The Pardu

The Pardu
Watchful eyes and ears feed the brain, thus nourishing the brain cells.
Showing posts with label Obama haters. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obama haters. Show all posts

Thursday, September 5, 2013

Media Resurrects Wrong Spokesperson Against Obama and Syria

George W. Bush, Dick Cheney (Scooter Libby), Donald Rumsfeld, Condi Rice and Collin Powell pulled one the nation's most surreptitious and heinous acts of misinformation as a justification for war. There was no WMD! As we listen to credible news host speak of the lead up to the invasion of Iraq, we only hear: "Ridding the world of Saddam Hussein." As my memory serves me, "ridding the world of Saddam Hussein" was never once mentioned as the Bush/Cheney strategy unfolded. Let's set that fact aside for a moment.

Since just before the Bush Library campaign moved into full blossom, we started to see more and more George W. Bush. Dick Cheney even dusted $100.00 bills from the entry to his mole hold and moved his daughter aside to speak boldly against President Obama. Someone even produced a television special for Showtime: The World According To Dick Cheney. Rice peeps out from time to time (mostly at GOP events). Rumsfeld has now surfaced like an irritating Ant to speak complete hypocrisy about the failings of the US strategy regarding Syria. 

The shame of it all!

Television news producers know how the US entered the Iraq War. They know the Bush charge to war was a fabrication pre-determined as such. Each producer of Fox News and CNN who book Rumsfeld (for ratings) to get his unique legacy resurrecting babble know this. Or, better yet, this! Of course, we know the ultimate shame that seeps well below the horrors of the Iraq War fabrication and flawed execution: the outing of Valerie Plame.

The shame goes to news producers and managers who scrounge around for negative news stories comparable to gold miners shifting through a creek for specks of gold. As these producers book far less than credible people for on-air appearances, they actually demean the cred of their networks. Fox News has no credibility, and CNN is fighting hard to lower itself to the very lucrative "'low information" viewers.

It truly is a safe bet producers who book Rumsfeld do so with the knowledge people will turn-in and knowledge most do not even remember the shame of Donald Rumsfeld. Why not book insiders who have spoken boldly about the Bush charge to war? Maybe those guest could actually shed light on the Administration's reports related to Syria. Maybe insiders can help us understand the pressure associated with going along when consumed with doubt (as Powell has professed to his senior advisers). Just maybe, those guest could shed light on how INTEL impacts decisions made in the Oval Office, State Department and at the Department of Defense.

Did you think or say, "what guests?" 
I. Richard Alan Clarke is the former National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Counter-terrorism for the United States 
II. Lawrence B. "Larry" Wilkerson is a retired United States Army Colonel and former chief of staff to United States Secretary of State Colin Powell
III. Ari Fleisher, on Contract with CNN, former Bush spokesperson with a negative view of Obama, I am certain but still much more relevant as guest than Donald Rumsfeld. 
IV. Scott McCellan, longest serving Press Secretary for George Bush 
I would love to hear their thoughts on INTEL and their opinions about INTEL veracity. Booking politically influenced failures and talking heads like Rumsfeld is nothing more than ratings scrounging or satisfying the political paradigm of their network owners (Murdoch) managers (Ailes) and producers (et al.).





If we could have some degree of insider information from people who have published about the dangers of INTEL, news viewers could actually become educated on what Obama, Hagel and Kerry are working through. High information viewers undoubtedly find on-air segments with Rumsfeld purely political and view the segments as "fishing for ratings" from sympathizers audiences (e.g., Obama haters, Bush lovers, conservatives, etc.) 

Rachel Maddow summed it up really nicely last night.

“If you’re an architect or a conspirator or one of the primary actors in the Iraq War–in arguably the grandest and most craven foreign policy disaster in American history–your opinion is no longer required on matters of war and peace. Please enjoy painting portraits of dogs or something. Painting portraits of yourself in the bathroom, trying to get clean. Please enjoy the loving comfort of your family and loved ones, and your god. But we as a country never ever need to hear from you about war, ever again. You can go now.” Rachel Maddow.


The really satisfying thing about posting on pages such as this, we are less bound by the standards of a Rachel Maddow we can and often do say to people like anyone from the Bush Administration who speaks-out about the failings of President Obama: "STFU."

I am going to do something here I have never done before. If you want to see the level of credibility among our media and a clear reminder of why reaching out to people like Rumsfeld is mere manipulation for ratings, check out this Google search. The search is the result of seeking the image posted in the header of this piece. 

"Weak!"  Oh that ever-present conservative mantra.  And, I suppose Bush/Cheney were 
"strong" leaders.

Fox News and CNN should seek to resurrect the ghost of  General George Armstrong Custer to seek an interview about how it felt to out-wit Sitting Bull, Gall, and Crazy Horse.
StumbleUpon

Tuesday, August 27, 2013

The Shrinklng US Government And Those Who Refuse Reality


In a piece published earlier today, John Liming via The American Liberal Times reminds us of the shrinking US Government.   Despite constant right-wing rhetoric about "Big Government" and out of control deficits, President Obama presses-on with shrinking government spending and size of government.  An intriguing and revealing reality: Obama doesn't bother to toll his own bell regarding our shrinking federal government.  

Before we move this piece to The American Liberal Times, we thought we would add a couple of graphic representation of data that validates our shrinking federal government. There are many more such images.  The data is out there and the Obama Administration knows 'high information' people know the truth. The very sad part of that dynamic, we have 47% of the voting public who are either 'low information' people or they are blinded by American conservatism and do not care about the truth.


           

The American Liberal Times...
_________________

Federal Government Is Shrinking Under Obama!

8/27/2013

Here is an item that should set some Right Slobs to chewing on their left-over socks!
It seems that despite all the noise and fluff from the far right extreme in American Politics – - the Obama Haters and all the rest of them – - the Federal Government has actually been shrinking in size ever since Obama took office.
Isn’t that kinda like what the righties are always clamoring for?  Isn’t that the ideal all of them aspire to for the country?
If President Obama is shrinking the size of government then what in the Hell are the right-turds who oppose his policies so strongly talking about?  If he is doing what they have always wanted, what is their gripe with him?
Read it and weep, right-wads – -  HERE.
Posted by John on 8/27/2013
StumbleUpon

Monday, September 17, 2012

“2016: OBAMA’S AMERICA”

Cross posted from Hot Politics Dot Com....






AUTHOR DINISH D’SOUZA DOESN’T LET FACTS GET IN THE WAY


Posted  by  & filed under Uncategorized.
No wonder the conservatives love “2016: Obama’s America” (which brought in more bucks than any  conservative documentary, ever), by Dinesh D’Souza, right-wing darling and skilled quoter of right-wing talking points, and the author of the best-seller, “The Roots of Obama’s Rage.”  As Mary Sheehy Moe of greatfallstribune.com notes, D’Souza asks viewers to “dig for the roots of Obama’s rage.”  D’Souza, explains Moe, “posits that Obama carefully cultivated an unthreatening black mask, the better to dupe us with. It worked. Glib and endearing, he got himself elected president. Then he implemented his sinister plan.”
What sinister plan, you might ask?  Why, the sinister plan to end the war in Iraq, provide healthcare to millions of uninsured Americans, keep the auto industry from being obliterated, adding stimulus to the economy to keep it from crashing, and, well, little stuff like making sure kids eat, helping students attend college, and making sure our young undocumented immigrants aren’t yanked out of classrooms and deported.
As D’Souza told Bill Maher, he uses “Obama’s own voice,” and lets “Obama tell his story.”  If the splicing and dicing going on in Fox News’ production room – and the Romney campaign – is any indication, “Obama’s own voice” no doubt bears little recognition to things the President actually said.
Bill Maher challenged D’Souza, saying, “You say he’s filled with rage . . . the real Obama, I’ve never seen do anything like that.”
D’Souza had a ready answer, that Obama’s rage is ” . . . vigilante rage, it’s a different kind of rage, sublimated . . . let’s look at an example, healthcare.  Obama had a plan, and the Republicans had a summit with Obama and they offered a lot of ideas.  Obama could have taken one or two Republican ideas and he would have had a bipartisan plan.”
When Maher reminded D’Souza that when it comes to healthcare reform, “The whole thing is a Republican idea . . . a Democrat idea would be at least a public option . . . This is a business-friendly plan .  . . It’s a big blow job to the insurance companies is what it is,” D’Souza was ready with another talking point:  ”Obama could have gotten some votes but he didn’t care because to him Republicans are the bad guys, so that’s what I mean, he campaigned as a healer . . . but he hasn’t governed that way.”
Maher admonished D’Souza again, reminding him that the second President Obama got into office, Republicans said they were going to block everything he proposed.
D’Souza – despite pretending to completely understand the man – admitted, “I haven’t talked to Obama,” but continues to insist that President Obama has based his life on the life of his father, a man he barely knew:  ”The same guy who hardly met his father wrote a 500-page book called ‘Dreams from my Father’ . . . ”
“How far up your ass,” Maher mocked, “Do you have to go to pull that out?”
Some of D’Souza’s talking points include the assertion that President Obama ” . . . sees America as the rogue nation in the world . . . I believe Obama is anti-capitalist . . . he has fundamentally altered the relationship of the citizen to the state . . . .”  Other assertions include the “Obama deficit” (much of which was left over from the Bush regime), and a refusal by D’Souza to acknowledge that Bush caused a good portion of the deficit the President has been battling since he came into office.  ”Four years later,” D’Souza says indignantly, “You’re still blaming Bush . . . . .”
And then there was D’Souza’s interview with Cenk Uygur, where he continued the assault on the President using well-worn and faded talking points: “Domestic spending has been growing promiscuously under Obama . . . ”
When reminded by Uyger that Bush left a boatload of debt, D’Souza pompously replied, “A president should take responsibility for the budgets that go under there . . . Obama has had a chance to leave his imprint both on foreign policy and on domestic policy . . . I’m suggesting that Obama wants to reduce America’s footprint on the world because he thinks we are stepping on the world . . . I think that Obama is using debt to saddle future generations with obligations to foreign countries, so he is a global redistributor . . . .”
D’Souza repeated the top lie on the right-wing wish list, that “the largest Bush deficit was $500 billion, the lowest Obama deficit is $1 trillion . . . 2008 America’s deficit was under $500 billion . . . We’re talking about a carry-over year and you’re basically trying to saddle Bush with an Obama deficit . . . Average the Bush deficits over 8 years and they don’t total the amount that Obama has had in 4 years in deficits . . . .”
Watch Uygur debate D’Souza, Parts I and II.
D’Souza says what staunch conservatives want to hear, and as most right-wing pundits and “experts” do, rarely shake hands with the truth.  D’Souza has never met the President, doesn’t know him, and is using as “factual data” other right-wing talking points.  It’s like the old journalism trick of reporters chatting casually and coming up with theories, then quoting each other as “unnamed sources.”
As Moe commented in her opinion piece, “Maybe it’s time to inquire into the roots of D’Souza’s rage.”
StumbleUpon

Saturday, June 16, 2012

Lament for the Obama Haters!





Cross posted from a Facebook group, written by a friend of a group member.  Of course, there are many perspectives on life in America circa 2010 and forward. We post those that frankly fit our paradigm values, and beliefs. There are other sites for those who find fault in screeds such as the following!





Hi, Folks, it's me again...



It's very disturbing to see so many people who are so dead-set against a man who is doing his best as the first black president in a country that is rife with ongoing systemic and institutional, injustices and discrimination, not only towards minorities but the common man and woman as well. They refuse to see or admit that president Obama has been attacked daily, on a scale that no other president in the history of the nation has had to endure. 


They think that he can just waltz into the white house, and do whatever he likes, and not have to go up against the most powerful and deeply entrenched powers on the planet. They have no idea what it is like to be black in this country, even when they see how he has been treated since day one. They may have voted for him, yet, when he doesn't jump high enough for them they will turn on him and cannibalize and devour his very soul. They saved all of their anger and animosity for the one who is doing his best to represent them under incredible and unprecedented pressures. 


But that's okay, some folks have been dealing with this type of BS all of their live's. And if you don't believe it, just go and ( politely ) ask 99.9% of African Americans, who do their very to best to assimilate into this society on a daily basis what it is ( REALLY ) like for them. And, if some could put aside their denial; they might actually hear the answer. You want to know why I fight... this is why I fight; I fight for the children who have to grow in up in a country that suffers from the psychosis of the privileged and so-called entitled, who create and maintain a 'us again them' mentality. I will never give up on securing the rights and freedoms that so many of our ancestors died for. But, hey, guess what? The good news is that a lot of folks all beginning to wake up and realize that they are the 99%, too...


They see that the republicans have been doing everything in their power to make him fail; even if it means destroying the country, they even hear them admit it, they use all their energy to excoriate the president. What they don't see however, is their lack of patriotism. They are blinded, and can't see that what they are doing is aiding and abetting the enemy. They put in jeopardy those same principles that they claim to hold so dear. Some of them are even willing to throw their vote away and vote for someone who has no chance of winning, it's like saying; if I can't have everything I want, ( Now ) then I am going to take my ball and go home. ( That'll learn em' ) I sure hope that they don't teach their children that. They fail to see what their childish bickering might produce in the country they claim to love. They are engrossed in a mob mentality and derive some type of cynical pleasure from piling on; while the real culprits escape right under their radar. What a shame...


I've spent 30 years in the military and have led men into combat in both Vietnam and Iraq and just from a tactical point of view; sometimes you have to change course in a heated battle. You have to recognize that you might lose men if you go in the direction that you originally planned. You realize that in order to take your objective; you may have to do a temporary tactical retreat, and go left, instead of right, because the situation and the enemy are fluid and unpredictable. There come's a time when you have to make an adjustment. Sometime's you might have to compromise to save some live's. But some people will never understand that because they've never been in a combat situation... Just like they've never been the first black president in a country where half the people hate you and treat you with disgust and disdain, just because of their skin color... The bottom line is that you can't wake people up who are pretending to asleep.

Tom~

StumbleUpon