Reading an article about Obama’s escalating war in Central Asia, I was struck by the references to the media snow job:
Those who echo the New York Times‘ description of Obama’s plan as a “narrowing” of the war, because it abandons “Mr. Bush’s vague talk of representative democracy in Afghanistan,” are only trying to deceive the public.
To be fair, before covering for Jr.Jr’s war, New York Times famously donned its pom poms for Jr’s war – who can forget Judith Miller and her WMD? It’s not like NYT has any credibility left, but why would Obama have any?
Leave it to Bush’s holdout, Robert Gates to be candid – on Faux of all places
Asked on a Fox Network television interview yesterday about the difference between Bush’s “war on terror” and Obama’s “campaign against extremism,” Defense Secretary Robert Gates replied, “I think that’s people looking for differences where there are none.“
Who are you gonna believe? The guy in charge of waging the actual war for both administrations or…New York Times?
And more interestingly, why are people looking for differences? The con job is over, the public was deceived in installing the third term of Bush. Why try to keep the illusion?
The article points that
Obama’s plan exposes the connection between US militarism and the decayed state of American democracy. Overwhelming popular opposition to war is routinely ignored and violated. Obama’s plan was adopted without congressional authorization or public debate.
ts release was timed to avoid public attention and scrutiny. Just two days before, Obama held a prime time news conference where the issue of Afghanistan was not raised. He chose to announce a major escalation of the war at a 9:30 AM no-questions-asked press conference, when most of the population was at work and unable to watch. As Obama spoke, he was flanked by Gates and other Bush administration holdovers
But hey, we’re supposed to cheer that “war on terror” is no longer being used as slogan! And look, the war is so much narrower! (Not that we’re out of Iraq yet)
Update
And in this “narrow war” we sometimes get sucked in internal drug wars
The American forces were tricked by a drug clan into taking out a rival as part of an operation to seize an al-Qaida member.
That begs for Mr Fish’s cartoon
5 comments
March 31, 2009 at 9:56 am
Mrs. Bucket
“Those who echo the New York Times‘ description of Obama’s plan as a “narrowing” of the war, because it abandons “Mr. Bush’s vague talk of representative democracy in Afghanistan,” are only trying to deceive the public.”
This is not the time for anyone to be quiet Americans.
March 31, 2009 at 1:44 pm
sister of ye
Here in SE Michigan, where already the bad economy has been worsened by Obama’s games with the auto industry, we have pretty heavy advertising for the various armed forces. Guess they figure that desperate men and women out of work will be happy to be cannon fodder.
The ads on the sports channels are geared to possible recruits. But the ones on channels like the History Channel are geared toward parents. They basically run: “I didn’t want my son/daughter to go into the service, but s/he convinced me it’s an honorable, noble calling that will make an upstanding person out of him/her.”
In other words, shame on you unpatriotic DFHs for not wanting your kids blown to pieces in an unnecessary war.
March 31, 2009 at 2:09 pm
Mrs. Bucket
http://therealnews.com/t/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=33&Itemid=74&jumival=348
“Obama should save the banks, not the bankers, Pt.3
Tom Ferguson: If Obama does not go to something bigger and bolder another deadly round of crisis follows”
March 31, 2009 at 2:41 pm
Mrs. Bucket
Excuse me, OT, but what do you think of this Uppity?
HT to RBO.
John Batchelor writes on his blog:
POTUS Emergency Meeting with the Super Bankers
1-bankersLate in the week, 13 super bankers, led by the crypto-bankrupts Ken Lewis, Vikram Pandit, John Stumpf, were ordered to walk and up and down the White House driveway in order to meet with the world famous community organizer, Mr. Obama.
If this occasion was about a rent strike, or a voter turnout drive, or an EPA lawsuit, the results of “no change” would have been acceptable. Instead, the occasion was a revolt by the bankers against the Obama administration’s class warfare campaign. The one and only issue was money. The super bankers have already decided that the TARP fiasco is a virus that has infected their command and control, and they aim to shed TARP asap while keeping as much of the Fed credit backstop as possible.
The super bankers have also decided that the White House telling them how they pay themselves and their crowd is unendurable. The rupture is complete. No trust. No hope for trust.
1-bankerLow intensity warfare in place now as the bankers pick off members of Congress to see the money their way. Does POTUS know he has lost the respect of the super bankers? Yes. That is why he went through the infantilizing exercise of calling on the lords one at a time.
http://therealbarackobama.wordpress.com/2009/03/29/batchelor-community-disorganized/
April 1, 2009 at 6:19 pm
Corpe de Groucho
Excuse me!
That’s TOP Autocrat you plebes!
The Wall Street bankers just wanted you to know that.