It's not just Fox News that's become subject of White House derision. The following is an excerpt from a joke e-mail that is circulating among White House staffers. It's a response, of sorts, to the analytical essay that Politico editor-in-chief John Harris wrote about the "seven stories that Barack Obama doesn't want told." It's fairly caustic -- and, truth be told, the White House maintains good relationships with Politico reporters and has been known to try to agenda-set by dishing out a few tips to the publication. But make no mistake: many on the White House senior staff dislike Politico's brand of journalism, and they do not like the effect that Politico's metabolism has on the rest of the press corps, including this (i.e., my own) corner of it. Still, don't read too much into this. There's been plenty of back-and-forth between the White and the Politico, and the White House accepts the role -- which is often substantial -- that Politico plays in the newsgathering process.
7 narratives politico is fighting in their efforts to get an interview with the President
1. They are more interested in readers than accuracy
2. Its okay to be wrong everyonce in a while, if your are the first to break the news
3. More interested in gossip than news
4. A spouter of the worst sort of insider conventional wisdom
5. Their analysis about obama has been wrong more than any one
6. Click ... period
7. More obsessed with personality than policy
That unmistakable streak of nastiness is like so much else from this disastrous presidency.
Impressive. From zero to "disastrous" in 11 months flat. It would take quite a lot of skill to perform that badly.
Admittedly, this WH and I agree on many things. But there's nothing we agree on more than this. I honestly have no idea what it's going to take to dredge the cesspool of stupid that has become our political discourse, but if the White House were keen on giving it a go, I'd be thrilled to strap on the hip waders and join in.RE: "from zero to disastrous in 11 months flat".
No surprise here -- from the beginning it was clear that Obama intended to make the same mistakes as Clinton, Carter, Lyndon Johnson, even Franklin Roosevelt. Trying to encourage job creation by punishing the entrepreneurs who generate new jobs has never worked and never will. Plus Keynesian stimulus programs never worked for Carter, bigger government never created private sector jobs for FDR or LBJ, Obama is doing a lot to rehabilitate Bill Clinton's reputation, however.
The only problem with the Politico article by John Harris is that he is "predicting" what has already happened.
If you can go from zero to Nobel Prize in 11 days you can certainly go from zero to disastrous in 11 months.
Yeah, cuz they were doing such a great job creating jobs back when they WEREN'T being "punished."
Your Failed Ideology: Let Me Show You It.
Yes Lex, lower taxes on the entrepreneurial class really do work. You would know that if you just take a gander at the unemployment rates during the Bush Administration. It only started to rise when the idiot Dems took over Congress in January 2007.
The Bush Tax Cuts brought record revenues to the federal government because tax cuts "for the rich" give them more money to start and maintain businesses, which translates to more private sector jobs, which translates to more taxpayers, which translates to higher revenue. Pretty simple only the libs like you don't like it because it means they aren't interfering in people's lives.
See. All the hyperbole, unexamined shallowness, and out-and-out nuttiness we see here is exactly the point. How do you even begin to break through it?...Lost causes and all that.
And as long as you say it's too daunting a task, you don't have to actually refute anything. Nice try, but here's a tip: it may be fun to wear daddy's shoes around the house, but when you do it in public, you just look silly.
http://johngalt.podomatic.com/
1. Those who spout AFP/CEI/etc. talking points, oddly enough, repeatedly fail to note one fairly easy way to reduce U.S. unemployment: enforcing our imm. laws. In fact, even with millions of Americans unemployed, those in that orbit are supporting even higher imm.
2. The Politico article is like something Mr. Smithers would have written; there are far worse things that the Politico could be looking into but is too corrupted to do so.
3. The WH should look on the bright side: Ben Smith has repeatedly lied to help Obama. (Note: that post requires people to understand what a fact is and how claiming that something happened when it didn't is a lie.)
Hey slag, consider this. All of our great-great-grandchildren will go to their graves owing money to foriegn investors who bought all of this debt Obama and the last two congresses have swallowed. We are making slaves of them to prove once again that communism, socialism, in all their forms only destroy countries and people. Especially the innocents.
"I honestly have no idea what it's going to take to dredge the cesspool of stupid that has become our political discourse, but if the White House were keen on giving it a go, I'd be thrilled to strap on the hip waders and join in."
This is possibly the most absurd, completely out of touch with reality, comment I've read in some time.
On what could anyone base the silly notion that this White House would have the slightest interest in "dredging the cesspool of stupid that is our political discourse?"
The politics of personal destruction outlined by Saul Alinsky that this WH practices with great enthusiasm, with its own flair for Chicago style thuggery thrown in, IS at the root of our current political crisis.
The DNC shoveled the first heaping of stupid on our political discourse with its vile attacks on Judge Robert Bork, found it to be successful and has become more course, dishonest vitriolic and downright evil with each passing election cycle. Give it a go? Hell know this is exactly what they want. If we were ever engage in serious debate or discourse the radical left would get clobbered at the ballot box, they know it and they keep mucking things up, co-opting the language of their opponents and ridiculing anyone who doesn't tow their line in order to enable their campaigns of deception to succeed.
Forty years ago I participated in my first first election as a member of the Democrat Party, came from a family of union belonging Democrats and today I'm a registered Republican who has, as a result of this sleaze mongering WH, vowed that I will never NOT EVER vote for another Democrat so long as I live.
Dredge the cesspool *pfft* - spare me. They live in the cesspool, they revel in the cesspool - they ARE the cesspool!
So today nastiness is bad? Well how about that? Do me a favor please? Let me know when it's ok to be nasty again. I'm going to say that it will last until Ann Coulter has a new book to sell or maybe only until the 5pm Glenn Dreck Show comes on.
No offense, but having the audacity to suggest that Politico is "more interested in readers than accuracy" is hardly on par with suggesting that women shouldn't be allowed to vote or that everyone who disagrees with you is an America-hating Stalinist. I'm guessing that "nastiness"--in this case--is code for "stating the obvious".
Complaining about "nastiness" in modern politics is boring (and manipulative). Suck it up.
"and the White House accepts the role -- which is often substantial -- that POLITICO plays in the news gathering process."
I think the above statement says it all. The media is bought and paid for and for effect a couple of shills have been hired to play a "role".
"2. Its okay to be wrong everyonce in a while, if your are the first to break the news"
everyonce? Is that a word? Better yet, "your are". Obama's white house staff truly are a bunch of morons! I guess this is why they couldn't even get the Russian "reset" button correct.
This is what happens when you type the note on s Blackberry or IPhone with spellcheck. Looks familiar.
For a leading publication such as the Atlantic to state that the White House tries to agenda-set (manipulate) the press, is an outrage. A free and independent press is a cornerstone of our democracy. President Obama would never allow his team to compromise that independence by trying to influence the media. The only exception might be Fox News which clearly does not support the President and dares to challenge his right to govern.
Excellent publications such as Politco, Huffington Post or the major network newscasts such as Charles Gibson or Brian Williams are clearly supportive of all of the great things Barack Obama is attempting to do.
Davis, are you really that naïve? or were you just being sarcastic? I hope its the latter and not the former. But just in case it is the former...
Every presidential administration in modern history has had staffers whose primary purpose is to agenda-set/manipuate/control the message in the media. Its basic public relations. The Obama Administration has done it better than the Bush Jr Administration who did it better than the Clinton Administration who did it better than the Bush Sr Administration.
What's important is whether or not media outlets recognize that fact and do their best to accurately report in spite of the administration's attempt to control the message.
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or just drank too much kool ade LOL. This is one of the most political administration ever, run by admitted political hacks. Not only do the try to control the message and the messenger, they tell bald faced lies more than Nixon did. With Nixon, it took real journalists to connect the dots. For Obama, a fifth grader can do it. Obama's damage control is as bad as Tiger's, but most of the press gives him a pass. When sports writers dig deeper than political journalists we have a real problem.
Take another sip of the Kool-Aid....
Davis-
I've got to believe that you are sincere. Confused, but sincere.
This WH is as manipulative of the media as any we've EVER seen. The WH of GWB excluded or ignored the media at times. They also tried some manipulation or spin but nothing to the degree of this crew.
Davis,
What color is the sky in your world? There is more than one point of view in the one in which I live. All the 'reporters' and publications and sites you site are Liberal.
As is our President. The MSM made such a huge investment of their credibility in promoting his canidancy for POTUS he is TOO BIG TO let FAIL.
The bloom is off the rose. Obama as he asked should be judged by those who surrond him. Van Jones, Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers, Rahm Emmanuel etc, etc, Acorn, SEIU. A bunch of radicals, anachists, and thugs.
You forgot: Socialists, Facists, and Black Panthers. I'll check Hate Radio, Fox News, Palin, and Congressional Republicans for any I missed!
I think the problem is Davis' poor sense of irony
fantastic. glad the WH is a thinking WH. everyone always says the Dems need a backbone. a (wise) funnybone will do in this case.
If we had a media czar, this kind of bad press wouldn't be permitted.
"If we had a media czar, this kind of bad press wouldn't be permitted."
If the WH appointed Glenn Beck media czar, this kind of bad press wouldn't matter.
Marc,
Ever wonder why the White House chose you to be the recipient of this email?
Mickey Kaus is right about you.
How dense is this white house? Didn't they learn that this tactic doesn't work and results in the exact opposite of their intention? They tried it with Limbaugh and Fox News and both of them had tremendous increases in popularity.
I think they've gotten exactly the effect they want--the sort of Limbaugh-Beck looniness is more and more perceived as synonymous with the GOP and conservatism. The small hardcore of people who believe that stuff (e.g., Obama isn't Christian, isn't a U.S. citizen) and make signs to march around at tea parties feel increasingly validated. But a lot of other people who used to proudly call themselves Republicans and conservatives don't anymore. That's why the number of people who will tell pollsters that they call themselves Republicans is at or near all-time lows.
your so called hardcore, aka tiny, group of birthers is hitting at least 30% of the country according to recent polls. Besides, once again, ad infinitum, ad nauseam, here is the real question: If the father is not an American citizen, but the mother is, is the child eligible to be President of the United States? Short answer: No. Now go do your homework.
The judges can't change their soiled robes fast enough in order to answer this simple question.
Do your own homework. Jus sanguinis justifies children born with one parent as a U.S. citizen overseas can, and often do receive U.S. citizenship. Where Obama was born is irrelevant; drop the issue.
What an absolute bunch of hothouse flowers! I've never seen so many pinkboys get their panties in a twist as this administration! Oh, don't you dare do anything but make the kids sing praises to us...or we're gonna get YOU!
Hey, Barry, Gibbsy, Rahmbo...go take a Midol and chill for a while, will you? You're getting tighter than Pelosi's mug...
http://johngalt.podomatic.com/
This must be what passes for intelligent comments in the zanier precincts of the faaaar right wing. Do I detect some homophobia and sexism (and general nastiness and misanthropy) here? I guess losing has driven the wingnuts around the bend. And attitudes like this will keep them in the losing column for the long term.
Ah, and yet another pantywaist (I'm guessing this time with actual panties!) Hey, Flotsam N. Jetsam, that sudden whizzing above your noggin? That's a joke! I know you folks on the left are only used to making them, not having them directed at you.
You really have nothing beyond the orientation and gender cards, oh wise fellow traveler? Sorry, but that's wearing thin. It's almost as bad as when Jimmy "Peanut Envy" Carter claimed any discontent with the Obamessiah HAD to be racism. Of course, that meant, since his approval ratings went from 70% to under 50%, that it took ten months for millions of Americans to realize Barry is, in fact, a black man!
So keep playing those cards until everyone sees what a joke they, and the leftists in this country, have become.
Er, sorry if my post pulled you away from watching "Waiting to Exhale Fried Green Magnolias from the Sisterhood of Yaya Pants"...
http://johngalt.podomatic.com/
Oooh, John, you make me so hot when you talk manly like that...pantywaist...pinkboys...panties in a twist...hothouse flowers...Obamessiah...Peanut Envy...Gibbsy...Rahmbo...Flotsam N. Jetsam...
Did you learn to write so creatively and, well, just so hot, from reading Ayn Rand with one hand?
Call me!
Your little Hothouse Flower
No, I learned to do it because my mind ended up wandering while I shaved your mother's back (I'm hoping an illegal will take over for me, as it's a job Americans don't want to do any more).
And if, in fact, you're not gay, then you seem to be showing evidence of some very homophobic ideas. Shame on you. Why are you so hateful? I'll give you absolution, but you have to listen to an Indigo Girls CD and say ten "Hail Fairies."
Reading Ayn Rand with one hand? I think you need to stop fantasizing about my fountainhead...
http://johngalt.podomatic.com/
9090z is an example of the disgusting scum that has taken over the Democratic left. 2010 is looming lib, and your kind is shrinking back to the 20%-30% of nutcases that are still blaming Bush.
http://www.RightWingInc.com
Anti-Liberal Stuff
You really show your intelligence by using childish lingo like: wingnuts. You left-wing people win one election and you think you own the political system forever? I think you were totally out of power for 14 straight years! And with this bumbling anti-american-hater, the democrats will probably be out of power for another 20 years!You had to cheat with acorn to get your lying communist muslim over the finish line. Americans won't be so easily fooled again!
Just what was won, apparently they haven't seen the approval ratings for Congress. JohnGalt is right, it's old and wearing thin, time for some new material guys, please.
Wingnut is not a polite term but I don't think it has anything to do with owning the system forever.
I think "wing" comes from being right wing
Some of the very things you said in the rest of your post explains the "nut" part
Things like calling Obama a "bumbling anti-american-hater" and a "lying communist muslim"
and saying "You had to cheat with acorn..."
And someone linked to more birther crap
You know...nutty stuff
Still wingnut is not a polite term, though it is considerably more polite and honest then calling Obama a foreigner or Muslin or America-hater or communist or liar.
Thats a little silly don't you think. Most of us who didn't vote for Obama really wanted him to succeed as a president. He did give an inspiring speech that night that gave even the most skeptical of us a little hope. Then on the morning of the 23rd he blew it by hiring lobbyist when he said they were banned. Not a huge deal but a clear sign of things to come. I wanted him to succeed so folks like Sharpton and Jackson can shut their pie-holes on the race issue. It's this administration that is destroying themselves.
Not one promise has he kept. He hasn't done one thing to stablize the economy. He has spent more money in 11 months than all the aministrations of all the previous presidents COMBINED! How do you do that? I know it's not PC to say but I do believe there is an inherant sense of racism that comes from this man. The policies of the administration are showing us daily, dropping charges against black panthers, slaps on the wrist for union members beating up conservatives. Calling white cops "stupid" before he knew the facts.
So many factual errors, where to start?
Well lets start with the 55 promises he has kept, since you say he has kept NONE.
These are all promises he made while on the campaign trail:
-Created a foreclosure prevention fund for homeowners
-Established a credit card bill of rights
-Expanded loan programs for small businesses
-Extended and indexed the 2007 Alternative Minimum Tax patch
-Expanded eligibility for State Children's Health Insurance Fund (SCHIP)
-Expanded funding to train primary care providers and public health practitioners
-Increased funding to expand community based prevention programs
-Assured that the Veterans Administration budget is prepared as 'must-pass' legislation
-Appointed a special adviser to the president on violence against women
-Direct military leaders to end war in Iraq
-Send two additional brigades to Afghanistan (with 30,000+ more due to be sent after his address tonight.)
-Make U.S. military aid to Pakistan conditional on anti-terror efforts
-Give a speech at a major Islamic forum in the first 100 days of his administration
-Grant Americans unrestricted rights to visit family and send money to Cuba
-Restore funding for the Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (Byrne/JAG) program
-Establish an Energy Partnership for the Americas
-Release presidential records
-Require new hires to sign a form affirming their hiring was not due to political affiliation or contributions.
-Increase funding for national parks and forests
-Increase funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund
-Pursue a wildfire management plan
-Remove more brush, small trees and vegetation that fuel wildfires
-Matthew Shepard Act, which expands hate crime law to include sexual orientation and other factors
-Reform mandatory minimum sentences
-Create a White House Office on Urban Policy
-Support increased funding for the NEA
-Add another Space Shuttle flight
-Use the private sector to improve spaceflight
-Partner to enhance the potential of the International Space Station
-Use the International Space Station for fundamental biological and physical research
-Explore whether International Space Station can operate after 2016
-Rebuild schools in New Orleans
And the list actually goes on. ( http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/rulings/promise-kept/ )
Some of them you may or may not agree with, or you may feel are not important to you, but the fact remains he has CERTAINLY kept promises he made, quite a few in fact. There are LOTS more that he is presently working on. It doesn't help that at every turn he is having the rug pulled out from under him the right wing and all their annonymous holds and general obstruction.
As far as how much money he has spent, if he didn't walk into a nation after it collapsed and was on the verge of a great depression, he would not have had to AQUIRE all those funds. 2/3rds of the stimulus has yet to be spent. There is also that little $700 billion that was kept off the books during the Bush administration as "emergency" funding that was never attributed to him.
It's good to see you have all the Fox talking points memorized though....
Keith O. We see it is you who has the talking points memorized. What a hack!
"We"? Have you got a mouse in your pocket?
I reply with facts and links and that is your response?
Laughable....
to Keith:
You failed to address the points GuyC addressed, and have listed window dressing; sounds like you are a penny wise, pound foolish debater.
If you condemned Bush for deficits, where is your outrage at current spending?;
If you condemned lobbying in prior administrations, why have you dodged GuyC observation?;
If you believed Obama's promise to create jobs, where is the outrage that is is now create OR SAVE, not too mention that most of the save is in the public arena, not the private that creates the tax dollars to pay for the public?;
If the President promised Hope and Change, why are conversations such as in this post, even more divisive?
Regardless of affiliation, the POTUSA made statements during his successful campaign, that are not being met by current action. If he did not fully understand the gravity of the situation, it is certainly not Bush's fault. So he ought to man up, and do what is right, and realize that a small margin of victory, is not a mandate for the executive and congressional branches of government to act as they are while a plurality of Americans witness with dismay!
Keith, to be effective with a counter argument, first start by addressing GuyC's main points, then you can finish with your window dressing. Otherwise, your attempt to obfuscate the facts with immaterial data is ineffective.
Whoever wrote this email ought to be reprimanded; not for the content, but for the awful grammar.
Ahh, I thought the list was about The Washington Post but then I read #1....hahaha. Heckuva job, Hiatt!
If they are wrong, then please present the facts...this is not a defense, it is an attempt to marginalize....ask the white house how they are wrong and give us the facts....
I miss having adults in the White House. It makes me cringe to think someone in the White House would chuckle at such a weak and childish attempt to marginalize.
Oh you lefty elitists are always sooooooo brilliant and insightful.
Obama is so angry,destructive and radical, he will insure conservative victories for years to come! And aren't we glad that he is a Democrat!
Democrats own this muslim socialist president!!! Ha Ha Ha ! It serves you right. They deserve each other.
It has become readily apparent that the Robert Gibbs run White House press machine tolerates neither dissent, nor potentially embarassing truths.
To this day, Gibbs acts as a schoolboy, childishly deriding those who ask questions that do not actively further his agenda.
The Obama administration must learn that it cannot deny all inconvenient truths, and cannot paint all those who ask inconvenient questions as partisan racists.
For an administration that ran on a post-partisan platform, Obama and Robert Gibbs' certainly pick some petty battles.
I get the feeling they pick the petty battles because they're having such a tough time with the substantial ones (Afghanistan, health care, the economy, "climate change," etc). It's like any playground bully; you only pick on the kids you believe will back down...
http://johngalt.podomatic.com/
Yeah, cleaning up after the most sociopathic administration in history is a tough job. I'm glad we see eye to eye on that.
Yeah, that's accurate.
'..cleaning up after the most sociopathic administration in history'..... You must have ovaries the size of watermelons to pen an absurdity like that. Sociopathic? How about the sociopathy of trying to silence anyone and everyone that doesn't completely swallow your bilgewater-sodden, turd of an America-hating agenda? The sociopathy of the wholesale rape and pillage of the Constitution of the United States with this wretched 'health care reform'? The sociopathy of generational theft (to borrow from Mr. McCain)from our grandchildren ad nauseam, saddling them with a debt that they will never be able to repay?? The sociopathy of kneeling (and thereby forcing the most generous and freedom loving country in history to kneel)to emperors, communist rulers, heads of states that harbor those that hate us the most??? The sociopathy of spreading America's legs to accept the frenzied thrusts of the global warming fraternity of intellectual buggerers??? My sainted mother, but you have some stones! You and ALL others that think like you are the cancer that will destroy this nation in bitter subjection and subservience to UN/Eurotrash/Wahhabiist thugs unless you are politically decimated, soon and forever, as bitter signposts heralding the truth that 'Progressive Liberalism' is America's auto-immune disease.
Yeah,
Like Bush even tried to suppress dissent. I often wondered why he did not even try to respond to false accusations with facts; well, it appears, he was strong enough not to worry about those who preferred name calling to substantive debate. Now, we are able to see the stark difference in the first eleven months of the current administration. At least there was a free press then, versus the pressure being exhibited now. Sad to think that those who deride the "tea baggers", have such a poor grasp of the term "tea party", and the oppression upon individuals and a free society that were under siege at that point in American history. Oh well...the educated know the old saying about history repeating itself...too bad some of these knuckleheads think they are progressive versus regressive...and the rest of us have to be the water.,..
[[How about the sociopathy of trying to silence anyone and everyone that doesn't completely swallow your bilgewater-sodden, turd of an America-hating agenda?]]
Oh, you mean, like having protesters kept away from your campaign rallies ... or even arrested? Having your White House spokesman tell citizens they need to "watch what you say"?
Remind me -- who did that, again? Oh, yeah ... Bush the Lesser.
Sorry, son, but I've been a Red State Republican for almost 32 years and even I don't buy your crap. Obama called out Fox for being a propaganda outfit. He didn't say they shouldn't say what they say, he just said no one should consider it journalism. There's a difference.
As for sociopathy, I'd say torturing people -- and, in particular, torturing someone to get a false confession of complicity in terrorism in order to justify an otherwise illegal military invasion -- is the epitome of sociopathic behavior. If the jackboot fits, son, your boy Bush needs to wear it and you need to practice your stiff-arm salutes.
Come on! It's an inside post of a joke, not an attack on Politico.
What's telling is the White House, besides GQ, actually reads Politico. For awhile I thought they only read Huffington and Daily Kos. Heck even Pravda has published scathing articles critical if Obama's fiscal policies and left wing radicalism. Political's just democratic pablum. No substance, and easy for hacks with a short attention span to digest.
"...and has been known to try and agenda-set.."
To try AND agenda set? This is a professional user of the English language?
"It's not just Fox News that's become subject of White House derision"
Dude, since when does "White House Staffers" somehow slip over to having anything to do with "The White House"?
Your opening line is a dishonest presentation of the article's matter. So, I'm, what, supposed to want to read you again after this?
I thought that dissent was the highest form of patriotism. I remember hearing it as recently as in 2008. Not any more? I wonder whatever has happened? What, what, what, really ...
Correct! You remember Hillary shrieking at the top of her lungs about protesting. And then San Fran Nan said that she was "a fan of disruptors". And then Obama himself stated that he likes the differing points of view from conservatives. But They don't like it when the heat is on. They steal a play right out of Sol Alinsky's handbook. Identify, personalize and attack.
http://www.RightWingInc.com
Anti Obama Bumper Stickers
Right on.
Libs can dish is out, but can't take it.
I almost stoked out when Valerie Jarret goes on her "speaking truth to power" jab. Sorry, Val you are the power and need to toughen up.
Wimps
Why is a "news" organization participating in "dissent"? That's not their job, son.
When the government's torturing innocent people and raping the Constitution, it is.
I have to admit, I lol'd at #6. And while I'm quite aware it was a snarky inside joke, I'm sensing a pattern of not just disdain, but actual, visceral hatred of any and all entities that don't parrot the administration's agenda. Sure Politico sometimes ventures into tabloid journalism, but something tells me we won't be seeing one of these aimed at, say, HuffPost or Kos. At least Bush more or less ignored everyone equally--these guys are reaching Nixonian levels of petty vindictiveness.
Not that anyone familiar with "the Chicago way" or or the insane statists currently in charge of the Democratic party should be at all surprised...
All seven points are true. If Politico doesn't like it, they should stop posting articles based on opinion, inaccurate predictions, and anonymous sources.
The WH responses' greatest sin is its mind-numbing lameness on the level of a third-grader arguing in the schoolyard.
Politico's greatest sin is not publishing this good article 15 months ago, but instead being fixated back then on the Obama campaign's effectiveness - an effectiveness that was made possible by the media's schoolgirl-like fixation itself.
The only good in this is that the Politico article was #1 on Yahoo's Most Popular News list. There is a market for the truth, finally. Better late than never, presumably.
Let me see if I got this right...POLITICO bad...MSNBC good, yeah right. Face it folks...Obama is Jimmy Carter's second term. Jaunary 20, 2011---end of an error.
All of this petty carping from the sidelines will fall silent when Barack steps up to the podium to receive the Heisman Trophy.
FTW.
November 30th, 2009 3:44 AM
An Open Letter to President Obama from Michael Moore
Dear President Obama,
Do you really want to be the new "war president"? If you go to West Point tomorrow night (Tuesday, 8pm) and announce that you are increasing, rather than withdrawing, the troops in Afghanistan, you are the new war president. Pure and simple. And with that you will do the worst possible thing you could do -- destroy the hopes and dreams so many millions have placed in you. With just one speech tomorrow night you will turn a multitude of young people who were the backbone of your campaign into disillusioned cynics. You will teach them what they've always heard is true -- that all politicians are alike. I simply can't believe you're about to do what they say you are going to do. Please say it isn't so.
It is not your job to do what the generals tell you to do. We are a civilian-run government. WE tell the Joint Chiefs what to do, not the other way around. That's the way General Washington insisted it must be. That's what President Truman told General MacArthur when MacArthur wanted to invade China. "You're fired!," said Truman, and that was that. And you should have fired Gen. McChrystal when he went to the press to preempt you, telling the press what YOU had to do. Let me be blunt: We love our kids in the armed services, but we f*#&in' hate these generals, from Westmoreland in Vietnam to, yes, even Colin Powell for lying to the UN with his made-up drawings of WMD (he has since sought redemption).
So now you feel backed into a corner. 30 years ago this past Thursday (Thanksgiving) the Soviet generals had a cool idea -- "Let's invade Afghanistan!" Well, that turned out to be the final nail in the USSR coffin.
There's a reason they don't call Afghanistan the "Garden State" (though they probably should, seeing how the corrupt President Karzai, whom we back, has his brother in the heroin trade raising poppies). Afghanistan's nickname is the "Graveyard of Empires." If you don't believe it, give the British a call. I'd have you call Genghis Khan but I lost his number. I do have Gorbachev's number though. It's + 41 22 789 1662. I'm sure he could give you an earful about the historic blunder you're about to commit.
With our economic collapse still in full swing and our precious young men and women being sacrificed on the altar of arrogance and greed, the breakdown of this great civilization we call America will head, full throttle, into oblivion if you become the "war president." Empires never think the end is near, until the end is here. Empires think that more evil will force the heathens to toe the line -- and yet it never works. The heathens usually tear them to shreds.
Choose carefully, President Obama. You of all people know that it doesn't have to be this way. You still have a few hours to listen to your heart, and your own clear thinking. You know that nothing good can come from sending more troops halfway around the world to a place neither you nor they understand, to achieve an objective that neither you nor they understand, in a country that does not want us there. You can feel it in your bones.
I know you know that there are LESS than a hundred al-Qaeda left in Afghanistan! A hundred thousand troops trying to crush a hundred guys living in caves? Are you serious? Have you drunk Bush's Kool-Aid? I refuse to believe it.
Your potential decision to expand the war (while saying that you're doing it so you can "end the war") will do more to set your legacy in stone than any of the great things you've said and done in your first year. One more throwing a bone from you to the Republicans and the coalition of the hopeful and the hopeless may be gone -- and this nation will be back in the hands of the haters quicker than you can shout "tea bag!"
Choose carefully, Mr. President. Your corporate backers are going to abandon you as soon as it is clear you are a one-term president and that the nation will be safely back in the hands of the usual idiots who do their bidding. That could be Wednesday morning.
We the people still love you. We the people still have a sliver of hope. But we the people can't take it anymore. We can't take your caving in, over and over, when we elected you by a big, wide margin of millions to get in there and get the job done. What part of "landslide victory" don't you understand?
Don't be deceived into thinking that sending a few more troops into Afghanistan will make a difference, or earn you the respect of the haters. They will not stop until this country is torn asunder and every last dollar is extracted from the poor and soon-to-be poor. You could send a million troops over there and the crazy Right still wouldn't be happy. You would still be the victim of their incessant venom on hate radio and television because no matter what you do, you can't change the one thing about yourself that sends them over the edge.
The haters were not the ones who elected you, and they can't be won over by abandoning the rest of us.
President Obama, it's time to come home. Ask your neighbors in Chicago and the parents of the young men and women doing the fighting and dying if they want more billions and more troops sent to Afghanistan. Do you think they will say, "No, we don't need health care, we don't need jobs, we don't need homes. You go on ahead, Mr. President, and send our wealth and our sons and daughters overseas, 'cause we don't need them, either."
What would Martin Luther King, Jr. do? What would your grandmother do? Not send more poor people to kill other poor people who pose no threat to them, that's what they'd do. Not spend billions and trillions to wage war while American children are sleeping on the streets and standing in bread lines.
All of us that voted and prayed for you and cried the night of your victory have endured an Orwellian hell of eight years of crimes committed in our name: torture, rendition, suspension of the bill of rights, invading nations who had not attacked us, blowing up neighborhoods that Saddam "might" be in (but never was), slaughtering wedding parties in Afghanistan. We watched as hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians were slaughtered and tens of thousands of our brave young men and women were killed, maimed, or endured mental anguish -- the full terror of which we scarcely know.
When we elected you we didn't expect miracles. We didn't even expect much change. But we expected some. We thought you would stop the madness. Stop the killing. Stop the insane idea that men with guns can reorganize a nation that doesn't even function as a nation and never, ever has.
Stop, stop, stop! For the sake of the lives of young Americans and Afghan civilians, stop. For the sake of your presidency, hope, and the future of our nation, stop. For God's sake, stop.
Tonight we still have hope.
Tomorrow, we shall see. The ball is in your court. You DON'T have to do this. You can be a profile in courage. You can be your mother's son.
We're counting on you.
Yours,
Michael Moore
MMFlint@aol.com
MichaelMoore.com
P.S. There's still time to have your voice heard. Call the White House at 202-456-1111 or email the President.
Just think! If we ALL had been informed BEFORE this man was elected as the most powerful person in the world we would NOT be waking up to the daily mess he is continuing to make - how is this hope and change working now! MMM-MMM-MMM
its odd--
for being the recipient of the most favorable (some would say fawning) media coverage since perhaps Kennedy, the Obama Whitehouse strikes me as pretty thin skinned.
I thought the Politico piece was pretty innocuous and its surprising that the Whitehouse would react to it. Its the kind of thing that if ignored, goes away quickly. All they have done now is ensure that the Politico piece gets emailed repeatedly.
what's even funnier is that list describes Huffingtonpost.com to a T!!!
Rather than rise above the discourse they disagree with, or are uncomfortable with, this immature White House continues to use school yard tactics. It reminds me of: "Oh Yeah? Well, Your mother's so fat...." or, "I'm rubber, you're glue, everything you say bounces off me and sticks to you!" This White House disgusts me! Keep up the good work, Politico, I love ya!
OMG, and here all this time I thought Politico was left wing because they are to soft on the administration, and liberal congress. Maybe it is it like the gore of a horrific murder scene, the news outlets will not give all the carnage done as it would create nightmares in some of their followers, I guess they have to treat what this administration does in the same manner.
These were funny. It shows at least that someone in the White House has a sense of humor. I find it absolutely amazing that so many try to box this president in as weak on this or weak on that. The fact is he continues to embarrass them with his successes. His agenda will pass, the democrats will gain more seats in 2010 and he will be re-elected in 2012. All the rest sells advertisement but nothing else. His approach gets results. Those in our 24 hour media channels are nothing but tabloid journalists that do not have the skills required to see the depth of any story. But this is what has happened to Americans in general -- all bluster and no depth.
Hey James Briggs, go back to ACORN.
This is the worst administration I have seen in my 50 years.
Go back to pushing your gloabal warming hoax and kissing Al Gore's fat behind.
Go back to the rest of the world and keep kissing everyone elses behind too.
Go back to anywhere but near me and keep your gd hands off our wallets.
I have never had as little faith as I do now in our government. What a disaster.
Hey ken mac,
Go back to watching Fox and repeating their talking points. You honestly think that this administration is worse than the previous? You are delusional and in complete denial.
ACORN = $53 million over the last 15 years
Haliburton = approx $200 BILLION in 7 years of no bid contracts that went uncompleted.
Go back to your impotent rage at the wrong administration. You were asleep for the last 8 years while the country fell apart around you and now you wake up and throw the blame at the guy sitting in office?
Next thing you know the right wingers will be saying 9/11 never happened on Bushes watch. Oh wait, Dana Perino and Sean Hannity already did that....
Uh, Keith O (is that the orgasm you get from watching Olbermann every night?), I can't speak for anyone else, but I personally didn't support the last administration either, so is it OK for ME to criticize the incompetents and fellow travelers in the current administration? Why, I guess it IS!
I DO blame the guy sitting in office for the not only useless, but downright DESTRUCTIVE stimulus plan (hey, who cares what our grandkids have to deal with, eh?).
I DO blame the guy sitting in office for the proposed health care scam (but hey, who cares how many Americans don't want it? What do they know when compared to an erudite man like the Obamessiah?).
I do blame the guy sitting in office for dithering about Afghanistan (I guess he's too busy having his Hollywood buddies over for shindigs, or maybe just watching "baby daddy" tests on Maury.
Yeah, I have plenty of antipathy for the last guy in office, too (especially late in his term), but no, that doesn't excuse what the current Commander-in-Thief is doing. Nice try, but that dog won't hunt anymore either...
http://johngalt.podomatic.com/
You blame the guy the guy sitting in office for dithering about Afghanistan? Come on now, bush and cheney have left office, no use to go on blamimg them.
Yes I know it is upsetting that General McKiernan's request for 30,000 more troops was ignored by the bush administrations through 2008 but at least President Obama responded quickly once he got into office and sent 21,000 more troops + support staff.
I wouldn't say what bush and cheney did was dither, it was more than they just ignored the request. On the other hand President Obama did anything but ignore any request.
Wait, you weren't saying it was Obama that dithered were you? No, that would have been silly.Having regular meetings where many options were discussed, the consequences of them explored, much research done...no one would call that dithering.
Of course if you were you'll have to come up with a word to describe the lack of response for months on end that the previous administration had.
And that word? "Inconsequential"...at least to the question at hand. As I said, I was not a Bush supporter either, so trite attempts at "it's Bush's fault" or "he did it first," while charming in a Gump or Biden-like manner, are really a dead end.
Yes, dithering. He went into office having campaigned on the promise that he would deal with it IMMEDIATELY, then waiting for most of his first year. And when he did act, it was too little and far too late, in my opinion (and truth be told, our troops will almost certainly NOT be going anywhere in 18 months).
So the fact that I didn't agree with the way the last administration handled it EITHER is rather a moot point. It was cute, though, sort of on the level of a chihuahua in a sweater...
http://johngalt.podomatic.com/
All 7 of the items in theoriginal memo look spot on to me. Too many members of the press whine whenever the press is criticized. What, they now have some form of 21st century lese majeste?
Elect a pussy president, expect a pussy response. Remember, only 1146 more days of this A$$hat until he joins the ranks of the disgraced ensconced with Jimmy Carter in the halls of failure. God but you liberals disgust me.
They really HATE any press that's not totally subservient to them.
Eventually we're going to see this ad:
Live at Cobo Hall! The WHWF (White House Wrestling Federation) brings you...Press-lemania '09!
See Ba-Rock Obama and his Teleprompter taking on the Fighting Fox Crew!
See Van "The Czar" Jones take on Glenn Beck in a steel cage (if Jones loses he has to leave his job!)
See Janet Napolitano take on Lou Dobbs in a Mexican Death Match!
Tickets are $30 in advance, $50 at the box office, and FREE for Mary Landrieu!
http://johngalt.podomatic.com/
So how was the press with Bush?
With Bush? They were downright confrontational, which is not necessarily a bad thing. With Obama? 90% of them ought to just end the mystery, get on their knees, and give him the Lewinsky they so badly want...
http://johngalt.podomatic.com/
Downright confrontational? When was that?
Those who are so upset at the political response are ignoring the fact that Politico was nakedly disseminating rightwing talking points under the guise of "criticism" and "journalism". So much so that the response took the form of straight up mockery.
Hi Marc,
Are you surprised? It's been a long time since I have appeared on any web site in response to any article.
I need to ask you if you are really surprised at the malicious intent always spewing from the Obama White House?
Regardless of the topic, if it doesn't suit the Obama way of thinking they attack..from 'folks' who protest against higher taxes to world leaders who point out, in my view correctly, that his policy towards Iran is weak. Attack..call them racists, call them war mongers, call them anything that deflects the truth.
Are you aware his aunt is still living in Boston in HUD housing illegally? Just a point to ponder..if it suits Obama-its OK, regardless of the consequences to the rest of the community-local or otherwise. It is and always has been his operating plan. Why would Politico be spared from the attack?
Why do you have to crank up the hyperbole on everything? They saw the article and laughed at it. Then put out an email mocking it. THAT'S ALL.
nickname72 I didn't know sane people were allowed to post on this thread. I hope you don't get in trouble
But seriously, what a relief to see your comment. Thanks.
Eventually the White House will start turning on CNN & others when they start criticizing Obama. It's just a matter of time. This is the Chicago style of politics as they are well known for when it comes to their 'enemies list'.
Thank for the Talking Point.
It should be apparent by now that the Republican Noise Machine's techniques that led to Harris' POLITICO piece on "7 Things" exhibiting contradictory ideas is nothing new and is really standard operating procedure. The idea is to cook up ideas, words and memes in the partisan back room, such as Frank Lutz' Office of NastyGrams, and push them out fast and furiously through the various media organs of talk radio, Limbaugh, FOX, Weekly Std, etc. Repeat, lather, repeat and see what sticks within the culture; it doesn't matter that there is no coherence to the ideas; not all will stick anyway. The point is to hammer the crap out of the ones that stick for a news cycle or two until they peter out or reality intervenes. It's an aggressive form of getting constantly nibbled by ducks with bloody, sharp teeth. It's a process not a principle. It worked to get Clinton in a Constitutional crisis, Bush (sort of) elected in 2000, and on and on during the Bush/Cheny Admin. to the present anti-Obama scourge. Harris is simply playing his partisan role in a big machine of agitprop and disinformation. One more cog posing as an honest man.
Wow. That's a lot of words to say basically nothing. Hope you didn't buy 'em by the pound...
http://johngalt.podomatic.com/
Dude, come back strong or don't bother.
I'm not your "dude," Spicoli...you might want to check at the bath house...and believe me, the likes of your ilk are no bother (well, you are, but only in the way of any gnat...).
http://johngalt.podomatic.com/
Exactly right! Couldn't have said it better. The modern day Republican Party from Nixon thru Reagan, Bush, and Bush, along with their control of talk radio and having their own television network to deceminate their visious attacks, smears and talking points is going to end democracy as we know it in this country.
They have no respect for facts or the truth. NONE! It's all about power. And what they have done to this country the past 30 years... starting with Reagan... would confine them to the dustbin of history in any other civilized country.
But their vicious propaganda machine and media manipulation along with a do or say anything approach to governing is ruining this country. And the corporate media's complicity in pushing right-wing talking points and forgetting what real journalism is, further destroys what this country was.
Anyone old enough to see what this country was pre-Reagan can't help but see how disastrous the radical right has been for our country.
OK Mr. Hand
Nor am I "Mr. Hand." That's what you call your onanistic pal...
http://johngalt.podomatic.com/
I remember when President Bush was no longer President and all my Dem friends said "Adults were going to be in charge."
When was that going to happen again? Anytime soon? Can I get an ETA on adults being in charge of anything in D.C.?
Oh, and when are the Dems in Congress going to "drain the swamp of corruption" as promised in 2006? I guess making the corruption worse made it easier to see and find, but when does the draining start?
If the White House were so interested in presenting their unprecedented transparency and correcting any missinformation, why don't they simply present their 'truths' in the comments section of Politico? I enjoy educated debate and would prefer to be enlightened with verifable information so that I can form my own (Libertarian biased) point of view.
I LOVE YOU... John Gault!
>^!^
....er... JohnGalt!
1,000 pardons for misspelling your name!
>^!^
a friend.
I thought the mantra "sticks and stone may break my .............." was used by the under five year old set.
Contrary to popular belief, absolutes in life do exist, beware of teachers who teach otherwise, they might have an Agenda they are pushing to make them more Powerful, Wealthy or both!!!!It is nearing the time that the honest folk need to be Concentrated to camps, it is Apparant the unConstituted (Criminals) are in charge, they have no laws they abide by, other than those they can conjure up, to restrict you, the common sheepeople!!!!!!!!!!!
dear koolaid drinker aka rover27. Let's get it all straight. The republicrats either want to give all control to big business or to the government. They want we the people to pay for all of their STUPID ideas and be their good little house slaves(get my drift?) and keep our mouths shut. What needs to happen is for the people to join and completely take over the two political parties, throw the criminals who claim to be public servants into prison, and restore this nation to the REPUBLIC it is supposed to be.
There is a direct correlation between high unemployment and the need for "government" healthcare, Don't look for any improvement in unemployment until owe-bamma's health care bill is passed.
The issue is actually not the coverage. The issue is that the administration is pursuing a radical agenda and counting on a loyal press corps to cover for them and help hide what they are doing until it is irrevocable. Debauching the dollar, massively increasing the percent of GDP allocated to government beyond all historical precedent, allowing international vampires to feed off our productivity through the Copenhagen treaty, permanently slowing the national growth rate and reducing future flexibility by massively expanding the debt, nationalizing our largest banks (Citi, BOA) and manufacturers (GM, Chrysler), seeking to set a process in motion that will inevitably nationalize the 15% of the economy in the healthcare sector and reduce doctors, nurses and techs to the same form of electoral slavery to and dependency on the Democratic party as teachers and postal workers, turning a recovering recession into sustained stagnation and eventual stagflation through raising taxes and profligate spending, providing grant support to feed a demonstrably false anthropogenic global warming scare designed to create a state of fear in the population justifying further expansion of government and stupidly destructive Cap and Trade taxes - THESE ARE THE ISSUES THEY HATE TO SEE SURFACED
I am just amazed at those who are upset about America's political discourse. Good grief - the hate speech when Bush was President was so more mean-spirited, hate-filled and ignorant - and where were you all then. Listen to leftie Chris Matthews - now West Point is the enemy camp. Liberals, progressive, socialists - whatever you call them -- they are the do as I say, not as I do, crowd.
Obama is utterly distracted by the pomp and circumstance surrounding his office. Obama intentionally feeds into these noises, leaving him no time left over to carry out his presidential duties. Obama knows he is incapable of doing the job of president. He simply doesn't want to be a witness to his own blundering failure. And so he distracts himself. Meanwhile, Iran works to acquire nuclear weapons, the means to deliver them, and to fulfill on its pledge to preemptively strike Israel, Europe, and the US with its nuclear weapons.
The GOP had their Nixon, now the Dems have their Nixon.
the kenyan born muslim usurper illegally occupying the WHITE house, is a fraud that i will never obey. whatever it makes into law, will be ignored by me and all my 50,000 twitter followers. it can keep having speeches on tv, to no avail. it has proven itself to be a LIAR, a FRAUD, and a TERRORIST.
i still cant understand why anyone would refer to it as the 'president". it is no presidet of mine as a president has to be born in the USA and suppprt the AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE.
what is your next question?
CS
(common sense)
dansvan, the unemployment rate started creeping up in '07 because the housing and CRE bubbles were beginning to burst, not because of the marginal income-tax rates. Moreover, we created a lot more jobs under the (higher) marginal rates of Clinton than we did under Bush -- again because of a bubble (led by Internet stocks), not because of the tax rates.
And, finally, consider all the jobs created under Eisenhower, when the top marginal rate exceeded 80%.
So, nope, sorry, but the facts don't comport with your fantasy. But thanks for playing.
"7. More obsessed with personality than policy"
I told you all last year this guy wasn't qualified.
I mean he may be clean and articulate -- even good looking. In fact, he may be (and is) many things other than qualified. As the boss himself put it to Rick Warren last year, the really big, tough decisions are "above [his] pay grade."
You gonna tell me voters cast a ballot for this guy's policies over his personality?
And speaking of casting, the 2008 election results cast a whole new light on #7 of the WH staffers' list, don't they?
You ain't seen nuthin', yet.
Mark my words: Gird your loins.