Home › Message boards › Thom's Radio Programs › Thom's nationally syndicated radio show › Meet Barack, New Salesman of Death and Lies

Meet Barack, New Salesman of Death and Lies

Dave M's picture
Submitted by Dave M on 26. July 2010 - 21:51

To the Yes We Can Dupes:

Quote:
It's both interesting and revealing that the CIA sees Obama as a valuable asset in putting a pretty face on our wars in the eyes of foreign populations. It is odious -- though, of course, completely unsurprising -- that the CIA plots ways to manipulate public opinion in foreign countries in order to sustain support for our wars.  Now that this is a Democratic administration doing this and a Democratic war at issue, I doubt many people will object to any of this.
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/03/27/wikileaks

Quote:
The White House has swiftly vowed to continue the war and predictably condemned WikiLeaks rather harshly.  It will be most interesting to see how many Democrats -- who claim to find Daniel Ellsberg heroic and the Pentagon Papers leak to be unambiguously justified -- follow the White House's lead in that regard.  Ellsberg's leak -- though primarily exposing the amoral duplicity of a Democratic administration -- occurred when there was a Republican in the White House.  This latest leak, by contrast, indicts a war which a Democratic President has embraced as his own, and documents similar manipulation of public opinion and suppression of the truth well into 2009.
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/07/25/wikileaks/index.html

Quote:
This is how Assange put it to me this morning in explaining why he believes his organization's activities are so vital and why he's willing to make himself a target in order to do it:

"This information has reform potential.  And the information which is concealed or suppressed is concealed or suppressed because the people who know it best understand that it has the ability to reform.  So they engage in work to prevent that reform . . ."

Suppressing and concealing... T'aint no reform but it's change dupes can believe in.

Comments

slabmaster wrote 5 weeks 4 days ago

Why were the wars we wage in

Why were the wars we wage in the middle east referred to as "imoral" and "illegal" when Bush was pumping money into them, yet for the last year and a half of Obama pumping more money into them, increasing drone attacks on civilians, and adding more troops....eery silence from the liberal community... 

BadLiberal wrote 5 weeks 4 days ago

slabmaster wrote: Why were

slabmaster wrote:

Why were the wars we wage in the middle east referred to as "imoral" and "illegal" when Bush was pumping money into them, yet for the last year and a half of Obama pumping more money into them, increasing drone attacks on civilians, and adding more troops....eery silence from the liberal community... 

What "eerie silence" are you referring to? Thom opposes the Afghan policy. Every liberal talk-show host I listen to with any regularity (Bill Press, Stephanie Miller, Ed Schultz, Thom, Malloy, Alex Bennett, etc., etc.) opposes this policy and wants us the eff out of both theatres. Every liberal and progressive I personally know is also opposed to this policy.

The ONLY pass we're giving Obama on this is that he campaigned on a policy of winding down Iraq in a "responsible fashion" and concentrating our focus on Afghanistan. And right or wrong, for better or worse, that's seems to be exactly what he's doing. So while we can oppose the policy we can't accuse him of going back on his word or breaking a campaign promise.

This "eerie silence" you refer to must be the echo inside your own skull.

Dave M wrote 5 weeks 4 days ago

It's just misguided policies,

It's just misguided policies, riiight? It's not as if he's actively deceiving anyone or suppressing truths, riiight? Oh God nooo.

LOL

Yeah, the left is really pounding the table on this. How pathetic.

meljomur wrote 5 weeks 4 days ago

What makes you believe the US

What makes you believe the US President currently has much real influence as to whether or not the US stays in Afghanistan or not.

What makes you think the country which owns the US purse string doesn't call the shots?

Quote:
In nuts-and-bolts terms, if we stay in Afghanistan and eventually succeed, other countries will benefit more than we will. China, India and Russia are all Asian powers, geographically proximate to Afghanistan and better able, therefore, to garner practical advantages from any stability our armed forces would make possible.

Everyone keeps saying that America is not an empire, but our military finds itself in the sort of situation that was mighty familiar to empires like that of ancient Rome and 19th-century Britain: struggling in a far-off corner of the world to exact revenge, to put down the fires of rebellion, and to restore civilized order. Meanwhile, other rising and resurgent powers wait patiently in the wings, free-riding on the public good we offer. This is exactly how an empire declines, by allowing others to take advantage of its own exertions.

slabmaster wrote 5 weeks 4 days ago

meljomur wrote: What makes

meljomur wrote:

What makes you believe the US President currently has much real influence as to whether or not the US stays in Afghanistan or not.

 

Nice of you to give President Bush a pass. He never planned to enter Afghanistan. It was never his fault. Obama must be a limp little puppet in your eyes. Thank God you worked so hard to get him elected so the empire could dangle him in front of a teleprompter to keep them lemmings pacified.. 

No more war protests, no more rhetorec about "illegal" and "immoral" wars. Of course Obama can't do anything about...anything. He's a mear wind up toy for the Illuminati. 

slabmaster wrote 5 weeks 4 days ago

BadLiberal wrote:  What

BadLiberal wrote:

 What "eerie silence" are you referring to? Thom opposes the Afghan policy. Every liberal talk-show host I listen to with any regularity (Bill Press, Stephanie Miller, Ed Schultz, Thom, Malloy, Alex Bennett, etc., etc.) opposes this policy and wants us the eff out of both theatres. Every liberal and progressive I personally know is also opposed to this policy.

The ONLY pass we're giving Obama on this is that he campaigned on a policy of winding down Iraq in a "responsible fashion" and concentrating our focus on Afghanistan. And right or wrong, for better or worse, that's seems to be exactly what he's doing. So while we can oppose the policy we can't accuse him of going back on his word or breaking a campaign promise.

This "eerie silence" you refer to must be the echo inside your own skull.

So, in comparison to being "opposed" to this policy when President Bush ran it, there are no calls for impeachment, no war protests, no calling the action "illegal" and immoral", no stand up speeches in the empty halls of congress denouncing our involvement, no nightly raving talking heads about how Obama is a criminal for killing innocent Afghans and Iraqies, no wailing about the financial expenditures, etc...

Obama campaigned on being completely OUT of Iraq by May 2010. He one upped Hillary during the phoney campaign promises. http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-21303-Philadelphia-County-Libertarian-Examiner~y2010m5d21-Today-is-the-day-obama-promised-that-troops-would-be-out-of-Iraq?cid=publish_facebook:21303 OH...snap!

You state you and every liberal you know is opposed to Obamas policies. What are you doing about it besides eating container ships full of crow?  

kwikfix wrote 5 weeks 4 days ago

Sorry, all you right-wing

Sorry, all you right-wing mealy-mouthed liars. This is the Bush/sickDick Cheney War and always will be. The right-wing started this war and left President Obama with the job of ending it. The Republican Party is responsible, and always will be,  for every single death that occurs in the middle-east, American soldier and Arab. Cheney wanted to to start a war with Iran before he cut-and-ran from office, but he just didn't have time to get it started.

End of debate,

http://www.costofwar.com/

 

 

Northwestpeep wrote 5 weeks 4 days ago

I think it can be considered

I think it can be considered a Bi-partisen War.

The totals in the House of Representatives were: 420 Ayes, 1 Nay

The totals in the Senate were: 98 Ayes, 0 Nays

meljomur wrote 5 weeks 3 days ago

Well Slab, I am not the one

Well Slab, I am not the one who has a son over there fighting for some arbitrary idea that the war is REALLY to further American freedom and democracy.

Seriously, how can anyone swallow that garbage.

I don't give Obama a pass.  I certainly don't give the Bush administration a pass, after all they started it all.

What I do think has happened over the years, is that as the strength of the Taliban diminished, the Chinese saw a real opportunity to grab resources from mineral rich Afghanistan. 

The fact that the US is providing the military defense for these endeavors is an added bonus for the Chinese (who actually have a MUCH larger standing army than the USA).

For anyone who still believes this war helps America at all, I would just ask, how and why?

polycarp2 wrote 5 weeks 3 days ago

The enemy in Afghanistan was

The enemy in Afghanistan was quietly changed from Osama bin Laden to the Taliban. The prize, an energy pipeline from Azerbajan to the sea...and a trillion bucks worth of mineral deposits.

Somehow, people expect  the Party of Tweedle Dee to be different than Party of Tweedle Dum. One wears red and the other wears blue so we can tell them apart. One wears a donkey patch...the other an elephant.

The liberals in Denver who protested Bush's wars..are still on street corners....now  protesting Obama's wars.

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"

 

slabmaster wrote 5 weeks 3 days ago

meljomur wrote: Well Slab, I

meljomur wrote:

Well Slab, I am not the one who has a son over there fighting for some arbitrary idea that the war is REALLY to further American freedom and democracy.

 

I know,

in your world, someone else always has to do the heavy lifting. It's OK with my son though, he volunteered.

If you wanted to do something positive today, here is a site that I contribute to that helps soldiers and their families. It's a good cause and helps your fellow human.  http://www.soldiersangels.org/

BadLiberal wrote 5 weeks 2 days ago

slabmaster wrote: I know, in

slabmaster wrote:

I know,

in your world, someone else always has to do the heavy lifting. It's OK with my son though, he volunteered.

If you wanted to do something positive today, here is a site that I contribute to that helps soldiers and their families. It's a good cause and helps your fellow human.  http://www.soldiersangels.org/

I served nine years. Serving your country isn't a particularly partisan thing. Don't try to pretend it is.

BTW, did YOU serve? Or were you too busy accumulating money while I did?

opelgt wrote 5 weeks 2 days ago

kwikfix wrote: Sorry, all you

kwikfix wrote:

Sorry, all you right-wing mealy-mouthed liars. This is the Bush/sickDick Cheney War and always will be. The right-wing started this war and left President Obama with the job of ending it. The Republican Party is responsible, and always will be,  for every single death that occurs in the middle-east, American soldier and Arab. Cheney wanted to to start a war with Iran before he cut-and-ran from office, but he just didn't have time to get it started.

End of debate,

http://www.costofwar.com/

 

 

 

Uh.... no.   Actually the fanatic psycho crazy middle eastern jihad crazy muslim terrorists started the war.

Anyone who doesn't like the war in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, wherever..... where would you like it to be?  There or in your town, at the Mall down the street from your house, your neighborhood?

They WILL bring it here if we let them.

Then what will you say.   "The Govt didn't do enough to protect us."

 

???

 

There may be a cost of war, but the cost of freedom is always greater.   One day you just 'might' get it.

Dave M wrote 5 weeks 1 day ago

meljomur wrote:What makes you

meljomur wrote:
What makes you think the country which owns the US purse string doesn't call the shots? ...

What I do think has happened over the years, is that as the strength of the Taliban diminished, the Chinese saw a real opportunity to grab resources from mineral rich Afghanistan.

The fact that the US is providing the military defense for these endeavors is an added bonus for the Chinese.

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare3/manchurian/s_mtitle.jpg

So Mel, who's Obama's "Control"? Helen Thomas?  LOL

What's it like to realize The One is no more than an empty suit dancing on a puppetmaster's strings?  Where did that warm little glow of hopey-changey go?

meljomur wrote 5 weeks 1 day ago

Dave, what makes you think I

Dave, what makes you think I ever thought the US President was ever anything other than a figure head.

But I am smart enough (and have lived abroad long enough) to realize it DOES matter who the figure head of the US is.  And Obama is a thousand times more respected abroad than that last bozo.

That does matter. 

kwikfix wrote 5 weeks 1 day ago

opelgt wrote: kwikfix

opelgt wrote:

kwikfix wrote:

http://www.costofwar.com/

Uh.... no.   Actually the fanatic psycho crazy middle eastern jihad crazy muslim terrorists started the war.  

There may be a cost of war, but the cost of freedom is always greater.   One day you just 'might' get it.

Wrong again, opeigt. Bush and sick Dick Cheney started the war that we are in. Maybe someday you'll get it.  In the meantime, I suggest you volunteer for combat and go shed blood for Dick. The cost of freedom is putting your warm body where your loudmouth is.

opelgt wrote 5 weeks 1 day ago

I did.  PROUDLY served in

I did.  PROUDLY served in Desert Storm and I'd do it again.

Rodger97321 wrote 4 weeks 3 days ago

Persons in Military service

Persons in Military service (soldiers, airmen, sailors, marines) go where they are sent and follow the lawful orders given to them.

This is completely separate from the decision-making processes involved in the selection of where our country stations military personnel and what they are tasked with doing.

The former administration so oversold the idea that one can best show their patriotism by serving in the military that those growing up the past decade have understandably come to confuse patriotism with military service.

The bulk of our national officeholders can be called patriotic (of differing flavors) even though most of them never did active-duty military service.

My Marine Corps days were in the 70's so I think I'll still be around when the war crimes trials of the Bush/Cheney Group finally get underway.

The more rapid the decline of the U.S., the sooner the international community will be in a position to begin those trials.

Somewhat obvious that the real, behind-the-scenes, powers have already decided to throw Bush, et al under the bus by doing nothing to prevent the U.S. from becoming as financially bankrupt as they were morally so.

kwikfix wrote 4 weeks 3 days ago

opelgt wrote: I did.  PROUDLY

opelgt wrote:

I did.  PROUDLY served in Desert Storm and I'd do it again.

So go DO it. This is a volunteer army. Go join the army and fight for Cheney. The only thing you righties ever do is TALK about fighting but you never DO it. Go DO it!

Do it, Do it, Do it, Do it, Do it, Do it, Do it, Do it, Do it, Do it, Do it, Do it, Do it, Do it, Do it, Do it, Do it. 

Recent topics in Thom's nationally syndicated radio show

Active topics in Thom's nationally syndicated radio show

Who's online

There are currently 15 users and 314 guests online.

Online users

  • crowheart
  • polycarp2
  • Harry Schneider
  • bamboo
  • woodster
  • Bull O'Really
  • marmon
  • Phaedra2
  • GustavMahler
  • uclarry