You are currently browsing the daily archive for April 28, 2010.
It used to be, GOP (and their media) were the party of personal attacks. Just ask Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry about it.
Things changed with Obama’s campaign for POTUS., the same media on his side this time. Just ask the Clintons, Sarah Palin, the voters from Pennsylvania, Appalachia and pretty much every state not voting for Obama in the primaries. Just ask the voters from Michigan and Florida, or those from Nevada (I may have lost, but got more delegates, so screw you all – Obama”)
So, the Politico headline is disingenuous as it implies this might be something new for Obama
President Obama’s strategy gets personal
Even after the election, when trying to rally the base without offering them anything of substance Obama would use gimmicks such as “the war on Faux” which was eventually abandoned as Fox appeared to have some power after all.
Politico gives a few examples of recent attacks
Mitch McConnell is in bed with Wall Street “movers and shakers” — and is fronting “cynical and deceptive” arguments on their behalf.
Very likely true, but …pot, meet kettle.
Sarah Palin can be ignored on arms control because she’s “not exactly an expert on nuclear issues.”
and we’re back to patronizing “the mayor of Vassila” by the guy who runs his own campaign (and has a penis)
And Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh are just a “troublesome” twosome spreading “vitriol.”
true, but when the rest of the media is doing propaganda for him, attacking the few that dissent, not exactly righteous.
The point that the article fails to make is that these cheap stunts are part of the electoral mode the White House is shifting into, the one illustrated by another Politico craven headline
and in the efforts to recover the put upon base, the personal attacks are just some red meat. No wonder that in
However some of the dissed B0bots do have a longer memory:
6. Progressives are his favorite punching bag
He and Rahm have left the conservative dems alone, but he is forever bragging about “rejecting” progressive ideas. He craves the “middle ground” and seems to have defined that is just slightly left of right wing, bat shit, crazy. He loves to establish himself by using the left as a shield against attacks from the right. I’m trying to figure out the most “liberal” thing he’s done so far and I’m struggling.
and when challenged to prove it:
16. He bragged to the GOP
He bragged to the GOP that he rejected “progressive ideas”.
His chief of staff described us a “retarded”.
He described single payer as “unworkable”, despite it being in use in several industrialized nations.
He called out one single congressman during the entire health care debate, Kucinich. Not Lieberman, not Nelson.
And of course on day 1 he gave a big wet sloppy one to Rick Warren.
As cheerleaders protest, more links are offered
But more importantly,one even notices that this enables Obama to avoid taking any ideological stands
13. “Rather than going after big groups of bad guys…” Isn’t it better if he makes it ideological?
Wouldn’t making it personal weaken his argument, and not let him take ideological stances? If that’s his strategy, I don’t like it.
It lets him get away with blaming a few bad apples, rather than systematic failure.
And that’s the main thing the article misses to point out.
Obama may pick some punching bags to amuse distracted B0bots. But he still loves Reagan, is ready to dismantle Social security, public education, enshrined the insurance companies as profiteers of the so called healthcare reform, just as will cede more power to Wall Street after the so called financial reform. He is, as it was pointed many times by adoring media “postpartisan,””ideology free” (or as the media would put it for someone they didn’t like “would do/say anything to get elected)
In other words, applying to his base what Abramoff was describing what the “R” were doing to theirs in this document
and with the same amount of respect for the retards too
Against something always worked for the lowest common denominator. Against someone, even better.
And much as I am gratified to see some of the profiteers skewered these days (Goldman Sachs), I do know that this is part of that same campaign strategy – and again – pot meet kettle.
Michael Moore On Larry King: Goldman Sachs, Obama’s #1 Private Contributor
And he says there should be a CRIMINAL investigation. He is right, period.
Of course, it’s mostly loud protests but the occasional information as well
Let alone that MM lately reminds me of Tweety during the war in Iraq – gives me whiplash with his reversals. But he is on the “true” side today
So, per Abramoff recipee the “against” is being whipped up again by Obama and his media.
“Against something” always worked for the lowest common denominator. ” Against someone,” even better.
Just notice how the one who brought us 8 years of peace of prosperity still gets maligned by those who are supporting those responsible for 10 years and counting of wars and unemployment.
The cover of the day goes to AM-NY for capturing the essence of what went on – and without the “S” word too
Tabloids are taking from the SG senate hearing the “shitty deals” Carl Levin used from their e-mails. It makes for some colorful headlines.
.while NY Post seems to blame Senate for the language in GS’s e-mails
By comparison, WaPo seems to defend GS
not so Washington Times
.The Wall Street Journal sees it a secondary headline after Greece