Pundits escalate attacks against Obama

04SCTLS

Dedicated LVC Member
Joined
May 13, 2007
Messages
2,910
Reaction score
6
Location
Lockport
Pundits escalate attacks against Obama

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/04/08/MN1I16TJEN.DTL&type=politics&tsp=1

Carla Marinucci,Joe Garofoli, Chronicle Staff Writers
Thursday, April 9, 2009

It took fewer than 100 days for conservative critics to start lobbing the F-bomb at President Obama.

"F" as in "fascist."
Take Glenn Beck, the bombastic Fox News host, who in recent weeks has repeatedly used the term - along with references to Mussolini and pictures of Hitler and Lenin - to describe Obama's efforts to revive struggling banks and automakers.
The American Spectator, a conservative publication, earlier this month ran an essay on Obama titled "Il Duce, Redux?"
And TownHall.com's David Limbaugh went even further: He called Obama the head of a "Gestapo government" during a recent San Francisco radio interview.
Maybe it is the approach of Obama's 100-day milestone, the crowded agenda of domestic and international issues or the fact that the president is no longer a White House newbie. But the recent high level of hysteria from conservative pundits - which has been dubbed the "Obama Derangement Syndrome" by the leftist blogosphere - underscores a crucial marker that might say as much about Obama's critics as it does about Obama himself.
'Act of desperation'

Jack Glaser, associate professor of the Goldman School of Public Policy at UC Berkeley, says the use of such hyper-heated language from the right so early into the Obama administration "seems pretty clearly to be an act of desperation."
"They can't get any thing to stick to him," he said, citing a New York Times poll this week that showed that two-thirds of Americans approve of Obama's job performance in office, while a record low of 31 percent said they have a favorable view of the Republican Party.
Critics are "grabbing on to whatever they can," Glaser observed, a tactic that is sometimes head-spinning. During the 2008 election, Obama was accused by many of these same voices of being socialist and "he wasn't patriotic enough," Glaser notes. "And now, he's fascist."
The liberal watchdog group Media Matters has established a "Red Scare Index" to track the pundits' descriptions of Obama. It shows that "since the inauguration, there have been over 3,000 references to socialism, fascism, communism" in describing the president, says spokeswoman Erikka Knuti.
The lobbing of such high-powered, even incendiary, labels shows that the critics "obviously have no understanding of the history of the world, of national socialism or of fascism," says Michael Semler, a political science professor at Cal State Sacramento. "They're looking for symbols in language," aiming for maximum impact - and firing blanks, he said.
"I'm surprised they haven't thrown Mao (Zedong) into the mix yet ... or compared him to (North Korean dictator) Kim Jong Il. Where's (Uganda's) Idi Amin?"
In fact, in a recent broadcast, Rush Limbaugh (David is his brother) did appear to draw a connection between Obama and Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, the strongman who has been accused of the torture and murder of his opponents. Limbaugh made a reference to "Robert Ogabe," saying that he "slipped up."
Limbaugh added, "I was confusing him with a well-known Kenyan named Barack Ogabe."
Defenders of Limbaugh and other conservative pundits argue that the use of such loaded criticism is hardly unique in American politics. They note that during the previous presidential administration, pundits on the left didn't pull any punches on President George W. Bush and often resorted to equally aggressive language - though not so early in his administration.
Attacks on Bush

Example: MoveOn.org, in one ad in 2004, made a direct comparison of Bush and Hitler. "A nation warped by lies. Lies fuel fear. Fear fuels aggression. Invasion. Occupation. What were war crimes in 1945 is foreign policy in 2003," the ad said.
Conservatives also note that the recent hyped-up criticism of Obama isn't limited to the right. The president increasingly is getting hit with shots from the left and the political center.
Last month, some of the first anti-Obama street demonstrations in his 11-week-old administration appeared at an anti-war rally in San Francisco. One protester, saying he aimed to compare Obama to Bush, carried a cardboard effigy of Obama's face on an Uncle Sam character. It held a sign that read, "I want you to fight & die in Iraq & Afghanistan."
For the most part, volleys from the left have not been loaded with overheated political rhetoric. The strafing has challenged Obama's foreign policy in a more measured way than comparing him to the Gestapo. It also has come more from the grassroots than the media.
Anti-war activists, for instance, challenged Obama's plan to send 21,000 troops to Afghanistan by saying it threatened "to obliterate the most progressive aspects of Obama's domestic agenda, just as the war in Vietnam ruined the presidency of President Lyndon Johnson," according to a statement last week from United for Peace & Justice, the nation's largest coalition of anti-war organizations.
And the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation ripped the Obama Justice Department this week for "continuing the Bush administration's cover-up of the National Security Agency's dragnet surveillance of millions of Americans" - a stance echoed by progressive MSNBC commentator Rachel Maddow over the past several weeks. Maddow, an increasingly influential voice of the left, told The Chronicle recently that while the Obama administration "dropped the enemy combatant designation, (it) kept all of the meaningful things about making somebody an enemy combatant."
Common thread

The common thread in the criticisms from liberals is that the critics "treat Obama like a professor," said Nichola Gutgold, an associate professor of political communication at Penn State University, who is working on a book about Obama's rhetoric and how he has handled the media.
"They're holding back in their criticisms of him because they realize that these are unprecedented times we're facing, so it's not easy to quickly dismiss what he's doing," Gutgold said. "He's trying to systematically change what we're doing. And that takes time, they figure."
Semler, the Cal State Sacramento political scientist, says that conservative pundits, by going far further, are hurting their own cause by undermining "the legitimate debate on what that (government) intervention should look like" in key industries like banking and auto production.
Any comparisons of a U.S. president to Hitler, Mugabe or Mussolini represent nothing less than "an affront to the American public," he said. "Hitler killed millions of people for their simple religion, gender, sexual preferences and ethnic practices. To equate that with what's going on in the nation's economy is an insult to history and to the memory of those people."
On her MSNBC show Monday, Maddow needled conservative critics, noting how some conservative Web sites are even finding "hidden" messages by playing Obama's speeches backward. "There is a ton of this Obama Antichrist stuff online," Maddow said. "Waaaay more than you'd think there would be."
If they listen hard enough, she said, they'll find the real truth: that playing Obama's signature "Yes, we can" line backward sounds like "Thank you, Satan."
Fighting words

Some examples of the verbal barrage being lobbed at President Obama:
From the right

"Just as Mussolini did - in slightly different words - Obama repeatedly talks about using government to 'leverage' private investment for the greater good."
"Then you combine it with the Obamanation of a growing Il Duce-like cult of the leader. ... The comparison of today's situation to that of Italian fascism is no mere scare tactic, but a serious concern."
- Quin Hillyer, "Il Duce, Redux?" American Spectator, last Thursday

"The government is a heroin pusher using smiley-faced fascism to grow the nanny state."
- Glenn Beck, Fox News, March 31. Last week, he showed photos of Hitler, Stalin and Lenin and asked, "Is this where we're headed?"

"(The White House is) perfectly timed, perfectly monogrammed, perfectly educated to destroy capitalism ... and they're in the process of doing it."
- Rush Limbaugh, March 18

From the center

"With the Obama Justice Department continuing the Bush administration's cover-up of the National Security Agency's dragnet surveillance of millions of Americans and insisting that the much-publicized warrantless wiretapping program is still a 'secret' that cannot be reviewed by the courts, it feels like deja vu all over again."
- Kevin Bankston, senior staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Monday

"The Obama team has yet to formulate the very benchmarks that the president says are at the heart of his new and hard-headed (Afghanistan) strategy. It seems to me that the president can't make final decisions on the strategy without clearly delineated benchmarks, which are necessary to judge the viability and accountability of the strategy."
- Leslie Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, the Daily Beast, March 27

From the left

"The sight of our president having to promise that he would back every GM warranty and give consumers a bonus if they trade in their old Grand Am for a hybrid was alternately sad, hilarious and just plain weird. This is what it's come to: The commander in chief of the free world is now Mr. Goodwrench. Jeesh."
- Filmmaker Michael Moore in an e-mail to supporters, April 1

"His escalation of the war in Afghanistan, as well as the ongoing occupation of Iraq, threaten to obliterate the most progressive aspects of Obama's domestic agenda, just as the war in Vietnam ruined the presidency of President Lyndon Johnson."
 
Or it could be just a reaction to the full court press of Marxism that is spewing from the White House.
 
And the general public shrugs and yawns,
most Americans being so intelligently well informed and aware of 20th century history:rolleyes:
At least whispers of Satanic baby eating rituals haven't surfaced (yet)LOL!
 
And the general public shrugs and yawns,
most Americans being so intelligently well informed and aware of 20th century history:rolleyes:
At least whispers of Satanic baby eating rituals haven't surfaced (yet)LOL!
Could you please, for once in your life, post something that makes sense without having to read it three times?

Thanks.
 
Could you please, for once in your life, post something that makes sense without having to read it three times


Just my comments on the above article.
Sounds like a lot of "Frustrados" carping away at Obama to no effect.
 
Could you please, for once in your life, post something that makes sense without having to read it three times?

Thanks.
As opposed to your posts that make no sense no matter how many times you read them.
 
As opposed to your posts that make no sense no matter how many times you read them.

dont_feed_the_troll.gif
 
As opposed to your posts that make no sense no matter how many times you read them.
Taking the source of this comment into account, it is easy for me to chalk this up to being your problem, not mine. :rolleyes:
 
Ridiculous the hatred that these people have against themselves (the country)

I'm probably the least patriotic guy here, america :q:q:q:qing sucks. But to hate a president that was elected by majority, so vividly, is really getting beyond me
 
Taking the source of this comment into account, it is easy for me to chalk this up to being your problem, not mine. :rolleyes:

Let's just take this little snippet of yours:
And I have to yet again object to your blanket inclusion of catholics into Christianity. There are distinct, extreme differences, which I've taken great pains to point out in another thread.
:

You would have at least 1 billion people on this planet shaking their head and saying "this makes no sense" Would you like to put it to a vote. Guess what Fossten your little cult doe not get to define Christianity as much as you wish it did.
 
Let's just take this little snippet of yours:


You would have at least 1 billion people on this planet shaking their head and saying "this makes no sense" Would you like to put it to a vote. Guess what Fossten your little cult doe not get to define Christianity as much as you wish it did.
1. You don't speak for 1 billion people.
2. Again, because it makes no sense to you speaks more about you than it does me.
3. You're off topic.
4. You're a troll.
5. You don't even know what my 'little cult' is. So you're full of crap.

Bye now, I have no more time to waste on you. Get on topic, or be ignored.
 
Ridiculous the hatred that these people have against themselves (the country)

I'm probably the least patriotic guy here, america :q:q:q:qing sucks. But to hate a president that was elected by majority, so vividly, is really getting beyond me

While reacting emotionally may qualify as "thought" for you (seeing as you apparently buy into egalitarianism; an ideology based on faith and wishful thinking at the expense of reason and reality), conservative thought is not based in hate (or any other emotion, for that matter). It is based in a reasonable skepticism and a desire to counter dishonesty with honesty.

As for the whole "Obama is a fascist" thing, here is a quote you might consider:
Socialists believe in government ownership of the means of production. Fascists believed in government control of privately owned businesses, which is much more the style of this government. That way, politicians can intervene whenever they feel like it and then, when their interventions turn out badly, summon executives from the private sector before Congress and denounce them on nationwide television.
-Thomas Sowell​
Obama's actions with the economy are consistent with fascism and Obama's rhetoric and policies are consistent with progressivism, and ideology which is basically a type of soft, "nice" fascism. Many of the ideological underpinnings of fascism are shared with Marxism/socialism as well as what is effectively socialism and fascism's more modern, nicer form; egalitarianism.
 
Could you please, for once in your life, post something that makes sense without having to read it three times?

Thanks.

I understood it, here's what it means:

And the general public shrugs and yawns,
most Americans being so intelligently well informed and aware of 20th century history:rolleyes:
At least whispers of Satanic baby eating rituals haven't surfaced (yet)LOL!


Conservatives are crying because they're use to getting their way for 8 years.
most americans actually don't believe what's being said in the news (and try to get it from more reasonable places; i.e. internet and not the radio)
And at yall are pointing out every minute, mundane mistake this guy is doing.

At least, that's what i got from it.
 
Well Ahem
Perhaps I do sometimes write with too much brevity.

The liberal watchdog group Media Matters has established a "Red Scare Index" to track the pundits' descriptions of Obama. It shows that "since the inauguration, there have been over 3,000 references to socialism, fascism, communism" in describing the president, says spokeswoman Erikka Knuti.
The lobbing of such high-powered, even incendiary, labels shows that the critics "obviously have no understanding of the history of the world, of national socialism or of fascism," says Michael Semler, a political science professor at Cal State Sacramento. "They're looking for symbols in language," aiming for maximum impact - and firing blanks, he said.

And the general public shrugs and yawns,
most Americans being so intelligently well informed and aware of 20th century history:rolleyes:
Most americans are not informed enough historically to define fascism.
Therefore they don't know what it means and shrug off the (ineffective) conservative attacks.

At least whispers of Satanic baby eating rituals haven't surfaced (yet) LOL!

Politics being war without bullets historically it has been standard practice to try to demonize one's enemy.
The Arabs do it to the Jews all the time.
I was just raising an example of how outrageous things can get.
 
The liberal watchdog group Media Matters has established a "Red Scare Index" to track the pundits' descriptions of Obama. It shows that "since the inauguration, there have been over 3,000 references to socialism, fascism, communism" in describing the president, says spokeswoman Erikka Knuti.
The lobbing of such high-powered, even incendiary, labels shows that the critics "obviously have no understanding of the history of the world, of national socialism or of fascism," says Michael Semler, a political science professor at Cal State Sacramento. "They're looking for symbols in language," aiming for maximum impact - and firing blanks, he said.

FYI, Media Matters is not a credible source. The are smear merchants who traffic in distortion, dishonestly and lies.

Most Americans are not informed enough, historically to define fascism.
Therefore they don't know what it means and shrug off the (ineffective) conservative attacks.

The claims of "socialism" and "fascism" with regards to Obama are not without foundation here. There is a strong ideological basis to them.

Politics being war without bullets historically it has been standard practice to try to demonize one's enemy.
The Arabs do it to the Jews all the time.
I was just raising an example of how outrageous things can get.

You should check the legitimacy of the claim before you write it off as an attempt to demonize. If the claim is legitimate, then it is simply exposing the truth and based in honesty. If the claim is not legitimate, then the claim is demonization and based in dishonesty.

When it comes to these claims of "fascism" and "socialism" in regards to Obama, while there is some exaggeration on the right, the ignorance and/or dishonest is primarily coming from those who are looking to disregard these claims.
 
Politics being war without bullets historically it has been standard practice to try to demonize one's enemy.
The Arabs do it to the Jews all the time.
No, you're describing what CNN does to the Jews.

The Arabs use missiles.
 
Obviously, you aren't aware of the large, broad swath of incompetence that this guy is plowing.

Check this out. Read the details.
And how would that compare to the 650,000 to 1.2 million unecessary deaths in Iraq that have resulted from his predecessor's uneccesary war which was based on barefaced lies. Obama's profilic spending almost pales in comparison to the ultimate cost of that debacle.
 
And how would that compare to the 650,000 to 1.2 million unnecessary deaths in Iraq that have resulted from his predecessor's unnecessary war which was based on barefaced lies. Obama's profilic spending almost pales in comparison to the ultimate cost of that debacle.

How does that have any relevance to this debate? Ever hear the term "two wrongs don't make a right"? What you are doing is making a fallacious tu quoque argument of sorts. It is a deceitful and dishonest attempt to misdirect. If all you are going to do is come in here and misdirect, then only hinder any honest debate. Seems to be consistent with the history of trollish behavior you have established here. :rolleyes:

Also, have any proof that is was a lie? The Clinton administration said that Iraq had WMD's before Bush took office. Where they lying too? If you wanna argue that Bush went in on bad intel, that is one thing, but to claim that he (or his administration) lied is hyperbole to the point of distortion.
 
No, you're describing what CNN does to the Jews.

The Arabs use missiles.

The Arabs raise their children from a very young age to hate Jews by filling their minds with outrageous lies including Jews killing arab children to make blood matzos.

I don't think CNN goes quite this far.
 
"Arab" is offensive to arabics, Its equal to saying the "N" word, I have taken three vacations to Iraq, just thought I would let you guys know.
 
"Arab" is offensive to arabics, Its equal to saying the "N" word, I have taken three vacations to Iraq, just thought I would let you guys know.

With countries with names like Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emerates I think your comparison to the N word is invalid and not a widely held sentiment.
 
How does that have any relevance to this debate? Ever hear the term "two wrongs don't make a right"? What you are doing is making a fallacious tu quoque argument of sorts. It is a deceitful and dishonest attempt to misdirect. If all you are going to do is come in here and misdirect, then only hinder any honest debate. Seems to be consistent with the history of trollish behavior you have established here. :rolleyes:

Also, have any proof that is was a lie? The Clinton administration said that Iraq had WMD's before Bush took office. Where they lying too? If you wanna argue that Bush went in on bad intel, that is one thing, but to claim that he (or his administration) lied is hyperbole to the point of distortion.
Every President is going to make some mistakes, that is human nature. It seems the right would like to point out every minor mistake that Obama may have made and forget every major mistake that his predecessors have made during their administrations. Were Iraq weapons of mass destruction a lie, well either that or the American Intelligence Services are totally incompetetent. I think the best that can be said is that the WMD issue was grossly overstated and used as a justification which would suggest it was dishonest if not an outright lie.

I like the term honest debate, frankly this is just another "beat up the the president" thread rather than any attempt at honest debate. After following a few of these threads I am starting to give up on any hope for my neighbours to the south, why don't you try to work together to rebuild your international credibility and stature rather than continue your partisan bickering which diminishes your credibility on the world stage.
 
The Arabs raise their children from a very young age to hate Jews by filling their minds with outrageous lies including Jews killing Arab children to make blood matzos.

I don't think CNN goes quite this far.

...so...when you say this:
Politics being war without bullets historically it has been standard practice to try to demonize one's enemy.
The Arabs do it to the Jews all the time.
Are you equating indoctrinating children to negative claims against Obama?

Some clarification might be in order.
 

Staff online

Members online

Back
Top