Spintested: 08/11/10

Petraeus, Young Officers To Press For Slower Afghan Drawdown

Wednesday, August 11, 2010

Now if you want to talk about Govt failure how about the Post Office, Amtrack, Fannie and Freddie, Stimulus.

=================================

If these would have had the money thrown at it that the Pentagon's had, we would be what we were before we became "the late great USA".

Our military needs to stop invading other countries for rich stockholders in transnational corporations looking to steal the resources of other nations and exploit and enslave their citizens..
About Afghanistan
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Petraeus, Young Officers To Press For Slower Afghan Drawdown

Is there any doubt that Obama will agree because wants to be seen as a CIC who "listens to the troops on the ground."

Where's the exit? I've seen this movie before.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

It's hardly "manufactured controversy"; Gibbs just told you that Obama is not for universal health care, and isn't ending the wars. We on the left knew that, we've been trying to get voters like you to hear it, but you just can't.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

Over the course of US history, corporations have managed to game our political system, and done it so effectively that the two-party system competes to serve corporate interests while defending that service as, "What's good for GM (corporations) is good for America (We the People)".

DLC Democrats who control the Democratic Party and Republicans are corporate t00Is. Like siblings competing for the attention and approval (campaign contributions) of a parent, Republicans and DLC-controlled Democrats try to outdo each other in delivering for their real constituent, Big Corporations. The trick for them has been to make it seem as if they were really working on behalf of We the People.

Democratic voters have mistakenly believed that Obama&Democrats were for strong regulations on banks, Wall Street, investigations, prosecutions, restitution of what has been robbed from the middle class and poor for the past 30+ years, environmental clean-up, clean, sustainable renewable energy (& that isn't nuclear), putting an end to the wars and occupation of Iraq & Afghanistan, affordable, quality universal healthcare (which ObamaCare is not), and more. The DLC-controlled Democratic party gives lip service to these & all populist issues, because like the Republican Party, the DLC works for the benefit of transnational corporations.

Unless & until there is drastic and uncompromising change to our campaign financing system, until corporations are no longer 'persons' and are prohibited from participating in elections and politics, all efforts to reform government are useless.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

They don't give us "crumbs"; they give us Republican policies renamed and spun.

When the People put Democrats into power to get affordable quality medical treatment for everyone and Obama and Democrats instead force the People to purchase even-more-expensive-than-before insurance policies (that don't require the insurance companies to pay for medical treatment), that's Republican policies that even the Republicans didn't have the caj0nes to try to pull over on Americans.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

And the lesser of two ev!ls is still ev!l.

Since Obama has gotten into office, he's continued most of Bush's policies & his 'accomplishments' are being spun as "reform" when, in fact, they're Republican in nature.

Obama came into office with the greatest Democratic majority in Congress in decades. A filibuster-proof senate, and Obama did a 180-degree turn and slooooowed the pace down. To get "bipartisanship", from Republicans who had already announced that they were going to block everything that Obama and Democrats wanted to do.

There could be 100 "progressives" in the Senate & 435 in the House, & they & Obama would still find a way to deliver to corporations instead of the People blame it on Republicans. Because they're DLC, aka Republicans-in-Democrats'-clothing.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

Do you believe The Hill fabricated Feingold quotes?

Would you prefer links to the same info, only from more left-leaning organizations?

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=11055975

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/07/01/assassinations
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

Another example of Obama continuing Bush's policies:

Doctors Who Aid Torture (And Obama Who Helps Cover It Up)

The report from the physicians’ group does not prove its case beyond doubt — how could it when so much is still hidden? — but it rightly calls on the White House and Congress to investigate the potentially illegal human experimentation and whether those who authorized or conducted it should be punished. Those are just two of the many unresolved issues from the Bush administration that President Obama and Congressional leaders have swept under the carpet.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/08/opinion/08tue1.html?ref=opinion
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

Another example of Obama continuing Bush's policies:

Feingold sees similarities between Bush and Obama on intelligence sharing

Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) voiced his suspicion that the Obama administration is stonewalling on intelligence.

Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) voiced his suspicion that the Obama administration is continuing some of the stonewalling practices of the George W. Bush administration when it comes to providing full intelligence briefings to the relevant committees in Congress.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/62959-feingold-sees-similarities-in-bush-and-obama-on-intel
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

Another example of Obama continuing Bush's policies:

ACLU chief 'disgusted' with Obama

The top official at the American Civil Liberties Union seems to be losing patience with President Barack Obama and his administration.

Speaking at a conference of liberal activists Wednesday morning, ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero didn't mince his words about the administration's handling of civil liberties issues.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/0610/ACLU_chief_disgusted_with_Obama.html
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

Another example of Obama continuing Bush's policies:

Who Are We?

By BOB HERBERT

Policies that were wrong under George W. Bush are no less wrong because Barack Obama is in the White House.

One of the most disappointing aspects of the early months of the Obama administration has been its unwillingness to end many of the mind-numbing abuses linked to the so-called war on terror and to establish a legal and moral framework designed to prevent those abuses from ever occurring again.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/23/opinion/23herbert.html
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

Another example of Obama continuing Bush's policies:

Obama Upholds Detainee Policy in Afghanistan

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration has told a federal judge that military detainees in Afghanistan have no legal right to challenge their imprisonment there, embracing a key argument of former President Bush’s legal team.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/22/washington/22bagram.html?_r=1&fta=y
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

Another example of Obama continuing Bush's policies:

In Warrantless Wiretapping Case, Obama DOJ's New Arguments Are Worse Than Bush's

Friday evening, in a motion to dismiss Jewel v. NSA, EFF's litigation against the National Security Agency for the warrantless wiretapping of countless Americans, the Obama Administration made two deeply troubling arguments.

First, they argued, exactly as the Bush Administration did on countless occasions, that the state secrets privilege requires the court to dismiss the issue out of hand. They argue that simply allowing the case to continue "would cause exceptionally grave harm to national security." As in the past, this is a blatant ploy to dismiss the litigation without allowing the courts to consider the evidence.

It's an especially disappointing argument to hear from the Obama Administration. As a candidate, Senator Obama lamented that the Bush Administration "invoked a legal tool known as the 'state secrets' privilege more than any other previous administration to get cases thrown out of civil court." He was right then, and we're dismayed that he and his team seem to have forgotten.

Sad as that is, it's the Department Of Justice's second argument that is the most pernicious. The DOJ claims that the U.S. Government is completely immune from litigation for illegal spying — that the Government can never be sued for surveillance that violates federal privacy statutes.

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/04/obama-doj-worse-than-bush
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

And your proof for that statement?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/08/10/gibbs/index.html
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

BillLoney, you claim to be a liberal, for the same objectives as me, but all of your words and actions go to support those working against those objectives.

That makes you the tr0II.

So how much is the DLC/DNC/Obama campaign paying you?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

He has not "worked constantly" to achieve what Democratic voters put him into office for.

Since Obama has gotten into office, he's continued most of Bush's policies & his 'accomplishments' are being spun as "reform" when, in fact, they're Republican in nature.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

Obama's continued most of Bush's policies & his 'accomplishments' are being spun as "reform" when, in fact, they're Republican in nature.

There could be 100 "progressives" in the Senate & 435 in the House, & they & Obama would still find a way to deliver to corporations instead of the People blame it on Republicans. Because they're DLC, aka Republicans-in-Democrats'-clothing.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

During the Bush years, Democrats said if the People wanted change, they had to put Democrats in the majority in Congress. So in 2006, we did. Nothing changed.

Democrats said, "You have to give us more Democrats -- 60 in the Senate". In 2008, we gave them the 60. And the White House.

Obama came into office with the wind at his back. More people voted for him, a black man in America, than ever in the history of the US. They did it because of his ability to persuade that he was going to change the system, end the corporatocracy, lobbyism in government -- He was going to be the People's president, not a corporate t00I.

And no sooner did Obama get elected than he slammed on the brakes of the momentum of his election & a filibuster-proof Senate (tentative yet, with 2 senators, Kennedy & Byrd, at d.e.a.t.h's door, Obama did a 180-degree turn on his campaign promises & sloooooowed everything down. To "work in a bipartisan manner with Republicans", after Republicans had already announced they were going to block everything Democrats wanted to do, and vote no on everything, in lockstep.

Since Obama has gotten into office, he's continued most of Bush's policies & his 'accomplishments' are being spun as "reform" when, in fact, they're Republican in nature.

There could be 100 "progressives" in the Senate & 435 in the House, & they & Obama would still find a way to deliver to corporations instead of the
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

The more progressives that win their seats in November, maybe they'll start listening to what we have to say!

=======================

Obama came into office with the wind at his back. More people voted for him, a black man in America, than ever in the history of the US. They did it because of his ability to persuade that he was going to change the system, end the corporatocracy, lobbyism in government -- He was going to be the People's president, not a corporate t00I.

During the Bush years, Democrats said if the People wanted change, they had to put Democrats in the majority in Congress. So in 2006, we did. Nothing changed.

Democrats said, "You have to give us more Democrats -- 60 in the Senate". In 2008, we gave them the 60. And the White House. And no sooner did Obama get elected than he slammed on the brakes of the momentum of his election & a filibuster-proof Senate, did a 180-degree turn on his campaign promises & sloooooowed everything down. To "work in a bipartisan manner with Republicans", after Republicans had already announced they were going to block everything Democrats wanted to do, and vote no on everything, in lockstep.

With 2 of the 60 at de@th's door (Kennedy & Byrd), Obama slowed the works down.

There could be 100 "progressives" in the Senate & 435 in the House, & they & Obama would still find a way to deliver to corporations instead of the People.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

The more progressives that win their seats in November, maybe they'll start listening to what we have to say!

=======================

Obama came into office with the wind at his back, with more people having voting for him, a black man in America, than ever in the history of the US. They did it because of his ability to persuade that he was going to change the system, end the corporatocracy, lobbyism in government -- He was going to be the People's president, and not a corporate t00I.

During the Bush years, Democrats said if the People wanted change, they had to put Democrats in the majority in Congress. So in 2006, we did. Nothing changed.

Democrats said, "You have to give us more Democrats -- 60 in the Senate". In 2008, we gave them the 60. And the White House.

And no sooner did Obama get elected than he slammed on the brakes of the momentum of his election & a filibuster-proof Senate, did a 180-degree turn on his campaign promises & sloooooowed everything down. To "work in a bipartisan manner with Republicans", after Republicans had already announced they were going to block everything Democrats wanted to do, and vote no on everything, in lockstep.

With 2 of the 60 at de@th's door (Kennedy & Byrd), Obama slowed the works down.

There could be 100 "progressives" in the Senate & 435 in the House, & they & Obama would still find a way to deliver to corporations instead of the
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

Obama came into office with the wind at his back, with more people having voting for him, a black man in good old r.a.c.!.s.t America, than ever in the history of the US. They did it because of his ability to persuade that he was going to change the system, end the corporatocracy, lobbyism in government -- He was going to be the People's president, and not a corporate t00I.

During the Bush years, Democrats said if the People wanted change, they had to put Democrats in the majority in Congress. So in 2006, we did. Nothing changed.

Democrats said, "You have to give us more Democrats -- 60 in the Senate". In 2008, we gave them the 60. And the White House.

And no sooner did Obama get elected than he slammed on the brakes of the momentum of his election and a filibuster-proof Senate, did a 180-degree turn on his campaign promises and sloooooowed everything down. To "work in a bipartisan manner with Republicans", after Republicans had already announced they were going to block everything Democrats wanted to do, and vote no on everything, in lockstep.

With 2 of the 60 at de@th's door (Kennedy & Byrd), Obama slowed the works down.

There could be 100 "progressives" in the Senate and 435 in the House, and they and Obama would still find a way to deliver to corporations against the People & blame it on Republicans.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

Helen Thomas lost her seat and her job for comments outside of the press room which offended.

Who can forget the calls from Republicans, Ari Fleischer leading them, for Thomas's firing?

Unless Gibbs is gone, Obama and the Democratic Party stand behind Gibbs's comments and the Democratic Party's base might as well roll over and play de@d.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

Democratic voters have mistakenly believed that Obama&Democrats want what they want. The DLC-controlled DemocraticParty gives lip service to all populist issues (like civil rights protections, restoring habeas corpus, ending the wars, PublicHealthcare, Wall Street reform, environmental & energy issues, etc.).

If the Bush years taught us nothing else, it's that anyone can sell anything to Americans, if you're stolid & relentless in your sales pitch & tactics. It's not that Bush&R0ve were geniuses & knew something that nobody else knew; Bush&R0ve were just more ruthless (clumsy & careless many political graybeards would say) in doing what politicians & the parties had gone to great lengths to hide from Americans.

Obama didn't get to be the first black president, vanquish the Clinton machine (to get the nomination) & the oldest, most experienced politicians in our nation's history (including the Rove machine) by not having mastered these skills. Nor do Democratic politicians (more incumbents than ever, in office longer) not know how to do it. How do you think Democrats managed to keep impeaching Bush&Cheney off the table & have us still reelecting them, not marching on Washington with torches&pitchforks?

Obama&Democrats know how to do it -- They don't want to do it.

The trick for them has been to keep the many different populist groups believing that they really do support our issues, but they're merely inept. And to get us to keep voting for them despite their failure to deliver on any of our alleged shared objectives.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Gibbs Stands By His 'Professional Left' Critique, Expects Liberals To Vote In 2010

Gibbs was speaking in a non-official capacity, in which he can let his hair down and speak his mind as an individual.

=================================

Did Gibbs say this to his wife? How about a personal friend?

No.

Gibbs said this in an interview with The Hill.

Was The Hill interviewing Gibbs perhaps as a "man on the street"?

No.

Gibbs was being interviewed because, second to the president, Gibbs is the voice of the Obama administration.

So you're a professional political operative, Balzac? It's good to know who around here is being paid to l!e to and manipulate voters on behalf of the corporate Obama administration.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Taliban Execute Pregnant Woman

Secular liberals give Islam a break when it comes to the treatment of women. Islam oppresses women far beyond any kind of discrimination found in developed western countries.

==============================

What is this "secular liberals" cr@p?

If anyone in power in the US gave a d@mn about the treatment of women, we would be arming women in Darfur so that they could walk the mile to the river for fresh water without getting raped and/or murdered. And arming women in the Congo. And issuing an ultimatum to the Saudis to grant Saudi women equal rights now and not next century.

If we gave a d@mn about women in Afghanistan, we would have required they all remove their burqas after the invasion in 2001.

We are not in Afghanistan, or anywhere else, because of the treatment of women. The US does not and has never warred on any other nation for humanitarian reasons. It's always about money and resources.
About Afghanistan
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

© Blogger templates Newspaper by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP