as close as possible to saying Limbaugh printed and distributed the Obama-with-Mustache posters himself without actually doing so. As they show the image, reporter Kelly O'Donnell's voiceover proffers "Some anger on display gets stoked by the provocative megaphone of Rush Limbaugh" as they then immediately cut to video and audio of Limbaugh.
On Sunday's Meet the Press, David Gregory's voiceover at the time of their Obama-with-Mustache visual is "but the rhetoric has become extreme." The voiceover lands on the word "extreme" when the Obama-with-Mustache poster appears, and they too then immediately cut to video and audio of Limbaugh.
How's that for subtle? But there's a problem with this media narrative.
Obama-Hitler%20Larouche%20Small.jpg
For written at the poster's bottom is the web address "LaRouchePAC.com," the political action committee website for Communist and perpetual Presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche.
No right-winger he. And neither he nor his acolytes are likely ones to be "stoked by the provocative megaphone of Rush Limbaugh." In fact (from Wikipedia):
In 1979, LaRouche formed a Political Action Committee called the National Democratic Policy Committee (NDPC). LaRouche has run for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States seven times, beginning in 1980.
​
 
Last edited:
I don't remember Larouche being on the ballot last year;I thought he must have died. Or maybe I just missed him.

Running once for President, with the anger so prevalent in this Country, would have been enough to send me to the grave; nevermind seven. :shock:

Maybe he has nine lives.
 
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter












                               
Back
Top