Top Leaderboard, Site wide
September 16, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Newsletter

sign up to get updates






On the Run


Truthdig Bazaar
The Bases of Empire

The Bases of Empire

By Catherine Lutz
$17.28

more items

 
Report

Obama’s Presidency Isn’t Too Big to Fail

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Sep 15, 2009
Obama
AP / Charles Dharapak

President Barack Obama addresses the AFL-CIO convention on Tuesday at the David L. Lawrence Convention Center in Pittsburgh.

By Robert Scheer

A president has only so much capital to expend, both in tax dollars and public tolerance, and Barack Obama is dangerously overdrawn. He has tried to have it all on three fronts, and his administration is in serious danger of going bankrupt. He has blundered into a deepening quagmire in Afghanistan, has continued the Bush policy of buying off Wall Street hustlers instead of confronting them and is now on the cusp of bargaining away the so-called public option, the reform component of his health care program. 

Those are not happy sentences to write for one who is still on the e-mail list of campaign supporters urged to back the president in the face of attacks that are stupidly small-minded. But to remain silent about his errors, just because most of his critics are so vile, is hardly an example of constructive concern for him or the country.

Yes, Obama was presented with a series of crises not of his making but for which he is now being held accountable. He is not a “socialist” who grew the federal budget to astronomical proportions. That is the legacy of George W. Bush, who raised the military budget to its highest level since World War II despite the end of the Cold War and the lack of a formidable military opponent— a legacy of debt compounded by Bush’s decision to first ignore the banking meltdown and then to engage in a welfare-for-Wall-Street bailout. And it was Bush who gave the pharmaceutical companies the gift of a very expensive government subsidy for seniors’ drugs.

But what is nerve-racking about Obama is that even though he campaigned against Bush’s follies he has now embraced them. He hasn’t yet managed to significantly reduce the U.S. obligation in Iraq and has committed to making a potentially costlier error by ratcheting up America’s “nation-building” role in Afghanistan. 

Just as he was burdened with the Afghanistan situation, Obama was saddled with a banking crisis he didn’t cause, and the worst that can be said of his attempted solutions to the financial mess is that they were inherited from Bush Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson. But Obama, who raised questions before his election about the propriety of a plan that would rescue the banks but ignore the plight of ordinary folks, has adopted that very approach as president. He elevated Lawrence Summers and Timothy Geithner, the two Democrats most closely aligned with Paulson’s policy, to top positions in his government. 

Advertisement

Square, Site wide
Obama’s proposed new regulations, while containing some kind words about better informing consumers, do not portend any breakup of the “too big to fail companies” whose problems were permitted to fester by previous deregulatory measures. His answer is to increase the regulatory capacities of the Federal Reserve, which failed to use its already existing and considerable powers to avoid the debacle.

The promise is that next time the Fed will behave better. As Obama put it Monday, “So our plan would put the cost of a firm’s failures on those who own its stock and loaned it money. And if taxpayers ever had to step in again to prevent a second Great Depression, the financial industry will have to pay the taxpayer back every cent.”

Why not now? And why has he accepted the Wall Street line that all this represents a “collective failure,” as if the con men and the conned had equal responsibility? According to Obama, “It was a failure of responsibility that led homebuyers and derivative traders alike to take reckless risks that they couldn’t afford to take. It was a collective failure of responsibility in Washington, on Wall Street, and across America that led to the near-collapse of our financial system one year ago.”

Hogwash. The chicanery of the financial system, securitizing highly suspect mortgages, was codified into laws that made the hustle legal. 

That insistence on equating the swindled with the swindlers is also what is wrong with the evolving health care reform plan. The assumption from the beginning, when Obama reached out to insurance companies to come up with a deal, was that they had the interest of their customers at heart. They don’t, and it is the purpose of government regulation in the area of health as well as banking to even the scales between the powerful corporations and the consumers from whom they profit. That is the purpose of a public option worth its name.

Without a government program as a check on medical costs, Obama will end up with a variant of the Massachusetts program, one that forces consumers to sign up with private insurers and costs 33 percent more than the national average. He will have furthered the Bush legacy of cultivating an ever more expensive big government without improving how the people are served. 

Click here to check out Robert Scheer’s book,
“The Great American Stickup: How Reagan Republicans and Clinton Democrats Enriched Wall Street While Mugging Main Street.”


Keep up with Robert Scheer’s latest columns, interviews, tour dates and more at www.truthdig.com/robert_scheer.



Get truth delivered to
your inbox every week.

Previous item: Let Us Not Become the Evil We Deplore

Next item: Joe Wilson’s Confederate Cronies



New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By Ray Duray, September 20, 2009 at 9:42 am Link to this comment

archivesDave,

Re: “When Hartmann had (Hagger) on about two yrs ago, Hagger chewed him up and Thom hasn’t had him back again so far as I know.”

That interview was timed for the release of “The Secret Founding of America”. http://bit.ly/3Puskm

We might expect that with Hagger’s newest book just released that Hartmann will have him back.

Report this

By archivesDave, September 20, 2009 at 9:07 am Link to this comment

Ray,
I didn’t mean I was hooked on Hartmann: Sort of agree with u there! 
When Hartmann had him on about two yrs ago, Hagger chewed him up and Thom hasn’t had him back again so far as I know.
On the other hand, I haven’t joined any ‘choir’ to be
preached to by anyone I generally agree with. Instead, I choose to listen to (and read), those whom I may vehemently disagree with, even myself!

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, September 20, 2009 at 8:48 am Link to this comment

Folktruther:
‘Ray, consider.  If the White House was complicit in the 9/11-anthrax homicide to initiate the War on Terrorism, and it is being covered up by other American leaders, than it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that we are being ruled by homicidal political psychopaths.’

You don’t need a 9/11 conspiracy to see that.

But now that this discussion has been taken over by the secret police, I’m out of it.  I hope they don’t notice I’ve discovered their secret and send someone to rub me out.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 20, 2009 at 8:36 am Link to this comment

Birthers, 911, real and illegal aliens, lets not forget the grassy knoll,  these agendas and many others shoved into any discourse provides and stokes the most important never ending circle of imbecilic devis8ivness. If one really expects reality to expose truth, one only need wait for blind belief to take over the conversaton, for belief does not need facts.

Report this

By Ray Duray, September 20, 2009 at 8:29 am Link to this comment

archivesDave,

Re: “I first heard him on Thom Hartmann and have been hooked ever since.”

Thom Hartmann’s radio program reminds me of the satirical title of a CBC comedy show, “The Hour Has 22 Minutes”. http://www.cbc.ca/22minutes/

I would absolutely love Thom Hartmann if he had the same format as WHYY’s Terry Gross. Hartmann is a wonderful fella, but the show is ruined for me by the constant commercial interruptions. I feel pretty much the same way about Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow.

The American commercial model for TV and radio is, simply stated, infuriatingly maddeningly annoying.

Report this

By archivesDave, September 20, 2009 at 8:16 am Link to this comment

Ray,
His name: Dr Nicholas Hagger.  He’s written around 28 books on history, philosophy, and poetry.
You are assuming WAY too much and jumping to erroneous
conclusions about him.  NWO? Yes but his comprehensive
secular knowledge of history catapults him WAY beyond that.  One of his last books is The Syndicate and u can order it new or used very cheaply from addall.com or bookfinder.com.  Quite a poet & philosopher too!
I first heard him on Thom Hartmann and have been hooked
ever since.

Report this

By Ray Duray, September 20, 2009 at 8:02 am Link to this comment

drbhelthi,

You write: “Then, there are the several hundred in four different U.S. agencies who are paid to engage in commentaries such as this one. They are tasked with refuting all challenges to the official 9/11 report.”

Of this I would not doubt. However, I’m wondering if you have any specific instances, URLs or exposés of this deliberate psychological warfare against its own population being waged by the Federal government.

There is no doubt that COINTELPRO type operations are ongoing today. Unfortunately, there also appears to be no actionable proof of this either.

Report this

By Ray Duray, September 20, 2009 at 7:57 am Link to this comment

archivesDave,

[Sorry about the premature extravasation below…]

You inquire: “Would still like to know if either of you have read any of Nicholas Hagger’s research/writings?”

I’ve toured his website, read his C.V. His stuff isn’t readily available to us here in Central Oregon. There’s plenty of U.S. writers covering the same ground and I’m familiar with the NWO discussion.

***
Interestingly, there is a Nicky Hager [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicky_Hager ] in New Zealand whom I have taken the time to read regarding the U.S. MIC’s reach into the Southern Hemisphere with its intrusive spying apparatus. Some of this Mr. Hager’s work is available online and is quite well-researched and informative.

Report this

By Ray Duray, September 20, 2009 at 7:47 am Link to this comment

folktruther,

You wrote: “(then) it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that we are being ruled by homicidal political psychopaths.”

Absolutely we are. 

***
You wrote: “It takes a while for people to emotionally accept this.”

Look, America is a nation of emotionally and intellectually stunted narcissi and know nothing nativists. The percentage of the population capable of maintaining a self-ruled democracy is vanishingly small. Thus the fact that this nation is now in possession of a government of the corporations, by the corporations and for the corporations. Halliburton and Blackwater are corporations. You do the math.

Looked at with a completely exasperated and jaudiced eye, one comes to realize that the American public are too immature to even accept the plain truth that evolution is real. You have a significant percentage of the population who believe the Universe is 6,000 years old. This is a pathetic population who will never chose to see reality.

Report this

By truedigger3, September 20, 2009 at 6:46 am Link to this comment

By Anarcissie, September 19 at 6:08 pm #

Excellent point and analysis.
I agree with you 100%.
Although in some events in history, some or many of the facts are hidden by official explanations, that idea that the WTC was wired by explosives is definitely pure nonsense and hog-wash.
As someone wrote, why you need explosives if there are planes hitting the buildings and setting them on fire producing fierce heat and fire storms.

Report this
drbhelthi's avatar

By drbhelthi, September 19, 2009 at 11:59 pm Link to this comment

Many exceedingly naieve´ Americans continue to believe the official report of the 9/11 event. Then, there are the several hundred in four different U.S. agencies who are paid to engage in commentaries such as this one. They are tasked with refuting all challenges to the official 9/11 report. Some of these puppet-pimp-types are supplied with lists of subject-heading responses from which to choose. All are encouraged to engage similarly in their private-time-use of the internet. Who is their master ?  dr.b_helthi

Report this

By archivesDave, September 19, 2009 at 9:49 pm Link to this comment

Ray and Glider:
Would still like to know if either of you have read any of Nicholas Hagger’s research/writings?
It certainly answers a lot of your your questions!

Report this

By Folktruther, September 19, 2009 at 9:41 pm Link to this comment

Ray, consider.  If the White House was complicit in the 9/11-anthrax homicide to initiate the War on Terrorism, and it is being covered up by other American leaders, than it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that we are being ruled by homicidal political psychopaths.

Tens of millions of Americans do believe the former part but are reluctant to accept the latter.  but what would you call a power structure that murders thousands of its own people for public relations purposes.

It takes a while for people to emotionally accept this.

Report this

By Ray Duray, September 19, 2009 at 8:56 pm Link to this comment

Martha,

Another excellent documentary to add to your collection is the Italian production, “Zero”:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2296490368603788739#

Report this

By Ray Duray, September 19, 2009 at 7:07 pm Link to this comment

glider,

Re: “Your right I have not intensively researched this conspiracy theory… nor do I intend to waste my time doing so.  Since you have, please tell us what specifically is the extraordinary evidence you have that 9-11 was an inside job?”

All I have is evidence of your unwillingness to do the work that would open your eyes.

Let me put it this way. If you examine the main support cable on a suspension bridge you’ll find that is consists of hundreds of strands of steel. The 9/11 Truth story is like that main cable with hundreds of strands. Perhaps we find that some part of the explanation is made clear by our government and we say that one or a dozen of the strands of the story are broken. But still there are hundreds of questions that should have been resolved and still haven’t been eight years on from the attack. It’s these hundreds of strands to the story that has more and more people skeptical of the official explanation of what happened on 9/11. As a lawyer might say, the preponderence of the evidence leads inexorably to the conclusion of a massive government cover-up of whatever the truth happens to be.

For those who been concerned enough pay attention to the hundreds of issues that are the still unanswered regarding 9/11 we can see that a huge degree of deceit has gone into the cover-up. Recall that with the Watergate break-in that brought down a Presidency it wasn’t the crime that got Nixon in trouble, it was the cover-up. Those with the intellectual capacity and the stamina for the battle come away realizing that most of the hundreds of legitimate questions raised about 9/11 have never been honestly answered by our government. You won’t read this, I’m sure, but perhaps there is a lurker who is honestly concerned enough about her citizenship responsibilities to consider this erudite denunciation of the 9/11 Commission and its failed final report:

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/10/0080234

<SNIP>

Whitewash as public service:
How The 9/11 Commission Report defrauds the nation

By Benjamin DeMott

No book in memory has stirred greater anticipatory frenzy than The 9/11 Commission Report… The Commission, in sum, offers peace through exculpation, evasion, and entertainment—and in doing so dangerously reenergizes a national relish for fantasy… “In all the general concerns,” James Fenimore Cooper wrote long ago, in 1838, “the publick has a right to be treated with candor. Without this manly and republican quality . . . [American] institutions are converted into stupendous fraud.” Faced with The 9/11 Commission Report, this country’s true need now is to shout Shame!

***
Ray again: It is a shame that so few Americans are willing to accept the burden of citizenship.

Report this

By glider, September 19, 2009 at 6:01 pm Link to this comment

The statement “extraordinary theories require extraordinary proofs” applies to proving positives.

At the same time it is easy to construct a theory that is difficult to disprove.  I can not prove that my neighboor is not actually eating the body and drinking the blood of Christ every Sunday but there is no extraordinary proof evidence to support his contention.  Likewise no scientist can prove that the tooth fairy does not exist.

Regarding your 50 questions most of them I have read would not seem to have any bearing on the issue of whether 9-11 was an inside job.  I am sure some bible thumper like Christian96 could give us 50 analogous questions as well.  Your right I have not intensively researched this conspiracy theory, nor have I read the entire Bible, nor do I intend to waste my time doing so.  Since you have, please tell us what specifically is the extraordinary evidence you have that 9-11 was an inside job? and that these questions can’t be answered by the massive chaos of the event, ordinary human incompetence, or other simple explanations.

Report this

By Druthers, September 19, 2009 at 3:54 pm Link to this comment

“He will have furthered the Bush legacy of cultivating an ever more expensive big government without improving how the people are served.” 

Unfortunately, at the present time there is no evidence that Obama intends to improve how the people are served.
He chose his collaborators and from day one with Rahm Emanuel the line was drawh.  One after another, in the financial sector, the military, the civil envoys and now healthcare the President chose his men and turned his back on almost all of his proclaimed campaign objectives.  Our civil rights are as abused as before.
So, unless there is some unexpected event that obliges him to change course there is nothing in his actions that indicates any inclination towards the “change” he so vibrantly advodated.
It looks as though the major policy is to toss “just enough” to the domestic population to ensure election, but this may fail, and to extend the military occupation and control of raw materials - see Africa - while under the band-aid covering an economic melt-down all sorts of unpleasant supperations are brewing.
FDR’s “forgotten man” may well find himself adrift in a lifeboat taking water and SOS no longer exists.

Report this

By Ray Duray, September 19, 2009 at 3:45 pm Link to this comment

Those with long experience on the intertubes will recall that “Godwin’s Law (also known as Godwin’s Rule of Nazi Analogies)[1] is a humorous observation coined by Mike Godwin in 1990, and which has become an Internet adage. It states: “As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin

Today, a new phenomenon has emerged, call it Godwin Redux, in which eventually all blog commentaries which go on long enough end up as 9/11 Truth debates.

But I won’t bore any of you with my beliefs on the matter. I’m agnostic with the exception that I’m certain that the official story is a lie.

I prefer the socratic method, whereby we ask questions and see if we can ascertain answers. One of the most troubling aspects of 9/11 research is that the number of unanswered questions just seems to keep growing.

Pepe Escobar is a Brazilian journalist whom I’ve corresponded with on, (what else?) 9/11 stonewalling in Washington, D.C.‘s incestous village culture. It’s a pretty nerve-wracking topic for most who depened on the MIC for a raison ‘etre.

Here’s a couple of articles in which Escobar poses 70 really challenging questions about what we should know about 9/11 but have been for a plethora of really lame excuses precluded as a citizenry from finding out:

http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/KI11Ak02.html
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/KI18Ak02.html


Here’s a representative sampling:

None of these questions has been convincingly answered - according to the official narrative. It’s up to US civil society to keep up the pressure. Eight years after the fact, one fundamental conclusion is imperative. The official narrative edifice of 9/11 is simply not acceptable.

Fifty questions
1) How come dead or not dead Osama bin Laden has not been formally indicted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) as responsible for 9/11? Is it because the US government - as acknowledged by the FBI itself - has not produced a single conclusive piece of evidence?

2) How could all the alleged 19 razor-blade box cutter-equipped Muslim perpetrators have been identified in less than 72 hours - without even a crime scene investigation?

3) How come none of the 19’s names appeared on the passenger lists released the same day by both United Airlines and American Airlines?

4) How come eight names on the “original” FBI list happened to be found alive and living in different countries?

5) Why would pious jihadi Mohammed Atta leave a how-to-fly video manual, a uniform and his last will inside his bag knowing he was on a suicide mission?

6) Why did Mohammed Atta study flight simulation at Opa Locka, a hub of no less than six US Navy training bases?

7) How could Mohammed Atta’s passport have been magically found buried among the Word Trade Center (WTC)‘s debris when not a single flight recorder was found?

8) Who is in the possession of the “disappeared” eight indestructible black boxes on those four flights?

9) Considering multiple international red alerts about a possible terrorist attack inside the US - including former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice’s infamous August 6, 2001, memo - how come four hijacked planes deviating from their computerized flight paths and disappearing from radar are allowed to fly around US airspace for more than an hour and a half - not to mention disabling all the elaborate Pentagon’s defense systems in the process?

10) Why the secretary of the US Air Force James Roche did not try to intercept both planes hitting the WTC (only seven minutes away from McGuire Air Force Base in New Jersey) as well as the Pentagon (only 10 minutes away from McGuire)? Roche had no less than 75 minutes to respond to the plane hitting the Pentagon.
11) Why did George W Bush continue to recite “My Pet Goat” in his Florida school and was not instantly absconded by the secret service?

***
Answers, anyone?

Report this

By Ray Duray, September 19, 2009 at 3:14 pm Link to this comment

glider,

You wrote: “Again extraordinary theories require extraordinary proof.”

Then again, when I read the words of Bill Manning, the editor of Fire Engineering (the premier fire investigation publication in the nation) in January, 2002 my mind was focused. He said that the post-disaster investigation of the WTC collapses was “a half baked farce”.

http://www.fireengineering.com/articles/article_display.html?id=133237

As Manning points out, all standard operating procedures for disaster investigation were suppressed by FEMA. New York State requires that State specialists conduct disaster investigations. FEMA and the Port Authority overruled the State.

As Manning prophetically states: “As things now stand and if they continue in such fashion, the investigation into the World Trade Center fire and collapse will amount to paper- and computer-generated hypotheticals.”

This is precisely what happened. After almost all the physical evidence was removed from the site, NIST was left with nothing to investigate. And so after five years they published computer simulations of the collapses. Kevin Ryan et al brilliantly addresses the major flaws with this effort here: http://stj911.org/press_releases/NIST.html

Architect Richard Gage recently addressed an open letter to Shyam Sunder, WTC lead investigator from NIST here: http://world911truth.org/open-letter-to-nist-by-richard-gage/

So far glider you are giving me the distinct impression that you have made essentially no study whatsoever of the facts surrounding 9/11. There’s a vast amount of information available at websites such as

http://www.historycommons.org/project.jsp?project=911_project
http://911truth.org/
http://stj911.org/
http://www.ae911truth.org/

I’ve put well over 2,000 hours into research on this topic, so if you have any questions, I’d be happy to help you get them answered.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, September 19, 2009 at 3:08 pm Link to this comment

Ray Duray:
’... To suggest that the secret police in this nation would not have an interest in surveilling and occasionally steering discussion on political blogs seems naive to me. They certainly have adequate budgets and staff for such operations.’

I see that 9/11 conspiratism has popped up in this topic as well as in so many others.  It generally leads to a good deal of bickering if not outright hostility between people who are generally in agreement on other subjects of fact and political theory, and people wind up arguing about chemistry and forensic evidence, which they know little about, instead of the original subject.

It would be a simple matter for some sort of secret or not-so-secret government agency, or even a private institution, to set up apparently authoritative web sites supporting both sides of the argument.  There would be a conspiratist set with evidence “proving” that the destruction of the World Trade Center was done with professionally rigged explosives, and an anti-conspiratist set “proving” that it was destroyed by Mohammed Atta and company.

It would be especially clever to set up the conspiratist set contrafactually in such a way as to induce passionate belief and activism, whose participants could then be embarrassed and disheartened by the release of previously concealed evidence showing they were taken for a ride; or vice versa.

Many people antagonistic to the established order could be neutralized, first by being provoked into fighting with one another, and later by being shown up as suckers.  It would be a lot less work than actually blowing up buildings.  Perhaps COINTELPRO lives!

However, I have a feeling, from participating in many non-political discussions on the Net over the years, that the bickering and hostility are probably gladly provided by volunteers.  Having the ruling class supply more of it would be gilding the (poisonous) lily.

Report this

By glider, September 19, 2009 at 2:39 pm Link to this comment

Martha,

Look at what your saying. 

Your telling me that Bush and Cheney would give Bin Laden/Al Qaeda a pass if the Towers did not collapse?  That they would not use say 1000 dead from Al Qaeda terrorists ramming planes into the Twin Towers to go into Afganistan and then Iraq?  I think that is naive.  Bush/Cheney/Pentagon/MSM put a very effective PR campaign together with to get us into these wars.  The buildings going down would not have changed that outcome.  Any such conspiracy plot would be run by intelligent people that would use a KISS plot if they knew what they were doing.

Again extraordinary theories require extraordinary proof.  It is the same reason I don’t believe in the tooth fairy or the Bible.

Report this

By TAO Walker, September 19, 2009 at 2:24 pm Link to this comment

“Too big….” is itself a failure, by definition.  Witness, for just one example, the worlds “most ‘power’-ful military” (“muscle-bound” describes it more accurately) pinned-down in Asia by a relative handful of lightly-armend Natives resisting foreign occupation of their Native lands.

And here’s Barack Obama, having foolishly climbed atop the ‘chain-of-command’ of this bull-headed behemoth, hanging-on for dear life, hoping desperately not to be thrown and gored or trampled to-death beneath its armored treads.  Forget about reining it in, or even steering it onto some less destructive course.

Does Robert Scheer, with such shallow and facile ‘analysis’ as this here, really believe he is “digging” into any actual “truth”?  The president might as well spend his “political capital” chasing rainbows, because the only ‘pay-off’ coming to the americanpeople and their overseers is all the chicken-hawks from the entire five-plus-century Turtle Island holocaust coming back now to roost in “the homeland.”

Anyhow, here in these latter days there’s no business BUT show-business.

HokaHey!

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, September 19, 2009 at 1:50 pm Link to this comment

glider,

If the WTC buildings had been left alone and no demolition planted, the firemen would have safely put the fires out and the nation would have spent years talking about those planes sticking out of the WTC Blgs.  That couldn’t be allowed, hence the demolitions were set.  Without the demolition to destroy a majority of the evidence, even the planes, there would have been even more evidence against the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Republicans and DLC cooperators, hence the demolition of the buildings, and like magic, Bldg #7 went down without being hit by a plane at all, and all the metal was immediately dispensed with from all the buildings. If it had not been planned, it would have been left in tact for pictures, scientists and police to decipher until released by the police department, but it wasn’t.

Report this

By Ray Duray, September 19, 2009 at 1:48 pm Link to this comment

glider,

Re: “Or not blow the charges and hope no one finds them after the fire crews go in there.”

It turns out that you’ve come up with the essential elements of the false flag operation at the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City where local TV camera crews on the scene shortly after the blasts reported that the Search & Rescue teams were pulled out of the building so bomb squads could go in and retrieve bombs on concrete columns that failed to detonate. This news coverage was later suppressed when the national news media created the mythology that a lone nut using a Ryder truck brought down the building. That story is a fairy tale that most Americans accept as fact, since most Americans are too disinterested to study history.

http://www.911review.com/precedent/decade/okc.html

Report this

By glider, September 19, 2009 at 1:20 pm Link to this comment

Martha,
The point is crashing 2 airliners into a building provides all the justification needed for anyone who would have conceived such a plot.  Additional planting of charges increases risk of getting caught or something going wrong.  So there is no significant motive to plant the charges.  The benefit/reward ratio is not there.  The notion is absurd.

Imagine this scenario.  The planes ended up hitting the towers with only small glancing blows or perhaps they don’t make it at all.  So then what do they do?  Blow the charges and then have to work up a new Al Queda inside job plot?  That would be a tough sell! Or not blow the charges and hope no one finds them after the fire crews go in there.  It works out to be an insane idea if you take everything into consideration!  Common sense tells you this theory is complete B.S.!

If the Pentagon/CIA is on these sites they are probably pushing crap like this to make otherwise reasonable people appear nuts and discredit all the valid points.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, September 19, 2009 at 12:51 pm Link to this comment

glider,

The motive doesn’t fall apart.  The motive was power and authority to start a never ending war, just like Hitler did when he burned the Reichstag Building.

Report this

By Ray Duray, September 19, 2009 at 11:33 am Link to this comment

ardee,

Re: “But I doubt that there is a concerted effort to sway opinion on these small and relatively unimportant sites, what would be the point when the public seems far too disinterested to care?”

Keep in mind that the Right has funded small operations like The American Spectator, the Weekly Standard, the National Review, Little Green Footballs, Michelle Malkin’s blog and any number of other tiny circulation outlets because that is where the opinion leaders on their side have tended to congregate. The counter-examples would be Nation Magazine and Harper’s Monthly, for example which are subsidized opinion leaders on the “left”.

The point of having working psyops agents sprinkle dissension on websites that cater to progressives is obvious. It tends to stop any sort of cohesive intellectual counter-argument to laissez-faire capitalism from gaining any traction. Surely you are familiar with COINTELPRO, which was the Viet Nam era version of seeding various progressive movements with ‘agents provocateurs’ to both engage in surveillance and occasionally to also engage in advocacy of illegal behavior. Note how this is used regularly by the FBI to entrap naive Muslims in various “terrorist plots” which make for good headlines but which can rarely be successfully prosecuted because the only people in these terrorist cells who show any leadership are the undercover police agents.

To suggest that the secret police in this nation would not have an interest in surveilling and occasionally steering discussion on political blogs seems naive to me. They certainly have adequate budgets and staff for such operations.

Report this
drbhelthi's avatar

By drbhelthi, September 19, 2009 at 11:19 am Link to this comment

Historical record, at least in Russia and the far east, if a reasonable future is forthcoming, will reveal the “family Bush entourage” destruction of the WTC to have been one small tip of a very large iceberg. I wonder who will own the remains of the former USofA ? dr.b_helthi

Report this

By glider, September 19, 2009 at 9:57 am Link to this comment

I hate to get side tracked here but regarding conspiracy theories I am a believer in the maxim that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.  I simply can not believe this theory that 9/11 was an inside job based on the idea that the twin towers were professionally rigged with explosives.  While I agree that the way the buildings fell was amazing I just can not see the rational for anyone executing such an operation.  Why given that you already have two airliners crashing into these buildings would anyone in their right mind take the incredible risk of putting coordinated explosive charges into the mix?  You would already have cause enough to do every action that the Bush administration took just from the planes alone.  So the motive just falls apart.  It is amazing though how far this conspiracy theory has gone.  I even read a detailed scientific paper showing exhaustive convincing evidence that explosive charge residues were found in samples submitted to a scientific team (whose work appeared very competent by the way).  Still the more rational explanation is that these samples were deliberately contaminated rather than that there was ever such a plot.

I do certainly don’t discount all conspiracy theories (I don’t buy the Warren Commission report on JFK’s assassination) but I find the “9/11 was a inside job” to be roughly as wacked out as the “birther” conspiracy.

Report this

By brhorton, September 19, 2009 at 9:38 am Link to this comment

“Apres moi le deluge”

God! i wish a natural or unnatural disaster would befall Washington DC, wiping it from the face of the earth.

Report this

By ardee, September 19, 2009 at 9:16 am Link to this comment

Ray Duray, September 19 at 9:12 am #

With all due respect to your position, Mr. Duray, I believe that some folks simply cannot face the truth that their opinions are less than factual, and , when one notes such, they instantly accuse the person of being a govt plant, a GOP “sophist”, a member of some “boiler room” or some such. It beats the energy required to defend their position I guess.

I do agree that propaganda exists, our failing journalism is far too willing to accept bullshit from govt sources sans investigation or corroboration, our press is ruled by advertising and not investigative intent, and the shrinking number of news sources are increasingly owned by right wingers with no obligation to truth, only ideology.

But I doubt that there is a concerted effort to sway opinion on these small and relatively unimportant sites, what would be the point when the public seems far too disinterested to care?

Report this

By Ray Duray, September 19, 2009 at 9:08 am Link to this comment

glider,

Re: “(interestingly she claims to be stepping down to some extent now)”

Oh, what’s the latest? Stepping down from what and to where?

***
I think I am in basic agreement with you that the concept of an activist blog community is a good one. But the results we see are so often disappointing.

For example, I’ve been an attendee and a host at a number of MoveOn.org sponsored events over the years. My most shining example is that I decided in July, 2004 that instead of hosting a “house party” for a screening or Robert Greenwald’s “Outfoxed” I’d rent an auditorium at our local community college and have a “campus party”. It was a wonderful success. I had 300 people show up. Yet today I’m quite bored with the directiont that MoveOn has taken. They not only don’t oppose the Afghanistan war, they seem to be part of Obama’s cheering section on this issue. From what I can tell, MoveOn has essentially been co-opted into being a Democratic Party tool.

Similarly I find the website Daily Kos to be frustrating in that any discussion that veers from fawning support of Democratic Party candidates is viewed as heresy. One friend of mine maintained a diary there and when in August, 2009 he had the audacity to state why he was supporting Ralph Nader instead of Obama, the entire comments section that followed was some of the most vile vilification I’ve ever seen at an internet water cooler. We know that the topic of 9/11 Truth is a guarantee of censorship at Daily Kos, yet there is plenty of legitimate discussion to be had on this controversial topic. For example:

http://www.independent.com/news/2009/sep/17/twin-towers-twin-myths/

Another example of the limits to democratic discussion would be the state-specific Blue Oregon blog: http://blueoregon.com/

Commentary at this blog which is not of a cheerleading nature for Democratic Party candidates is disparaged and discouraged. Woe be unto you if you point out where a Green Party candidate is telling the truth while the Democrat is prevaricating.

***
An exception to the rule is this Blue Oregon entry which features Stephen Colbert discussing corporate personhood: http://bit.ly/AaXcu

Report this

By glider, September 19, 2009 at 8:38 am Link to this comment

Ray,
“You gotta be kidding to think that this prison-industrial complex model is one that needs to be emulated”

OK, so one of the founders is strong willed and not completely aligned with your views (interestingly she claims to be stepping down to some extent now).  However, that speaks to nothing regarding their model of a more activist engaged news site.  It is illogical to criticize that broad model based on a personal squabble or a philosophical difference.

Report this

By glider, September 19, 2009 at 8:18 am Link to this comment

You know Truthdig is a great news site but it stays out of the fray, unlike FireDogLake that make no bones about being activist.  Truthdig is also equally unlike Fox News which has been a big player in whipping up these right wing “grassroots” protests and making the news.  Sometimes it is best to fight fire with fire.  There was an article a while back criticizing so-called “objective” journalism, the presenting of both sides of a story without doing the investigative reporting needed to sort out the truth.  I think that is a valid critique of old school journalism and Truthdig largely avoids that form of “news”.  It is then a small extension for such an organization to offer a means of political engagement to their audience.  I think Truthdig has a shortcoming here and should get more active in this arena.

Report this

By Ray Duray, September 19, 2009 at 7:59 am Link to this comment

glider,

You wrote: “I am thinking of something more at the national level outside that very apparatus.  Like a FireDogLake.com on steroids.”

I used to contribute at FDL, but I proved to radical for that bunch. Look, Christie Hardin Smith is an ex-prosecutor who still thinks she was doing the nation a lot of good by attacking hoodlums and leaving white collar criminals to their own devices. The lady who has relentlessly dominated the evening sessions, “Suzanne”, is a retired California prison guard who regards anyone who isn’t a milquetoast as an unruly prisoner to be throttled. 

You gotta be kidding to think that this prison-industrial complex model is one that needs to be emulated. From what I could see at FDL, any sign that the left might get uppity was met with the most severe punishments.

Report this

By glider, September 19, 2009 at 7:58 am Link to this comment

“paranoid beliefs about “hired agents”

There was also was that recent well publicized case of a military associated agent infiltrating a group that was organizing protests and blocking shipments to Iraq from a port in Washington State.

Report this

By glider, September 19, 2009 at 7:37 am Link to this comment

Ray,
What your describing sounds like working from the bottom up, working through the local apparatus, on very broad national initiatives.  That would seem to be a recipe for frustration.  I am thinking of something more at the national level outside that very apparatus.  Like a FireDogLake.com on steroids.

Report this

By Ray Duray, September 19, 2009 at 6:12 am Link to this comment

Hi ardee,

You seem to be a skeptic about agents attempting to steer internet discussions. I accept this as being part of the Pentagon’s new paranoia about a populace left un-propagandized.

Here’s a recent headline from Slate.com:

Obama Gears Up for War in Cyberspace

http://www.slate.com/id/2219354/

Of course the Pentagon monitors websites like Truthdig and I’d give anyone 10:1 odds that they have people contributing to the discussion here in the attempt to “steer” public opinion. This is the normal operating policy of the Pentagon. Similiar to the way that the Pentagon is involved in steering the Hollywood product.

Nick Turse has discussed this here on Truthdig: http://bit.ly/17EYWf

More on the Pentagon/Hollywood connection:

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8071178277073763777#

“Operation Hollywood” book: http://bit.ly/44vy4

And have you observed recently how television has become increasingly infested with programming highlighting war? There’s the Military Channel and its spinoff, and the History Channel now seems to be being produced by the Pentagon as well: http://wais.stanford.edu/Politics/pentagonandhollywood.htm

There’s every reason to believe that DARPAnet is still full surveilled and manipulated by its creators.

Report this
drbhelthi's avatar

By drbhelthi, September 19, 2009 at 5:28 am Link to this comment

Former insiders with good contacts are not plagued with - ““paranoid beliefs about “hired agents” infesting all the websites”“-. They know whats going on. Nor are they hindered by gross naivete` and tunnel vision. dr.b_helthi

Report this

By drbhelthi, September 19, 2009 at 5:23 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Former insiders with good contacts are not plagued with - “paranoid beliefs about “hired agents” infesting all the websites- . They know whats going on. Nor are they misled by gross naivete´ and tunnel vision. dr.b_helthi

Report this

By ardee, September 19, 2009 at 4:42 am Link to this comment

drbhelthi, September 19 at 3:04 am #

How many waste time and energy in paranoid beliefs about “hired agents” infesting all the websites on this vast internet…A rather enormous task one ponders.

I think some would rather believe that different opinions are the work of such “agents” rather than have to face the fact that there are many differing opinions out there and ones own is not remarkable or above all others.

Having said that I do believe that, when certain issues are topical, when certain actions are contemplated , we do see some rather suspicious posts from heretofore unheard from individuals. Any referencing to Chavez or Honduras seems to bring them out.

“Do I contradict myself? well then I contradict myself. I am large and contain multitudes.”

Emerson

Report this

By Ray Duray, September 19, 2009 at 4:37 am Link to this comment

Glider,

You wrote: So my question really is, can the Democratic Party controllers be circumvented through the process I described.  Going around them directly to those progressives who favor our same agenda?  Is it possible to organize a movement within the party or is this a hopeless endeavour?

Not in my county. Perhaps at the state level the progressives might have a little more traction, but I doubt it. Rep. David Wu (a D. from suburban Portland) just published in the Oregonian and came out 100% in favor of Obama’s folly in Afghanistan.

De Fazio is OK in the House, and Merkley in the Senate every so often mouths a progressive homily, but the senior Senator from Oregon Ron Wyden make talking out of both sides of his mouth an art form. I can’t recall how many times Wyden promoted “bipartisanship” when his Senate mate was Gordon Brown. Wyden’s solution for health care is a vastly complicated giveaway to the profiteers.

Things look somewhat better on the State level, but we still have the Democrats here opposing any sort of effort to follow the Arizona or Maine lead on public financing for campaigns and in this state there are no limits on how much corporations can put into the electoral process.

Report this

By ardee, September 19, 2009 at 4:34 am Link to this comment

MarthaA, September 18 at 8:57 pm

When the Democratic Party was worth a damn it was known as “the big tent party” for its encompassing of left, right and center.

You always seem to think purges are the solution to our current political problems.

Report this
drbhelthi's avatar

By drbhelthi, September 19, 2009 at 12:04 am Link to this comment

Superficial jargon about tangential issues that cannot
be influenced is an effective distraction from the
underlying central issues.  That seems to be the modus
operandi since before the CIA general assembly in 1981. 
Distract from the main issues, misinform, and induce
fear and anxiety. How many who comment to this and
other similar articles are hired puppets ?

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, September 18, 2009 at 5:57 pm Link to this comment

ardee,

The conservatives and the moderates need to be removed from the Democratic Party, as conservative and liberal are completely opposite, which defeats the purpose of balance.

Conservatives did not always be on the Left and we need to go back to when the Conservatives stayed strictly on the Right.

Report this

By glider, September 18, 2009 at 4:03 pm Link to this comment

Ray,
“my efforts to pass a couple of non-binding resolutions on ending the Iraq War and impeaching George Bush culminated in the progressive wing of our county party being purged from the organization. It was a pitiful display of the party regulars taking total offense”

Thank you for your efforts, and I certainly can understand your deep seated frustration from that experience (we have the dishonorable suck up Senator Feinstein here).  I have no problem accepting that most elected Democrates and the party apparatus is as corrupt as is you experience.  The question is how to change the situation and get rid of these sellouts.  So my question really is, can the Democratic Party controllers be circumvented through the process I described.  Going around them directly to those progressives who favor our same agenda?  Is it possible to organize a movement within the party or is this a hopeless endeavour?

Report this

By Vesendak, September 18, 2009 at 3:20 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Mr. Scheer -


I didn’t know you were psychic? Can you please tell me next weeks Lotto numbers when you have time. I know predicting the future must take a lot of energy out of you so get some rest then get back to me with the information I requested.

Report this

By hopeychangey, September 18, 2009 at 2:59 pm Link to this comment

Of course he’s not too big to fail.  He’s just accomplishing that inevitability a little quicker than most people would have expected.  To many impartial observers who took the time and made the effort to examine Obama’s record and experiences while campaigning, it’s no surprise that he’s struggling.  He’s never really done anything, so he doesn’t have any well of experience on which to draw for decision-making in tough situations.  His advisers represent the well-worn and sheltered DC groupthink mindset and so he’s sort of just making it all up as he goes along.  The scary thing is that he’s now hinged his administrative agenda’s success on a pass-any-healthcare-bill-at-any-cost position that most people see for what it has become.  That is, a real position of desperation and flailing.  It’s really too bad becasue we do need a health care overhaul, but done properly.

But the man gives a heck of a speech - unfortunately it seems more and more as though that’s pretty much his answer to everything.

Report this

By Ray Duray, September 18, 2009 at 1:17 pm Link to this comment

Glider,

Re: Since you have been “inside” I am curious about your take on the possibility of getting the progressive wing organized (realizing of course that all routes to change face a deck stacked against it).

I hate to disappoint you in this regard, but except in already very liberal areas such as San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, etc. there is a natural proclivity for conservatives to control the Democratic Party apparatus. That’s the case here in Central Oregon where my efforts to pass a couple of non-binding resolutions on ending the Iraq War and impeaching George Bush culminated in the progressive wing of our county party being purged from the organization. It was a pitiful display of the party regulars taking total offense that the rank and file would actually dare to take the initiative and try to stand for something.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 18, 2009 at 12:09 pm Link to this comment

WriterOnTheStorm, disappointment seems to be a comprehensive part of belief, so hope and change are like any other belief, they fall flat without substance. Hope in my case indicated my desire for change, though it was only hope, hence the disappointment. Hope can be blind, in my case it was more of a gamble, percentages or odds not known, though my choice won, the prize seems to be developing into disappointing.

Report this

By WriterOnTheStorm, September 18, 2009 at 10:29 am Link to this comment

Disappointment? Really?

Come on, it’s not as if America elected a progressive. Most of you settled for Not McCain and
now that that’s all you got, you’re going to complain?

Politics, like everything else in a capitalist state, is commodified. Social and economic policies
enacted in such a state will be those of the highest bidders, i.e. the wealthiest interests. Even
those who use their wealth to advance progressive causes will not escape the gravitational
vortex of the apparatus’ black hole. Does anyone seriously believe that a charismatic leader, no
matter how sympathetic, is any match for the meat grinder that is even now sucking on your
extremities?

Does it takes an outlier to see that your progressive causes are inimical to the wild west
capitalism that prevails in these “united” States? There is no magic compromise to be made
here, only devil’s bargains. Out here in the wild west no one is a citizen, we are all consumers.
In the western lands there is no humanity, just winners and losers. So come on, which are you?

Report this

By glider, September 18, 2009 at 10:08 am Link to this comment

Hello Ray,
I agree it is a dilemma without any clear alternatives.

I am attracted to the concept of organizing the progressive caucus within the Democratic Party (aka BlueDogLake.com efforts).  If they are converted into a unified publically visable entity with real effects on legislation it could serve as a means for changing the Democratic Party.  This would necessitate taking strong positions and killing compromised “better than nothing” legislation (the current health insurance bill).  However, isn’t this more palatable than losing elections to Bush types because of a 3rd party vote split?  It necessitates using such legislative drama to rally support in the next set of elections.  Ironically, this is basically following the Republican playbook.  However, I calculate that this is not like 1994 because the Republicans have painted themselves into an extremist corner.  If Obama’s “Waterloo” of failed health insurance reform is handled properly it should have a negative impact on Republicans and a positive impact on progressive Democrats in upcoming elections.  The key would be for the progressives to effectively communicate the causes of the reform failure and offer a solution.  This kind of “moral stance” approach is the opposite of the Obama “consensus building” approach which would make it attractive for many of us disaffected types. 

Since you have been “inside” I am curious about your take on the possibility of getting the progressive wing organized (realizing of course that all routes to change face a deck stacked against it).

Report this

By truedigger3, September 18, 2009 at 8:25 am Link to this comment

To Whom It May apply,

I have been reading truthdig for quite a while and MarthaA is one of the most brain-washed and blinded by partisanship posters.
For her Obama and the Democratic party is a religion, and she is a “true believer” in anything related to those two.
It is futile and waste of time trying to reason with such a character.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 18, 2009 at 7:10 am Link to this comment

Realizing disappointment from Obama, should not mean going backwards to Bush and Republican clone leadership. Obama and a Democratic Congress seem to have provided credence to Lincolns comment not a direct quote but from memory, “Differences between the two parties are like two drunks fighting on the street, when the fight is over they have on each others coat.”

Seems hope and change has become war and money. Looking at the payoffs the Medical Insurance Companies have given to members of Congress, one can only speculate how much money these Insurance companies have paid in other sectors of influence.

Lack of integrity seems to be normal with politics in this alleged great country, as Mark Twain stated, we have the best government money can buy.

Though I still hold out hope Obama is not part of the same ugly status quo, but it my hope is faltering. Appeasement and open armed acceptability of status quo. His selection of many corporate lackeys does seem questionable.

Most recently Obama’s administration has decided to continue and renew the Patriot Act, this alone pauses for question. As Politics turns, the Republicans will use this against Obama while they support it as they did when it was instituted.

So the fall if it comes will be greeted with open delight by ignorant bigots, racists and supporters of
division who have always worked unknowingly for the opportunists and manipulators behind the curtin, keeping the great divide seems most important in their grand scheme of things. For unity of the people is not on the table.

Report this

By Ray Duray, September 18, 2009 at 7:06 am Link to this comment

Hi Glider,

You wrote: ” If the progressive wing vote is just assumed they become irrelevant and it will cause an exodus to 3rd parties in the future.”

As I see it, the progressive caucus of the Democratic Party is ripe for some sort of change. As the base of the party it has become taken for granted by the DLC-type corporatists. There’s the rare bone that is tossed to our side, such as the White House decision to impose a 35% tafiff on Chinese tires, but this sort of sop to the werkinstiffs is the exception to the rule.

I’ve been discussing alternatives to Democratic Party membership with other disgruntled progressives locally. [I’m a Precinct Committee Person in the party.] There quite simply is no good alternative that I can see at present. I moved from the Greens to the Dems once the former proved to be irrelevant here.

So, what next? My fantasy is that someone with a genius for movement politics will create the “Citizen’s Party” which will be appealing to both lefites like me and also to the sort who are attracted to the good views of a Ron Paul for example. Smaller government (applied to the military and corporate welfare) and a reining in of the FRB before it creates any further risks for the nation for the sake of the banking elite. I do see that an anti-corporatist agenda could have tremedous cross-over appeal, just as long as the worst tendencies of the left (naivete and indiscipline) and the Right (jackbooted thuggery and adulation of authoritarians) can be held in check. But then, I’ve always been a dreamer. smile

Report this

By bert, September 18, 2009 at 6:48 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Buyers remorse already? “Told you so,” way back during the primary campaign before I was chased off TD. I feel no pleasure saying this because it is my country and my future too. While I have grave concerns for the country and her citizens right now, I have no sympathy for those here , including Mr. Scheer - who used to be a hero of mine - who could not see a con game underway.

Report this

By archivesDave, September 18, 2009 at 3:30 am Link to this comment

Ardee and Martha,
You both need to broaden your horizon just a little more since you both have a piece of the truth.
Do yourselves a big favor, both of you, and pick up a copy of Dr Nicholas Hagger’s ‘The Syndicate’. (You can also Google him): He’s written 28 books but you won’t find any of them in most schools and probably damn few libraries.
One little factoid he documents: Rockefeller’s Standard Oil fueled up BOTH the Nazis and Allies in the Second World War!
Of course this lends credence to your perspective Ardee but there is SO much more to it.

Report this

By ardee, September 18, 2009 at 3:04 am Link to this comment

MarthaA, September 17 at 11:13 pm #

ardee,

When are you ever going to learn—the Republicans infiltrated the Democrats.  How do you think CONSERVATIVES got on the LIBERAL side?  Are there any Liberals on the Conservative side?  NO.

Your illogic knows no bounds, Martha, as your loyalty forces you ever deeper into that illogic.

So, any conservatism in the Democratic Party is a sign of infiltration while the same on the other side of the aisle is a different animal.

Prior to Johnson signing Civil Rights legislation and losing the South to the GOP we had many conservative Democrats, and we certainly still do. In fact the Dems have been moving further right all the time. They are as much a tool of corporate control as are the Republicans in fact. No infiltration necessary…

One wonders at the type of mind it takes to see politicians in deep cover, joining the Democratic Party, running for office, gaining a seat in Congress and all the while being a “Manchurian Candidate” sort….

Report this
LostHills's avatar

By LostHills, September 18, 2009 at 2:02 am Link to this comment

Ain’t nothin’ too big to fail. The Wooly Mammoth failed. T. Rex failed. Obama’s not even big.

Report this
drbhelthi's avatar

By drbhelthi, September 18, 2009 at 12:59 am Link to this comment

“Republican,” “democrat”- names of former US
political parties.  Jesse Ventura, after having been
governor of Minnesota, revealed that the state-level
staffs, of all states, had been infiltrated by CIA
agents. The CIA was developed from the OSS, after
“Operation Paper-Clip,” which ferreted hundreds of
WWII NAZI leaders into the US. In the 1981 general
assembly of the CIA, the Reagan-appointed chief,
William Casey said, “We will know we have succeeded
when every American believes everything that is
right is wrong.” (Excerpted from
http://www.stopthefourthreich.com) This is known as
the CIA “Disinformation Program.”  Information that
ties the G.H.W.Bush family with the NAZI movement is
over-abundant.  A German scientist wrote me last
Fall, “ Doc, certain German families have always
known the true identity of the 41st US president.” 
His family knew. Also abundant is information that
ties the zionist movement to the NAZI movement. Thus
far, I have found no information to indicate that
H.B.Obama chose either his parents, or the shuffling
from pillar to post during his upbringing.  It is no
wonder that he cherishes his Kenyan “MeeMa”, a
constant source of love.  Nor have I found concrete
evidence that he was born in the USA. Nor have I
found significant evidence that his administration
will significantly alter the destructionist path set
by the NAZI administrations before him, and which
manipulated his election to the US presidency. 
Since zionists manipulate key positions in the
“Obama” administration - - just look at what is
happening?
Republican? Democrat ?  These terms are current
nonsequiturs.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, September 17, 2009 at 8:13 pm Link to this comment

ardee,

When are you ever going to learn—the Republicans infiltrated the Democrats.  How do you think CONSERVATIVES got on the LIBERAL side?  Are there any Liberals on the Conservative side?  NO.

Report this

By FlyoverCountryBoy, September 17, 2009 at 6:09 pm Link to this comment

Indeed, the Obama Presidency can indeed fail, and it seems to have been given a considerable nudge in that direction over the past week by a website that hadn’t even existed ten days ago.

In the wake of the incredible series of ACORN reports, I’ve been thinking a lot about whether Al Gore might now actually regret ever having invented the Internet. Seriously, between this and Drudge Report, it’s hard to imagine Al not working right this second on finishing up that time machine so he can go back and “fix” this whole Internet thing.

There’s a poll asking, “What does Al Gore regret most about inventing the Internet” along with the story “ANOTHER REASON AL GORE REGRETS INVENTING THE INTERNET” at http://firebreathingchristian.wordpress.com/2009/09/17/another-reason-al-gore-regrets-inventing-the-internet/ , if you’re interested.

Report this

By elisalouisa, September 17, 2009 at 5:01 pm Link to this comment

Such an outstanding column followed by articulate posts that reflect Robert
Scheer’s reservations about President Obama who will most likely be a one term
President. Turn this thing around Mr. President, it’s not too late. Not turning it
around might result in a right wing Republican winning the election in 2012.

Report this

By TAO Walker, September 17, 2009 at 3:36 pm Link to this comment

If actions do indeed speak louder than words, the “message” booming from every outlet these days is that there is really nothing to be done about any of this Pandora’s Box of predicaments overwhelming the virtual world of the domesticated peoples.  The machinery is all running completely out of CONtrol, and the end-in-sight is not a happy one.

Take a tip from the high-and-mighty among you, tame Sisters and Brothers.  They’re all bailing as fast as they can….with all the loot they can carry.

For the rest of you, with a net-“worthlessness” just on the cooked books of at least hundreds of thousands of dollars in “individual” indebtedness, a nicely appointed hidey-hole somewhere “they” can’t find you is simply out of the question.  What you do have, if you can only get past the engineered isolation of “self” into which you’ve all been tricked and trapped, is each other.

Truly organic Living Communities offer the only Human Arrangement that has a chance of seeing their members all together through the “Great Shaking” (as some refer to it) your self-appointed “betters” see coming, and have been setting up to survive for years already.  Hell, they’re even figuring to hasten and amp it up, in the silly belief that their own chances are even better the sooner and more intense it is.

No one is going to finesse their way through this, however.  No one will buy, or shoot, or think their way through it.  The Organic Form of Humanity, The Tiyoshpaye Way, relies on none of that….in-fact recognizes all of it as a dead-end.  It relies, instead, entirely on living, on-the-ground engagement with the whole Family of our Mother Earth’s Children, founded in the natural integrity of our Organic Function, and carried-out with undivided attention and unfailing respect.

The seeds of this are in all of us, even those presently captive to the CONtraption running amok in our midst….“civilization.”  Best quit looking elsewhere for some kind of “salvation.”  There is none “out” there.  What you need is one another, right where you live-and-breathe, and those innate qualities of your true Human Nature that have been suppressed in the vain attempt by our tormentors to have their foul way with our Mother and all Her Children.

Don’t be afraid.

HokaHey!

Report this

By ardee, September 17, 2009 at 2:12 pm Link to this comment

MarthaA, September 17 at 2:14 pm #

Whoa a minute—it took the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Republicans 40 years to create the destruction of the United States Economy and bankrupt the nation, that President Obama is having to deal with; how long has President Obama been in office—about 9 months—the baby of the Obama presidency is just being born, optimistically the Obama administration will be a wunderkind?

You mean it took BOTH PARTIES in complicity to destroy the economy. To read your post one might think the Democrats were on vacation.

Secondly there have been any number of carefully crafted posts enumerating exactly what many find wrong with this administration and its direction. The appointments he made, in his first decisions as president, were woeful frankly, extending the policies of the Bush administration in regard to widening the war are horrific as well.

His obvious pandering to the financial community, insurance and pharmaceutical industries has been plainly seen and will lead inevitably to no effective or comprehensive regulation of our banks and stock traders or any decent and needed health care reform.

The list goes on, all things already done. Nine months is certainly long enough to see trends.

Report this

By truedigger3, September 17, 2009 at 1:55 pm Link to this comment

Jean Gerard wrote:
“Obama is not a god.  Maybe we can help him become a statesman—but not with carping.”
____________________________________________________

Nobody expected Obama to be a God or perform miracles.
But it is obviously clear that he is doing nothing to change anything. He is rolling exactly on the same tracks W Bush was rolling on and following exactly the same policies both domestic and foreign.
He lies and bullshit and posture without blinking an eye. Where is the change we believe in.
Just look at his pathetic dis-spirited performance in the health care “reform” with continuously shifting his position back and forth. This “reform” is nothing but a give away to the health Industrial complex coming from the blood sweat and tears of of the common folks either directly or from their taxes without reforming anything.

Report this

By Alias, September 17, 2009 at 11:52 am Link to this comment

Pity that Obama’s presidency, coupled with the Wall Street robbery-in-progress, shows that “too big to fail” applies primarily to the bankrupt two-party system that masquerades as democracy in America.  That the elephants and jackasses are but two faces of the corporate party has never been more obvious; yet we the voters keep bailing them out on election day.  When will we learn?

Meanwhile, Obama’s inner circle is working around the clock to convince him to subordinate his better instincts in the interest of “bipartisanship” - a nonsequitor if ever there was one, given the minority party’s religion of obstructionism.

As for those at the top of the military/industrial/finacial complex who are pulling everyone’s strings - brilliant move!  You knew the public would never buy an extension of the disastrous Bush-era policies Mr. Sheer lists in his column, so you took bold and decisive action:  fix the election so that a nation basking in the self-congratulatory glow of putting the country’s first black person in the Whie House would cut him some slack for continuing to pick our collective socio-economic pockets. 

I pray we haven’t reached the point where our only salvation is divine intervention.

Report this

By glider, September 17, 2009 at 11:36 am Link to this comment

Hi Ray,
I agree with you and was just doing a thought experiment suggesting whereby even if we go down this road, apart from hitting some of the people who can afford this least, the product we end up getting from these HICs may not quite be what they are trying to advertise.  They will likely draw blood in other ways.  We need to start calling the on the progressive caucus to draw their lines in the sand.  If the progressive wing vote is just assumed they become irrelevant and it will cause an exodus to 3rd parties in the future.  If they can form a tight coalition people identify with then maybe a useful movement can get started.

Report this
MarthaA's avatar

By MarthaA, September 17, 2009 at 11:14 am Link to this comment

Whoa a minute—it took the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Republicans 40 years to create the destruction of the United States Economy and bankrupt the nation, that President Obama is having to deal with; how long has President Obama been in office—about 9 months—the baby of the Obama presidency is just being born, optimistically the Obama administration will be a wunderkind?

Report this

By Ray Duray, September 17, 2009 at 10:31 am Link to this comment

Hi Leefeller,

You wrote: “What has happened to the Obama anti lobbyist stance?”

Nothing. The anti-lobbyist stance is still just as phony as it was when Obama started his campaign.

It saddened me but it did not surprise me to find out in the summer of 2008 that Obama’s rhetoric about never taking any campaign contributions from lobbyists was simply a lawyer’s trick. You see, in a number of instances Obama donation bundlers turned out to be the spouses of lobbyists! You do see how clever this all is, eh?

As Robert Moses, the czar of New York infrastructure, once quipped: “If the ends don’t justify the means, what does?”

Report this

By Ray Duray, September 17, 2009 at 10:23 am Link to this comment

Hi Glider,

You wrote: “Apart from the distastefulness of forcing citizens to purchase a very expensive private sector product…”

I put it somewhat differently. In any decent society on the planet the proposed extortion of about $50 Billion from the working class for the benefit of highly profitable corporations would be considered criminally insane and morally repugnant. How can people even begin to think this should not be resisted by a massive show of force by the public?

What is being proposed here by Obama’s bribers is an outrage. Not that the theft of the Social Security and Medicare trust funds by the Pentagon wasn’t. But at least this time we ought to be wise enough to see the pattern of abuse that the People are forced to suffer.

Report this

By Jean Gerard, September 17, 2009 at 10:04 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Reading through the comments I wonder how many of them actually help?  Or is the purpose just to blow off steam?  And is that enough?  Obama does not deserve be to the focus of all this criticism. In view of what he has inherited—not only Bush but American history—it is unlikely that he alone could do more than he is doing, or do other than he is doing.  We are unwilling to face the fact that very serious problems have been accumulating for decades, unexamined and untreated.  Obama is not a god.  Maybe we can help him become a statesman—but not with carping.

Report this

By glider, September 17, 2009 at 10:00 am Link to this comment

We are deep into corporatocracy now.

Proof that the collusion between corporations and government is mature and sophisticated is evidenced by the history of laws rewritten to allow the financial “services” sector to play with the peoples money in their casino.  That is now deeply ingrained.

Currently, that the expanding corporatocracy has crossed a “point of no return”, is evidenced by the “too big to regulate” phenomena we have witnessed over the last year.  Government anti-trust responsibility is dead. Therefore no mechanism within government now exists to stop the progression of corporatocracy.  Politicians will eventually pass some faux regulatory legislation for feel good public consumption.  If you need to check that this legislation is indeed meaningless just watch for a drop in the growing unregulated $700 trillion derivatives playground for the financial elite.  Our government will only make sure that lightening will not strike again in the exact same spot.

Report this

By turnplug, September 17, 2009 at 9:54 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Obama is overwhelmed by what he is facing,two unwinnable wars,the obvious solution is to get out but then the howling from the right will start.He can’t win and the Repub,s knew that the 2000 election would be a disaster for whoever won it therefore run the two throwaway candidates that they did. Only bold and decisive action will extricate Obama from the quagmire that he finds himself in. Get out of these idiotic wars and vow never again. I am not sure he has the stones.

Report this

By EricinOak, September 17, 2009 at 8:22 am Link to this comment

In addition to what Scheer writes above, let’s not forget that Obama has failed
to uphold the constitution by not investigating and prosecuting Bush’s many
high crimes: torture, wiretapping, lying to the nation to go to war, etc.  I think
this is Obama’s high crime. 

His pro-corporate agenda is also deeply unfortunate, basically a lie given his
campaign promises, and truly unethical if not illegal.  For the illegality, follow
the money to Wall Street and back to the Dems.  What promises did Obama
make to the Masters of the Universe so they could remain too big to fail yet big
enough to take huge risks?  The crash happens on Geitner’s watch, and he is
made Treasury Secretary.  Go figure.  Obama is not as important as the crises
looming because the powers that be refuse to change.  Lefties and liberals
(“progressives”) need to wake up to the fact that Obama is no agent of real
change ... no agent of change I can believe in.

I hope we get a true liberal running for president someday.  1993 redux, as I’ve
said before.  Slick Willy is another pro-corporate liar who put on liberal
clothing to beat a Bush.  He is even more responsible for the financial crisis
than Bush.  Democrats Rubin and Summers supported Graham and Greenspan. 
Clintonites set it up; Bushies carried it through by degrading regulation and
prostrating us all to the efficient market gods.  This free-market fanaticism
does more damage than any Christian fanaticism. 

I’m still living with daily disgust.  I was hoping that would change.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 17, 2009 at 7:52 am Link to this comment

“Sadly, progressives were on Obama’s menu and he’s eating us alive.” Not sure who us includes, but one can be very sure the Republicans and racists are enjoying progressive discontent. Obama seems to be on an eternal campaign, how about moving into domestic decision mode other than accelerating the war dance? 

Obama selected some advisers who seem postured as corporate lackeys. What has happened to the Obama anti lobbyist stance? Congress and Obama seem to be sleeping big time with lobbyists, so suppose we are still screwed and stuck in follow the money mode?

Change the faces, not the system. opportunism and Manipulation seems to be still running the show.

Report this

By glider, September 17, 2009 at 7:40 am Link to this comment

Ray,
Yeah, rather odd for a constitutional scholar isn’t it?
“Patriot Act Section 215 ...allows the FBI and other agencies to demand electronic records of any business, “any tangible things” like bank/credit statements, as well as medical records, on any individual”.

This brings up a side issue for me.  Obama gives lip service to reforms would significantly reduce the cost of healthcare (no Single Payer, tepid Public Plan).  Meanwhile he will get excited about computerizing medical records to “reduce the cost of healthcare”. 

What this health insurance legislation is boiling down to is a change in the HIC business model where the pre-existing condition is largely given up and premium rates are instead allowed in other areas to compensate.  Integral to this “deal”, the HICs get a mandate to force all citizens to buy their product.  Apart from the distastefulness of forcing citizens to purchase a very expensive private sector product this does get closer to a large pool of distributed risk and is beneficial in that regard.  However, I just have to be suspicious about how this would actually play out.  The HICs have built up a massive infrastructure to make actuarial risk assessments on individuals and monetize that information.  Are there going to be massive layoffs since this is no longer needed?, or will HICs just shift their nefarious activities to exploit the numerous loopholes that are sure to be available from any legislation?  If I am a HIC CEO I think I would be salivating at the prospect of ultimately somehow acquiring complete access to everyone’s medical records.  This would be a great tool for enhancing profits.  While such an authorization would not be in this bill I think it is a concern down the road with the steady expansion of our corporatocracy.

Report this

By Ray Duray, September 17, 2009 at 7:34 am Link to this comment

Hi jmj1941,

You wrote: “What’s wrong with you people.  Obama is a black man; we need to give him time to get his feet under him.”

Actually, my understanding is that Barry is Scotch-Irish on his mother’s side. This might help explain his bellicosity regarding those poor dumb hajis in Helmand.

The other think that Barack Obama happens to be is the most successful politician to ever come out of the Chicago Democratic Party machine.

I have no idea why you counsel leniency on Barry. He’s made a dozen policy decisions that are all mollycoddling the criminal thugs of Wall Street and the Pentagon. He’s essentially failed to champion any of the causes of the progressive movements in this nation. Why he needs more time in some people’s eye is beyond me. And why people assume they need to treat him with kid gloves and feather duster tends to infuriate me. The bastard just committed us to slaughtering innocents in Af-Pak for another five years at least.

I think Obama is a vastly more wily man than a lot of the naive Left give him credit for. I guess they read his books and lapped up the beefcake and bon bons and failed to notice that it take corrupt egotistical sharp elbows to get where Obama sits today.

I had a friend put it to me this way, in L.A. the street hustlers have an expression, “if you ain’t workin’ an angle, you are the angle”. In Obama’s circle in Chicago it’s a bit different. There it’s “if you’re not invited to lunch, you’re on the menu”.

Sadly, progressives were on Obama’s menu and he’s eating us alive.

Report this
earthwirehead's avatar

By earthwirehead, September 17, 2009 at 7:24 am Link to this comment

...while i agree w/robert’s assessment of the uncomfortable compromises obama has made, i feel obliged to remind everyone of the choice this country faced last november… i find it very difficult to believe that things would not be substantially worse had mccain won… about as bad as things will be if obama gives away the store to the wingnuts and crazies in 2012, after pissing off and alienating everyone who was willing to take a chance on him in the first place…

Report this

By fwdpost, September 17, 2009 at 7:13 am Link to this comment

The discussion should not be whether Obama is less hated than Bush, but if either ever had our interests at heart.
I am sill waiting to see the $3,000 for each new job in America, the $50,000 tax free income for Social Security recipients, limited credit card interest rates, mortgage cramdown, fewer total troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, affordable healthcare, end to torture, and more taxes for the super, duper rich

Report this

By jmj1941, September 17, 2009 at 6:44 am Link to this comment

What’s wrong with you people.  Obama is a black man; we need to give him time to get his feet under him.  This is a big job for a young man.  Actually this sounds more like a Republican site than a Progressive site with all this criticism of our FIRST BLACK PRESIDENT.

Report this
Hulk2008's avatar

By Hulk2008, September 17, 2009 at 6:42 am Link to this comment

The Pres may have overspent his “political capital” but he does deserve kudos for even trying.  Frankly, it was a crap shoot at best from the start.  Since when has Congress or the media actually believed in “doing the right thing” ? Obama and America were behind the 8-ball long before the election was decided.  The only compensating thought is that McCain would have done absolutely nothing about ANYthing - in fact he would have slowed the Iraq withdrawal. And the economy would still be sliding into the abyss (hackneyed but useful phrase).
  The Tea Baggers should have been marching back during the Reagan administration…... back when “conservatives” blew up our economy and started the huge pendulum swings, including deregulation of EVERYthing.

Report this

By Ray Duray, September 17, 2009 at 2:12 am Link to this comment

And the hits just keep happening…

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/sep2009/patr-s17.shtml

<SNIP>
Obama administration to seek extension of Patriot Act spy powers
By Patrick Martin
17 September 2009

In a letter from the Justice Department to the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Obama administration has gone on record for the first time supporting the extension of key provisions the USA Patriot Act, including the notorious provision that gives the federal government the power to subpoena library records of any individual.

***
Got civil liberties, pilgrims?

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 17, 2009 at 1:07 am Link to this comment

Looking at my personal track record of past business associates and failures, I can only conclude I am a poor judge of character, so far I can add Obama to that list.  Seems my judgment of character is still poor, just quicker to realize it.

Report this

By truedigger3, September 17, 2009 at 12:50 am Link to this comment

mick koz wrote:
“except to say that I truly believe that the man is trying TO DO THE RIGHT THING. I have to believe this because he has not demonstrated, to me at least that he is being pathologically ambiquous or deceitful.”
_____________________________________________________

OH YEAH. What did make you believe that??
Whether this statement is true or not which in my opinion is completely false statement, Obama is not DOING THE RIGHT THING never tried to do THE RIGHT THING and is always DOING THE WRONG THING for the common people and THE RIGHT THING for his masters in BIG MONEY/BIG BUSINESS.

Report this

By mick koz, September 17, 2009 at 12:03 am Link to this comment

Say Hey Ray Duray-

We do agree on one thing…FDR is one of the greatest American presidents…right up there with Abe:) “Perfectly delusional”?-sure…try it…it might just brighten your day…if that fails might try a little less caffiene.

Peace…brother

glider-

I too hope you’re right about me not being wrong:)

Report this

By Ray Duray, September 16, 2009 at 10:44 pm Link to this comment

Dear mick koz,

You wrote: “Frankly, I too am disappointed in Obama’s tepid, overly nuanced advocacy of meaningful healthcare reform. I cannot defend his lack of assertiveness, except to say that I truly believe that the man is trying TO DO THE RIGHT THING.”

Consider the alternative. Consider that you are completely and perfectly delusional. Obama doing the ‘right thing’? That sounds like a satire on a Spike Lee Jones Joint.

The only right thing Obama does is to clear his throat before he lies to us.

Report this

By glider, September 16, 2009 at 10:18 pm Link to this comment

I am glad you think I have been civil and respectful because I have felt quite testy recently grin.  I was first turned on to Obama when I listened to his lecture on race relations in response to some flack during the primaries.  At that point I switched and started to support him because of his unusual intelligence and his ability to communicate his ideas to people in a way other democrats lacked.  I thought he had extraordinary potential.  I also then read Audacity of Hope, which does expouse your point about consensus building, but it also spoke of a peoples vision and not a corporate vision.  But additionally Obama layed out a detailed platform on his web site and he has broken virtually every commitment he made to the people in those statements.  Unlike you I can not rationalize his appointment of corporate linked cabinet members.  It is not like Obama has used these appointments by controlling them to produce just results for the people.  On the contrary they, as you would reasonably expect, have acted at every opportunity to enrich their elite brethren.  So it is more accurate to describe Obama as their tool.  Now regarding Lincoln, whom I am no expert on, he seems to have been the polar opposite of Obama.  Apparently, he was driven into running for office for the moral directive of ending the expansion of slavery into Kansas.  When he was thrust into a situation of having southern states succeeding he acted very boldly (like it or not) and we had the Civil War (which was not an exercise of consensus building).  Additionally, to fund the war he had the guts to circumvent the banking financial elite, and had the government print its own greenback money to fund it.  Some believe this is what ultimately got him assassinated (do you remember Kennedy’s own government silver certificate bills?).  There is nothing going on with Obama that suggests anything close to the character of Lincoln.  At this point you are simply projecting your hope onto him which is what my post is warning people not to do.  This is like religion and I think a big mistake.  That said I hope you are right and I am wrong.  But my actions and yours should be based on what Obama does and not his silk tongue dances.

Report this

By Ray Duray, September 16, 2009 at 9:35 pm Link to this comment

mick kos,

You said: “I believe Obama will grow into the job much as did Linclon, probably our greatest president.”

From the perspective of pure progressivism as clarified by Senator Bob LaFollette and his caucus in the early modern era in industrialized America, there can be only one truly great American President and that would be Franklin D. Roosevelt.

If you look at the the legislative record, the relative progress of the nation compared to a starting point and other standards of well being for the People, FDR wins hands down over Lincoln.

Recall that before Lincoln was elected there was a tension but the nation was a cohesive whole. Just as soon as Lincoln entered office the nation fell apart. That’s hardly the stuff of great Presidents. Recall that during Lincoln’s term in office America suffered its bloodiest war with over 600,000 casualties essentially resulting in a return to the status quo ante, with the South still an economic backwater and the dynamic industrial North continuing to dominate the nation.

Compare that to the achievement of FDR in World War II where he lost a mere 250,000 casualties while he fobbed off most of the fighting to the Soviets who lost 20,000,000. That’s some clever gamesmanship. And in the end, we became the predominant imperial force on the planet. While in comparison Lincoln managed to seed the ground for the KKK. That’s rude, I know. But it is good to put things into perspective, eh?

***
As far as your willful blindness regarding Barack Obama you may be utterly and hopelessly pollyannish about the reality we face.

Smart people like me started barking at Obama volunteer meetings last August when Obama betrayed our trust on his vote as a Senator on the FISA bill. This was a crucial eye-opener for me, as it should have been for you. Because the incident was so unusual. Barack Obama had set some sort of record in the Senate (as he did also in Illinois) for being absent from a huge percentage of votes that might have defined his character. As a brilliant and deceitful politician Obama knew instinctively and viscerally that he needed to avoid taking any real stands where he might be measured by his record. Thus we get the virgin candidate for President in 2008 who can be all things to all people and no one actually has a god-damned clue what the guy stands for. And then the exception came in. When it came time to destroy the essential liberties in the Fourth Amendment prohibiting the government from engaging in illegal searches and in the matter of giving the telecom companies carte blanche to defy the Fourth Amendmnet and create a big brother police state type security regime, Barack Obama took the time from his campaign frolics to come back to Washington and put a knife in democracy.

What part of this don’t you understand? Because surely if you paid attention as smart people are wont to do to the record of a politician instead of to the tissue of lies that they constantly spew forth with, then you’d be a bit less sanguine about the corporate whore sitting at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, September 16, 2009 at 9:14 pm Link to this comment

Quote: “because most of his critics are so vile, is hardly an example of constructive concern for him or the country.”

Absolutely.  I haven’t read each and every comment, however it is easy to see the VILENESS of “his critics”.  The “me first”, “me first” crybabies are out in full force.

Poor souls…. poor, poor souls.  Much of the “supposed” CONSTRUCTIVENESS of many comments here or the invoking of legitimate problem-solving…. is again, thrown “under the bus”.

Foolishness, it appears… is in the eye of the beholder.  Let’s face it, if I can “imagine” utopia…. it MUST exist.  And if I can BELIEVE in ghosts, therefore they MUST be real.  Please, correct me if I’m wrong.

Seriously…... P-L-E-A-S-E.

Report this

By mick koz, September 16, 2009 at 8:44 pm Link to this comment

glider-

Thank you for your comments on my post which I read with interest and took to heart. But more importantly thanks for the civil and respectful tone.

Frankly, I too am disappointed in Obama’s tepid, overly nuanced advocacy of meaningful healthcare reform. I cannot defend his lack of assertiveness, except to say that I truly believe that the man is trying TO DO THE RIGHT THING. I have to believe this because he has not demonstrated, to me at least that he is being pathologically ambiquous or deceitful. Now take Dubya…please anybody…

Much of Obama’s appeal as a candidate was the he was a reasonable and rational pragmatist.  That he would rather seek consensus than indulge in polemics and score political points. I know that is what attracted me to him. I was, and still am concerned about his naivete, but I really don’t think any one who was looking for an alternative to ‘bidness’ as usual politics should be surprised at his process. Sure he’s made some mistakes…for sure, he’ll make more, but when I look at the inventory of who is left out there to take on this lousy, thankless job of POTUS, well I cringe.

I sense many similarities with Lincoln’s presidency. A time of intense polarization based on the irrational fear of disruption of the status quo.  I believe Obama will grow into the job much as did Linclon, probably our greatest president. We all knew he would be tested by radical right…but I think history will prove that the Rad Right overplayed its hand with healthcare. If Obama can deliver something positive on healtcare, this maybe the beginning of a productive presidency.

And much like Lincoln who sought out political rivals to serve on his cabinet, I think he realizes that his best chance to ultimately prevail, and get something postive for the American people is not through political gamesmanship, but through compromise.  I deeply deplore that he has to capitulate to to get something less than what everyone should agree on as a moral imperative…but frankly. compromise was the entire basis of the formation of the grand experiment, this democratic form of government.

Again…patience brothers and sisters…patience…

Report this

By glider, September 16, 2009 at 7:55 pm Link to this comment

Frankly, I think I am now comfortable acknowledging that Obama is a corporate tool.  There is a lot of data consistent with that assessment now.  This means as a progressive you do not want to waste you efforts for this puppet.  We need to focus on unifying the progressive democrats in congress to draw a line in the sand to kill any health insurance reform not containing a powerful public option tied to medicare rates.  If even they are all talk and no action then observe it, believe it, and act upon it (3rd party for me if they are impotent as well).  But in the meantime pressure the progressive wing to unite and express themselves.

Report this

By synic3, September 16, 2009 at 7:54 pm Link to this comment

“Obama’s Presidency Isn’t Too Big to Fail”

It failed already. It failed the common people who really had “hope” for a “change they believe in”
Obama presidency is a carbon copy of W Bush presidency with minor cosmetics changes but with the same real substance.
Obama really conned us.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 16, 2009 at 7:53 pm Link to this comment

My hope is Obama address’s only one or two of his campaign promises, which is much better than what I had hoped from Bush. My only hope for Bush was that he would be hit by a meteor or choke on a pretzel.

Report this

By glider, September 16, 2009 at 7:21 pm Link to this comment

Truthdigger3,

You are being way too harsh on Scheer who is one of the few bright lights in this mess.  Yeah, he and the rest of us progressives are having a tough time giving up “hope”.  That is just plain human.  There is a natural proclivity to give what you invested in the benefit of all doubt.  It is the great seduction.  It takes a long while to learn “do not read into others what you want them to be, but instead observe what they actually are and believe it”.  It is not easy.  I hate to count the number of times I have been suckered on this basis.

Report this

By chrisbaron, September 16, 2009 at 7:04 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I read enough of these comments so that I really wonder about a LOT of the people who are reading Scheer’s column. He’s being very very CRITICAL of Obama. Hello! How could so many of these comments be so far off the mark as to what Scheer actually said? This is an anti Obama column. Read it again. Jeez.

Report this

By dihey, September 16, 2009 at 6:55 pm Link to this comment

Day-by-day it is becoming increasingly clear that it is too big for his breeches.

Report this

By truedigger3, September 16, 2009 at 6:27 pm Link to this comment

Robert Scheer wrote:
” He has tried to have it all on three fronts, and his administration is in serious danger of going bankrupt.”
_____________________________________________________

What a misleading and obfuscating statement.
It is like Obama is trying to accomplish something new, where in fact he is rolling on the same tracks W Bush was rolling on. He is continuing on the same path where W Bush left off. So much of a change we believe in.
What a real superb con job??!!
Wiht Obama doing exactly what W Bush was doing both in the foreign and domestic policies, here we find Mr. Scheer and his ilk of the so called progressives are whispering mute criticism of their beloved Obama, where during W Bush presidency they were continuously hollering and jumping in rage up and down.!! Where is all that rage and jumping up and down now?
And now Obama will really accomplish something memorable by shoving down our throat a health care bill that contain all what the Medical Industrial complex wanted and asked for and have the audacity to call it a “reform”, while in reality that “reform” is nothing but a additional tax on the commong people for the benefits of the Medical Industrial comlex and will reform nothing.
Without a single payer or at least a VIABLE public option it is all bullshitting and make believe theatrics without any real substance.

Report this

By glider, September 16, 2009 at 5:56 pm Link to this comment

Mick Coz,
“I know there are many who feel… betrayed by Obama…but… it is the congress, not the president that creates/ratifies legislation”

Are you serious?  Do you feel Obama has done all he can for his part?  Do you believe he used all the power of his bully pulpit to faithfully try to achieve the agenda he promised during his con man advertising of the year campaign in 2008?  If we felt that his ex-base would be behind the man fighting these Fox crazies.  However, the inescapable conclusion is that Obama cares little to nothing about his campaign promises.  They were a means to an end, and he now has new masters pulling his strings.  And worse his progressive base now has no leader to rally behind.

“You want meaningful change, change campaign finance and lobbying rules…through the legislature. Then and only then you can even have a hope of meaningful change”

Agreed 100%.  But that does not mean I give a pass to Obama for deceiving and abandoning his base.  All those grass roots donations were Obama exploiting the internet to max out his $ while he still sold out to the elite who now run the show. The very reason we need the reform of which you speak.

“But it cannot and will not happen overnight. This is the genius of Obama…he understands the human condition and how change must come incrementally”

This is the last great rationalized hope for the desparate searching for a silver lining in the sewage and I have expressed it myself in the past.  It is a seduction that is difficult to resist.  However, one of the most mature wisest men I ever knew told me when I asked what wisdom he had to relate upon his retirement.  He said “don’t read into others what you want them to be, instead observe what they actually are and believe it”.

Report this

Page 2 of 3 pages  <  1 2 3 >

 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook