Anarcissie,

Every time you write of so-called Islamophobia I find myself wishing you would take more time out of your days to educate yourself on the actions and teachings of Zawahiri, Rahman, Nasrallah, bin Laden, Hezb-e Islami Gulbuddin, Quetta Shura and more.

I intend no disrespect in writing that a global battle is being fought of which you seem completely unaware.

Labeling Westerners Islamophobic is akin to telling a Sunni Muslim she hates Islam because she fails to subscribe to be Shiite.  It simply makes no sense.

-

Is it possible you hold a deeply ingrained phobia of Caucasian Westerners?  Might that be the cause(s) of your views of the world and current events?

What are the root issues of the Tea Party?  When the movement was started up, there seemed to be a strong libertarian component which included unhappiness about the bailouts (a Bush initiative adopted by Mr. O) and the endless foreign wars (ditto).  Mixed in with this was birtherism (which I interpret as covert racism), 9/11 trutherism, gun rights (a perennial), Islamophobia*, and immigration.  In short, a very mixed bag of mutually contradictory currents, many of them antagonistic to the Republican establishment.  I haven’t heard much lately; a movement with incoherent goals usually has to sort them out or fall apart.  The libertarians seems to have been kicked out.  What else is going on?

* A lot of the New York City area people who wanted to junk the Constitution in order to prevent Muslims from building a non-mosque two blocks away from the site of the World Trade Center were identified with the Tea Party movement, but I don’t know if this was a national issue or position, notwithstanding the opportunism of Gingrich, Palin, and others of their kind.

When not immersed in his cocoon of political bigotry and race-bating politics ITW can be quite coherent.

-

Another teachable moment.

14% of the American voting public identify with the root issues of the Tea Party.

This minority in the U.S. effected the 2010 elections from coast to coast.  Everything from School Board members, to governors, to the House and Senate.

Labeling all who disagree with the current president as haters of little brown babies was never a rational thought or argument.  Particularly in light of the fact that the charge first came alive during the Clinton/Obama democratic primary.

All you need to do is convince 11% of the population that your guy is best and you win the Presidency.
Why?
40% will vote GOP even if it’s for a child-molesting thief.
40% will vote Dem even if…same as above

That leaves 20%.  All you need is a majority of them, and that’s 11%.  That means no matter what, 89% of voters don’t change their views, regardless.

I know this is a generalization, and exceptions can be found, but the 40%/40% is virtually constant.

I am baffled by this canonization of a president who has proved himself to be no more than a hawk in dove’s feathers. What courage was needed to execute without trial, a middle aged sickly man who was more of a religious symbol than a political leader? I don’t get it. Obama’s blather about Change was more saccharine Kool-Aid for the for those frustated with Bush’s horrible legacy. What is ironic, is that O could not have been a better executor of that legacy, if he had been a full-fledged Repub.
Obama is characterized more by waffling spinelessness than courage. The author has only shown brilliance in his skill at insulting my intellgience.

Mr. O has done pretty much what he said he would do, for example, he said before the election he might invade or at least make serious raids into Pakistan.  Again, I think people did not read the small print on the side of the package, or maybe they did and pretended they hadn’t.  Mr. O has always been cautious and conservative.  He is ‘courageous’ enough when he calculates that the odds are well in his favor, as witness his recent speech on the Middle East, which had Netanyahu foaming at the mouth.  There is no reason for him to do anything for the proggies because they are disorganized, ineffective, and will almost certainly vote for him anyway, but by accident he might do something they like, like rubbing out bin Laden, which seems to have people like our author all in a tizzy.

Perhaps he will get some credit for courage when he not only shows some but applies some real substance to go with his pre-election rhetoric.

Why is this fawning, right wing article published on truth.dig?  This is atrocious and those of us that support truth.dig deserve a response from the editors.

Obama will have a opportunity to show an unlikely bit
of courage Thursday when he meets with Benjamin
Netanyahu. HA!

By Inherit The Wind, May 20 at 2:32 pm

Luckily you’re wrong. A lot of minds are being changed, and at an increasing pace.
And rather than going belly up on yourself, get yourself together and start doing
something.

Here are some smelling salts you can try to disseminate far and wide, by linking,
tweeting, printing and distributing, if no more than this one little chart:
http://mosquitocloud.net/this-chart/

Who decided that this piece of fawning drivel
deserved to be published here? It’s an Obamanation!

Inherit The Wind,

My point was that my POV did change, drastically!  I
celebrated when Obama was elected.  I wrote to Robert
Reich who also praised Obama and he responded to my
question why by saying, “He’s better than the
alternative.”

My response to him was,
“Dear Robert,

I am underwhelmed by this response. Has our country
actually come to that? We choose the leader of the
most influential and powerful country on the planet
based upon something as flakey as, “They are better
than the alternative.”?

Has this corporatocracy led us to such a lowly place
that we acquiesce so willingly!

Dear Robert, you talk of taking control and using
non-violent means to regain justice against the
injustice that has the elite collecting 25% of our
country’s wealth. How can justice prevail if we
accept the destructive actions of a president who is
so complicit with corporate hegemony?

Alas. Based upon your response, it appears that even
you, who are so connected with Washington, have given
up hope and are willing to accept the neo-plutocracy
in which we now live.

I had hoped for more.”

Nobody REALLY changes their views.

If they hate Obama for being a “socialist” and a “wimp” in the international arena, they find rationalizations to continue that POV.

If they hate Obama for being a “right-wing toady” and a “warmonger” and “Bush 3” in the international arena, they find rationalizations to continue that POV.

If they like Obama for being better than any Repbulican they find rationalizations to continue that POV.

Nobody thinks. They just find rationalizations for their prejudices.

What an utterly revolting article. It doesn’t take guts to order the murder of some frail, old man (I refuse to call him Osama bin Laden) by a bunch of steroid-stuffed, contract killers.

Name ONE instance when Obama has stood up to the Military-Industrial Complex?

We’re waiting… hello?...

tdbach, May 20 at 12:20

and while you are dishing out the fascist government talking points, the world is
preparing to turn the heat on fluffers and cocksuckers like you and yours.

http://mosquitocloud.net/map-of-global-rebellion-hot-spots/

I must admit that I am disappointed to hear that you think so highly of President Obama. I voted for him and was one of those who thought that Hope had returned. But, after he and the Democrats wasted their majority, I was saddened. Then, as President, he filled his cabinet with the most evil corporate figures of our time – Bill Daley (JP Morgan), Jeffrey Immelt (GE) and the very worst of all, Jeffrey Smith (Monsanto) I lost all hope.

JP Morgan has manipulated the commodities market with impunity. Immelt has claimed that the best way to improve employment is to decrease corporate taxes. GE is paying nothing! It is hard to get any lower than that. And Smith, with his ties to Monsanto has introduced Genetically Modified food and seeds that could be the end of our food supply when their patented seeds contaminate our food supply with plants that can no longer reproduce themselves! Our own government threatened France when they would not allow Monsanto to pollute their country with these death seeds.

As for “killing OBL”, I refuse to take the word of a politician who talks about Hope and then dashes it on the rocks of corporate profit at the peril of we non-elites.  The outlandish claim that:
1. Osama’s face was blown off
2. Osama’s body was thrown into the Ocean
puts serious dents in any story about Osama’s demise.

I no longer have any hope in Obama.

The same people who excoriated Bush for turning his attention away from the chase for OBL in mountains to start a war and occupation of Iraq are excoriating Obama for an operation that left OBL dead. Just how did you picture that chase into some remote cave ending? With a cup of tea and a leisurely perp walk back to Kabul?

The order to kill OBL wasn’t to exact revenge, but to get the only measure of justice available that didn’t create even greater risks than the ones confronting the soldiers who carried it out. They had to be sure to get him, and they had to be sure to get themselves out alive. Sorry, they had no real alternative.

Enough of this shit, already—okey?

Here may be the seeds of rebellion if linked, twittered and disseminated broadly.
Get to it, please!

http://mosquitocloud.net/this-chart/

Another Obama apologist - disappointing.  Healthcare legislation was NOT an example of courage, but of weaseling out of a campaign pledge or three.  Single-payer wasn’t even on the table.  He took no strong, consistent position on what form legislation should take.  While useful reforms have gone into effect, the insurance industry has been given years to position itself favorably and find numerous ways to circumvent provisions that are supposed to rein them in.  And, the bill itself has done pitifully little to address the real problem - spiraling healthcare costs.  Unfortunately, he has only really shown courage to harshly criticizing the ‘professional left’ and in going after Bin Laden.

“We might ask ourselves how we would be reacting if Iraqi commandos landed at George W. Bush’s compound, assassinated him, and dumped his body in the Atlantic.” - Noam Chomsky

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/05/07-5

“Justice was done. And I think that anyone who would question that the perpetrator of mass murder on American soil didn’t deserve what he got needs to have their head examined.” - Obama

“And those who think Obama is a wimp ought to have their heads examined. ” - Boyarsky
          —————————-

Whether bin Laden deserved it is neither here nor there. We are a nation of laws and there are laws of war, many of which Mr. Obama has no problem circumventing. Is it okay now for the family of a murder victim in this country to go out and slaughter the perpetrator? Do we now shoot down serial killers like dogs in the street as soon as we have the chance? Is Obama answerable to some higher moral authority than the rest of us?

Courage would have been to bring him in and have a thorough trial where many of the issues that divide Americans today could be resolved, thus bring us down the road to unity. Now THAT, Mr. Boyarsky, would take courage. Don’t you agree?

Any thug can pull a trigger, it happens countless times a day.

Virginia777, - “Whaaaaaaah…..stop picking on my fav politician”.... Sniff, Snivel, Snort!

LOL…...LOL….LOL

May I offer you a Kleenex?

Here is a truckload of Kleenex boxes just arrived.

Heh how typical of a corporacrat. Or the oxymoron “Democrat”.

I’ll take a tissue; you and this crock of an article suggesting testosterone is more imporatnt than intellect cooked up by Chef Boy-ar-sky is rather depressing.

Monk-in-the-ruins & Obama-criers etc.:

*whistles, directs truck into parking lot*

Here is a truckload of Kleenex boxes just arrived.

Happy now?

Go Right Young Man:

May I offer you a Kleenex?

G.D. Wymer:

May I offer you a Kleenex?

gerard:

“This country is a country of people, not a country of officials.  People permit the officials (and corporocrats) to do what they do—and many of them benefit from what is done in their name—wars, graft, cheating, preference to monied interests and Wall Street gambling with vital resources, scorn for the poor and the undereducated, mereciless ignoring of widespread pain and suffering and blaming others in order to escape responsibiity.”

man, gerard, are you ever an awesome commentator.

Exactly.

Lafayette, May 19 at 1:18 am Link to this comment
IMMATURE NOTION

THX: Since you asked? Nader, Kucinich or Ron Paul.

OK, so what is their Track Record? What is their
Political Vision?

These may be competent individuals, but are they
Presidential timber? I suggest not.
===========================
Disingenuous at best; you don’t want a discussion;
you just want a platform. And judging by your
“questions”; you’re asking for an education about
information you should already know.
Your projected sense of superiority is rather off-
putting as well. Cheers.

I am not sure about the courage thing, and I agree with other posters here that making buying health care mandatory is a boon to the Insurance industry. Here is what I do not understand, he could have offered a basic public option, no cosmetic surgery, no abortion, but offer check ups, catastrophic care etc and left the rest for the Insurance companies to offer to people of means. He could have argued this as a boost to small business or even medium size businesses, where health coverage takes a big chunk. Why didn’t he argue public option as economic stimulus, or is he so influenced by Joe Lieberman, his mentor who is in the pocket of the Insurance companies. That’s my big disappointment, because a public option was good for business, good for economic growth it was a win win

This country is a country of people, not a country of officials.  People permit the officials (and corporocrats) to do what they do—and many of them benefit from what is done in their name—wars, graft, cheating, preference to monied interests and Wall Street gambling with vital resources, scorn for the poor and the undereducated, mereciless ignoring of widespread pain and suffering and blaming others in order to escape responsibiity.

Power has been relinquished into the hands of a small minority, and the vast majority are convinced they have to go along to get along. They are frightened.  They are confused.  They don’t know what to do or how to do it. They hope “somebody else” will do it for them. They don’t understand democracy and its values.

P.S. You must very well know “who, what is preventing him from taking to the air”.  Lack of strong support, danger of brnging on a major depression, pressure from the Democratic party big-wigs, inertia on the part of 90% of the public, uncertainty in the face of enorous problems that can affect the entire world, lack of leadership in other democratic countries, the “Jewish problem”, the “Muslim problem” and the general cussedness of the antiquated “right wing”, plus much of the media looking for calamity and victimization as news.

Myself, I am disappointed too, but I see the problem as much more complicated, more insidious, more difficult to solve than most of those on TD. I am wondering where the intelligent leadership is in this country?  To me, that seems the most important issue.

gerard, May 19 at 11:43 am

You may even be right, though the odds of that are gazillion to one, but he’s
the orator. The man with a golden tongue and the biggest bully pulpit around.

Do you not see what people are talking about, Wall Street rip offs, foreign
adventurism, wars and jobs?

He could be sounding like Cornell West, or Harry Belafonte, or Chris Hedges.
But he isn’t. So—is he the President, his own man, the man who hypnotized his
audiences, or someone else’s mouth piece, a ventriloquist for finance FIRE and
MIC interests?

Who, what is stoping him from taking to the air?

http://mosquitocloud.net/

gerard writes:
“Under all the pressures of the job, I doubt if any one of us could have done any better, frankly.”

My two-year-old German Pointer mix Roy could have done a better job. Seriously.

Obama’s “first great act of political courage” was—taking any public option out of the debate before the discussion on national healthcare even began.

  And these “great acts of political courage” include, of course, extending the Bush tax cuts (“well, he has to get re-elected, doesn’t he? in order to do what he REALLY wants to do”), extending oil drilling leases (“well, he has to get re-elected, doesn’t he?”).

  It is not an act of courage to violate international law & bask in the approval of people to whom international agreemeents and borders no longer mean anything. The continual collaboration of the admin with Blackwater/XE and Obama’s constantly lauding of torturers as devoted & patriotic people are the telling marks of Obama’s “courage” . . .

“national moral conscience”

According to whom? The bias polls? The Mainstream Media? The workers? The president? Certainly not the women.

Lafayette, May 19 at 1:18 am

“It took Bill Clinton two-terms to find his legs. And we should dump Obama
after just one, because he “disappoints us”? That’s an immature notion.”

Corporatist and neoliberal legs at that, which brought us to the brink of a
global crisis. That’s what you mean by timber?

The President selects his cabinet. Please tell us which of his selections if any
you disapprove of?

http://mosquitocloud.net/

Under all the pressures of the job, I doubt if any one of us could have done any better, frankly.

That is not to excuse shortcomings and fallures, but to point to the fact that for a long time now the nation as a whole has forsaken its lofty goals and promises—and that, more or less willingly and comfortably. 

One of the chief reasons is that national policy has become accustomed to depending upon weapons and war
for assuring a phantom called economic “national security.” That phantom has now overwhelmed national common sense.  It’s the monkey on all our backs.

No president will be able to get that monkey off our backs without the awareness of its presence and a broad, articulate will of many fields of endeavor—
business, industry, government, popular support and
—most important—national moral conscience.

By Lafayette Re: Nader, Kucinich & Ron Paul.

“OK, so what is their Track Record? What is their Political Vision?

These may be competent individuals, but are they Presidential timber? I suggest not.”

Why? Because they didn’t garner enough corporate backing or sufficient media play? Come on, dude, these guys (and others) never had a chance because the corporate owned media portends to be the pulse of the nation when, in fact, they are just elitist lackeys doing the bidding of a few power hungry nutjobs.
        Nader outstrips Obama in every field. Besides, the presidency is not just all about the man, it’s the team he brings in with him. Every Obama appointee was a shock to most people save the right-wingers.

          Obama’s vision is the SOS, advance the empire, bleed the center so the periphery can expand.

And again.

Bill wrote:

“His goals were simple and clear: assure health insurance for millions, including the working poor”

Nonsense.  While there were some steps forward (non-cancellation for preexisting conditions)  this was mostly for the benefit of insurance companies. Even one of my Senators (Jeff Bingaman) acknowledged that the major problem with health care is the attempt to privatize what is fundamentally a public good (NO, this is not a designation that people get to make, any more than they get to decide the relationship between matter and energy. Health care is a public good by its inherent characteristics). The US ALREADY spends more on public health than any other nations, with MUCH worse results.

While Obama DID state his intentions to kill Osama, he also stated his intentions for a single payer option, a stated policy option that helped get him elected. Once elected there was support for Wall Street, not Main Street. Thus he got the middle class to pay for those potential customers the insurance industry had been unable to capture on their own. And let the super rich keep their ill gotten gains.

http://bit.ly/fvZaI5

Courage? Hardly?

This is Empire porn, and Boyarsky is just one of its pathetic rank of Fluffers

sheesh…

http://mosquitocloud.net/

Bill Boyarsky says he APPROVES of the killing of Bin Laden.

      What he is really saying is that he approves of the MURDER of Bin Laden and the DENIAL of DUE PROCESS to criminals or to whomever the STATE deems to be a criminal. He must also APPROVE of the US public being denied a window into the crime through a trial that now will never take place. You are a real patriot, Bill.

More thoughts on what constitutes courage.

(Well said screamingpalm!)

From The Secret Sharer
Is Thomas Drake an enemy of the state?
by Jane Mayer

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/05/23/110523fa_fact_mayer?printable=true

“Mark Klein, the former A.T. & T. employee who exposed the telecom-company wiretaps, is also dismayed by the Drake case. “I think it’s outrageous,” he says. “The Bush people have been let off. The telecom companies got immunity. The only people Obama has prosecuted are the whistle-blowers.”

Courage is prosecuting those in position of power who, as screamingpalm notes, are inflicting serious harm on Americans.

On Wall Street, even the Wall Street Journal, commenting on Matt Taibbi’s Rolling Stone Articles on Goldman Sachs,

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/why-isnt-wall-street-in-jail-20110216

states:

“Many of us are resigned to the idea that no one is going to be punished for the era’s wrongdoing.”

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704281504576331811046204714.html#printMode

“I was one of the lucky few who was born with a silver spoon in my mouth, and I am doing my best to keep it there” —Barry Goldwater, from a letter by Barry Goldwater to John Evans, June 27, 1938

By this article Mr. Boyarsky, presents a false analogy, the question is not whether or not President Obama lacks courge, but what exactly his actions represent.

Mr. Obama, is as much, a corporate spokesman as was O.J. Simpson. In that he presents an image that people want to see, a young dynamic smiling friendly man, whose image allows us to project the best of our values into his imaginary world.

Yet, people were shocked when O.J. Simpson cold bloodedly murdered his wife Nicole, many thousands could not believe it.

Does murder take courage?

Does getting up on T.V., and lying strait faced to the American people, take courage? Does giving the insurance industry a multi billion dollar pay day take courage?

Does selling this give away, with images of your mother dying of cancer, and having her insurance cancled take courage?

Does appointing Goldman Sacks to run your treasury department take courage?

Just as president Bush used conservative images and ideology, to betray conservatives, President Obama has done the same. And there are many who will believe in his innoscence, no matter what he does or what happens.

“Justice was done. And I think that anyone who would question that the perpetrator of mass murder on American soil didn’t deserve what he got needs to have their head examined.”

Following that logic, what does the perpetrator of the mass murder of 500,000 children under the age of five deserve?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2irN1G5HiRo

Or does one NOT question even much worse crimes when they occur “BY Americans”, rather “ON American soil”?  Are not THOSE the heads that need to be examined?

AS others have noted, REAL COURAGE would consist of acting independent of mob mentality, and of prosecuting AMERICAN (Clinton as well as Bush) criminals, not of murdering an old unarmed man, who in previous times would have been captured alive, and put on trial.

“It is curious that physical courage should be so common in the world and moral courage so rare.” - Mark Twain

“As long as people believe in absurdities they will continue to commit atrocities” -Voltaire

I don’t understand Boyarsky’s complaint.  I used to think only boobs from the hinterland celebrated executions, but liberal columnists and frat boys have been wetting their pants in public ever since the alleged rubout of the alleged Osama bin Laden.  If blood theater is what they admire, what’s their problem?

Virginia777, - “all you Obama-bashers on Truthdig need to stop being such whiners.”

-

If memory serves, Virginia, you supported Sen. Obama, in part, because he campaigned on the following.

Candidate Obama believed indefinite detention was “un-American”.  He believed Military Commissions created a “constitutional crisis”.  He believed rendition was unlawful, drone attacks were “extra judicial”, Domestic Electronic Surveillance was a felony and the Patriot Act a travesty (before he signed into law an extension of the Act in February of this year).

Not only has President Obama extended all of the above, he has strengthened and employed all of the above far beyond what the Bush administration intended.

There has been a dramatic change in U.S. policy, however.  Less capture, less interrogations, less judicial processing, less indefinite detentions and a ten fold increase in Summary Executions using unmanned aerial vehicles.

To sum this up:  Using water to scare an enemy is immoral.  A sidewinder missile or a bullet to the head is “brilliant and brave”.

Obama was courageous because he ordered others to kill bin Laden? How does that work? As Ian Welsh wrote:
“...unlike most recent American presidents, Bin Laden did lead troops from the front line.  He didn’t dodge combat.”
http://www.ianwelsh.net/
Obama was courageous to foist—behind closed doors, which is never the mark of a courageous man—mandated and IRS-enforced corporate health insurance on us? Courage would have been to fight for Universal healthcare, not allow the corporate insurance CEO’s to profit from our illness. That’s not courageous. That’s immoral.
Everyone knows about Obama’s cowardice when it comes to doing what actually needed to be done when he won the presidency. However, he was too cowardly to prosecute the torturers in the previous administration and now the world sees us as a torturing nation. He was too cowardly to prosecute Wall Street CEO’s who blatantly broke the law. In fact, he was so cowardly, he did their bidding and extended the Bush tax cuts. I won’t even mention the wars he’s continued and escalated because he’s too afraid of the Defense Industry.
I could go on and on about Obama’s cowardice, but to suffice it to say he’s a prime example of a man who really, really wanted the job, but once he got it, he didn’t have the courage to make the hard choices it would take to get the job done.
Courage and Obama are two words that should never be written in the same sentence.

Is there some kind of Machiavelli Prize Boyarsky is
after where columnists are competing to see who is the
most fawning and subservient to authority?

IMMATURE NOTION

THX: Since you asked? Nader, Kucinich or Ron Paul.

OK, so what is their Track Record? What is their Political Vision?

These may be competent individuals, but are they Presidential timber? I suggest not.

It took Bill Clinton two-terms to find his legs. And we should dump Obama after just one, because he “disappoints us”? That’s an immature notion.

JUST THE FACTS, MA’AM

Clinton’s approval rating was consistently higher than 50% and ended at 60%. (See here.) Clinton had a dot.com boom. Obama’s is presently at 50% and he has had to contend with a Major Recession. (See here  for historical approval ratings.)

Overall, given the constraints of a tripartite governance and given that he inherited the worst recession in thirty years, Obama may be no saint but neither is he evil incarnate.

MY POINT

It is a common mistake to identify Economic Activity with the seated PotUS. The president has very little, other than fiscal spending, with which to influence the economy - and that influence is neither direct nor immediate.

Second point, it is best to judge Overall Approval and not just focus on Economic Approval. (Obama passed health care legislation, which no president since Roosevelt has been able to do. Even if that legislation is only a palliative remedy of America’s Health Care Mess.)

Give the guy a break. Lead-head was one of the worst presidents in recent memory and now we want to dump the present one as well?

Unbelievable.

If this can be suppressed - http://tinyurl.com/3fzwrv8 - no Carter jinx for BHO,
otherwise, who knows…

Yes, the report is ‘unconfirmed’ - but, what in the ‘official’ report IS ‘confirmed’?
Moreover, what, in the real life of OBL is ‘confirmed’?

We have a ‘legend’ - virtually nothing comprising the OBL Legend is ‘confirmed,’ -
any media pundit who speaks authoritatively on the life of Osama Bin Laden is
either wholly duped or a blatant liar.

I don’t know where to start in responding to this drivel…. Obama COULD have shown courage in standing up to Wall Street but instead gave them the trillions they needed to keep ripping us off. 

He’s worse than Bush. Did it take courage to sign the Military Commissions Act of 2009???? Courage to keep Bradley Manning in solitary confinement?  C’mon, give us a break.

Lafayette, May 18 at 11:58 pm
who can do better? And why?
=============================
Since you asked;
Nader, Kucinich or Ron Paul.
Why?
Because they have been consistent for many years; not
some newbies backed by banksters.

Now, if you’d like to discuss, this knock off the name
calling and attitude. Cheers.

BITCHING IN A BLOG ABOUT OBAMA

THX: Obama has trashed almost every promise he made to his base in order to get elected; now he expects that very base to re-elect him…and they will. Now that takes guts! Or at least a gutless base…

More Nerd Nonsense of which the forum is replete.

And if you think the base is gutless, pray do tell, which Replicant candidate should the gutless-base elect? Which one has the credentials and policy vision necessary to reform America from the vast Reaganomic wasteland it has become?

C’mon, aside from Bitching-In-A-Blog about Obama, America’s new National Pastime, who can do better? And why?

No courage? Surely you jest!
Obama has trashed almost every promise he made to his
base in order to get elected; now he expects that very
base to re-elect him…and they will.
Now that takes guts! Or at least a gutless base…

omg.

Again, all you Obama-bashers on Truthdig need to stop being such whiners.

We are facing an extremist invasion of politics and media on a scale not seen here for a long, long time.

Choose sides people, stop giving the right a hand with your self-absorbent carping.

Are these the actions of a man of ‘courage’?

1.  TARP & Financial Bailout: Over 70% of us opposed the bailout. Three years
later, un- and under-employment exceed 18%; record profits for financial
institutions.

2 .  Health Care: 72% of us supported “a government-administered insurance
plan—something like Medicare for those under 65—that would compete for
customers with private insurers.” 

3.  The Wealthy Pay Their Fair Shair: Washington Post-ABC poll Washington
Post-ABC poll, Spring 2011: 72 percent support raising taxes on the rich -
including 68 percent of Independents and 54 percent of Republicans.

4. Afghanistan: 64% of us opposed expanding the war in Afghanistan and
wanted to disentangle from Bush-era ‘War on Terror’ and ‘preventive war’
policies. Today, over 60% of Americans oppose the war.

Tarp and the Financial Bailout - accelerated under Obama; Geithner, a key
player in the Bush bailout, made Obama’s Secretary of Treasury; Bernanke,
another Bush left over, nominated by Obama for Fed President (a second term).

Health Care - Obama-led ‘non-reform’ gives private insurers a 20% overhead
for all government-mandated - i.e. ALL - customers.

Wealthy Pay Fair Share - Twice Obama has extended the Bush Tax Cuts for the
Wealthy

Afghanistan - Obama expanded the Afghan conflict. The war continues.

Are these the actions of a man of courage ? I think they are the actions of either
a coward or a Republican. Hardly the actions of a man of courage.

it’s hard to argue that the president who authorized this risky mission lacked guts… Bill Boyarsky

Just ‘cause you say doesn’t make it so!

The facts as stated said that the compound was being surveilled as of August 2010.

The number of people in the compound as reported: 4 men, 9 women, and 23 children.

Seals reportedly sent in: between 25 and 40.

It was real “risky” mission.  Those must have been some tough, unarmed babies!

Indeed, Obama is not lacking in courage.  It takes a special breed of testicular fortitude to betray his putative constituency as thoroughly as he has, the kind common to the most vile of scoundrels and sycophants.  Obama’s commitment to Wall Street, War, and the further gutting of civil liberty beyond even the obscene reaches of the Bush administration demonstrate him to be a reliable servant to his masters, the rich and powerful, at the expense of the poor and disenfranchised.  Additionally, Mr. Boyarsky’s credulity before the received narrative of the government is charming in its naivete, while his ‘approval’ of thug violence is reprobate.

Boyarsky’s column is consistently cowardly. He
should read Hedges, & go stand in the snow awaiting arrest. Or, he might write a thrilling piece on the nature of centrist courage, & name all of his magnificent heroes who are neither this nor the other.

Can I buy a gun and start shooting people I think are guilty, and call it justice?

I’d be crazy not to, says Obama.

President Obama, sworn to uphold the law, instead publicly shits on it.  Murdering people who have not even been indicted for a crime, has now become an acceptable substitute for a judicial process.  Anyone who thinks that justice involves such “quaint” notions as evidence, prosecution, courts, juries and innocent until proven guilty, should be considered insane, says the US president—the “smart” US president that is.

“Justice was done. And I think that anyone who would question that the perpetrator of mass murder on American soil didn’t deserve what he got needs to have their head examined.”

I guess I am not seeing what is courageous about gunning down defenceless civilians.  But it does seem to be something Americans universally think is brave (if carried out by US soldiers or presidents).

Obama’s reputation for political cowardice, as with other Democrats, is something he tries to create.  Why?  because its better to be seen by the base as a Progressive who is too cowardly to get anything done, than as he is, a psycopathic right winger, who goes after what he wants - which is the opposite of what his Progressive base wants.

“Justice was done. And I think that anyone who would question that the perpetrator of mass murder on American soil didn’t deserve what he got needs to have their head examined.”

Osama Bin Laden was a noob. We create the equivalent of 9/11 every 3 weeks (i.e.: “mass murder on American soil”) by denying health care. Killing is our business and business is good! Can “Seal Team 6” go after those perpetrators next?

Yay for testosterone!

Hey, a black man in the USA, living in the big White House in Washington, bossed around all day, day after day, by Michelle, Sasha and Malia, must have an abundance of courage just to drag his sorry a** out of bed each morning so he can take Bo for his poop walk.