I find Obama's respect for protests funny. He hates the Tea Party, he hates their rallies, he accuses them of being all kinds of things, but the protesters in Egypt, why, they are great, Muslim Brotherhood, secular, they're not interested in violence. Obama loves these people in Egypt all the while he is in violation of a federal judge. This man is so concerned about the law in Egypt, he's got his own health care bill declared unconstitutional, and he acts like the court has never ruled. So all this talk about democracy and the rule of law, give me a break, he's flipping Judge Vinson the bird.There's a lot of stuff in there. I'm focused on the question I put in the title. Obviously, I'm also interested in the health care case. He wove that into the discussion — awkwardly... or elegantly?
He may claim to love democracy in Egypt. He knows what that group is. He's a community organizer. He knows exactly what that group is. That's why he's such a big supporter of that. He knows that group's just a bunch of agitators. But to sit around and start talking about, "Oh, we love democracy, and whenever we see it bubbling up, we're gonna support it out there." Yeah, except when the judge says your health care bill's unconstitutional, we're gonna ignore that. He loves democracy in action except when it's the Tea Party. Then all of a sudden they become a bunch of tea baggers, as far as he's concerned. Yeah. I'm not kidding. The American Tea Party, they're responsible for shooting people, they're responsible for all the violence. I mean, who's worked this crowd up into a fevered pitch? I don't know that my program's on the air there. And if it were -- he-he-he-he-he-he-he -- they wouldn't like me much.
Meanwhile, the NYT reports:
The Egyptian military, complying with most of the principal demands of the opposition, said Sunday that it had dissolved the country’s parliament, suspended its constitution and called for elections in six months, according to a statement by the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces read on state television. It also said it would honor all of Egypt’s international agreements, including the peace treaty with Israel.
The military did not address a third major opposition demand to lift emergency rule. In previous statements, the council had promised to take that step once the security situation improved.So, at this point, it's pretty much a military coup, making references to an entity called "the opposition," dissolving parliament, and suspending the constitution. I'm just trying to understand what's going on and why we should feel so much confidence about it.
Or is it political theater? Perhaps Obama et al. are only acting as though they have full confidence that the outcome will be democratic and free, because it is a way to state our expectations, make that outcome more likely, and position us to pressure the military government if that doesn't happen.
Have I stumbled into the answer to my original question up there in the post title? If it's "political theater," then a completely different set of gestures with respect to the Tea Party makes perfect sense.
Posts
207 comments:
1 – 200 of 207 Newer› Newest»And then there's the continued oil drilling moratorium in the Gulf against a judges orders.
YES. That is the explanation. That captures his adult life.
Other than in Rush's fevered imagination, when has the President ever criticized the Tea Party in the way both you and he presume? (Of course you will weasel out of it by saying "I never said Obama, I said 'some people'") And please provide actual quotes, not vague statements about "civility" that were never aimed at a particular movement.
Also, you and Rush and the rest of you morons can drop the meme that the Egyptian revolution was led or organized by the Muslim Brotherhood. It simply wasn't. To constantly repeat this lie belies a shocking ignorance of what happened in Egypt. I expect Rush to be so intellectually lazy and dishonest, but then again, I don't really expect better of you either.
Poltical theater aimed at who?
The MSM audience. They need the MSM in the election, and will not complicate a simple narrative that will ruin that audience's interest.
The audience must not tune away, above all.
Lest they lose the MSM.
Even though the voters' interest would seem to be the first priority, it's below the MSM's interest.
The MSM, via its audience's tastes, so far has edited every public debate. That audience says what story never seems to go away, and what story never appears.
Voters are a problem; the tea party is a problem. But not a source of advertiser revenue.
Welcome to the delicious irony of the leftist worldview. It requires one to have the 'correct' views, despite their 'belief' in free speech.
The Tea Party follows the lines of 'organizing', but because they do not promote the leftist worldview narrative, they are bad.
He is a living, breathing Potemkin village.
And why is he and Hillary still insisting on the return of Manuel Zelaya to power in Honduras, and still calling his lawful removal as the president a military coup when he was removed by a constitutional process by the legislature and supreme court?
Ann didn't care and still doesn't care when George W. Bush was violating the Convention Against Torture.
"There's a lot of stuff in there."
And it's all so idiotic.
Yes, it's all political theater. He loves the Egypt protest because it's against a ruler who is a US ally. He ignores Iranian protests and Honduran protests because they are against anti-US rulers. He hates the Tea Party because they are against his leftist rule.
It will be at least a year before Egypt descends into tyranny again. By then The One will be on his way to reelection. Theater will do in the meantime.
It's all understandable when you realize it's about HIM and his promise to transform the world.
ANN: "Why do some people presume the best of the Egyptian protesters and the worst of the Tea Party protesters?"
HYSTERIC: "(Of course you will weasel out of it by saying "I never said Obama, I said 'some people'")"
Going by what was actually, demonstrably written now = "weaseling," does it?
Fascinating and feeble, in equal measure.
Have you considered that Obama IS our Mubarak? He rules over us by fiat and stigmatizes any organised opposition as dangerous wild folks. He wants his full 30 years to complete transforming America. As to respect for Court-power balancing Presidential power by limiting his rule, Rush remembers that FDR was once a fiat ruler with no limitations, until the Supreme Court said no. FDR never recovered his political mojo after that defeat, although 2 years later WWII elevated his Presidential Powers as Commander-in-chief back to the highest levels ever seen.
AA: Of course, you're brillant. What else could Obama mean by supporting the Egyptian protesters but not the TEA Partiers nor the Iranian protesters. Heck in Obama's view Tea Partiers are scum or at least terrorists. Iranian protesters must be in Obama's view the equivalent of terrorists too, which would make, again in Obama's view, Iran's mullahs the only legitmate form of government there.
Heck, whatever. It doesn't really matter except that Obama's view must be the one that our MSM promotes as being the word from up very high.
wv: unsharp; a definition of our nation's VP.
It's all theater, with him as the star.
The Zero is for governments that hate America (Iran) and hates people who protest against them. He's against governments that are allied with America (Egypt, at least for now) and supports (when he can get around to it) people who protest against them.
And, of course, he's rooting for the Moslem Brotherhood.
Closer to home, he hates America and wants to destroy it while the Tea Partiers love this country and want to save it, so he, like the rest of the Lefties, hate them.
Simple, in'it?
As for Egypt, I will believe that it is now a free and democratic nation when I see it's citizens, including women, proudly displaying their purple ink-stained fingers, as in Iraq and Afghanistan, and when a Coptic Christian can hold the office of president, and when people can freely and peacably renounce Islam and convert to Christianity without being threatened or oppressed or killed.
Isn't it obvious?
POTUS learned racism and loathing of white hegemony at his mother's knee. FLOTUS probably reinforces it to some degree because he's never had a real father's hand guiding his thoughts. He's never accorded his grandparents the kind of respect they deserve--did he write a book about them?
In a sense, POTUS is taking his crappy childhood out on the world.
Freder Frederson said...
Also, you and Rush and the rest of you morons can drop the meme that the Egyptian revolution was led or organized by the Muslim Brotherhood. It simply wasn't. To constantly repeat this lie belies a shocking ignorance of what happened in Egypt. I expect Rush to be so intellectually lazy and dishonest, but then again, I don't really expect better of you either.
The only moron pushing that "meme" is Freder/Montaigne/Alpha
Going by what was actually, demonstrably written now = "weaseling," does it?
Yes, because Ann doesn't have the guts to say Obama when she means Obama. Just like she doesn't have the guts to come out and say she doesn't believe in global warming or she doesn't care if George Bush authorized torture.
Slighty OT:
What bothers me is the difference in Obama's reaction to the pro democracy demonstrators in Tehran and Cairo. It's seems odd that the US was reluctant to support widespread protests against a clearly fraudulent election in Iran that kept in power the most troublesome regime to the US yet quickly pulled support from a long time ally.
As bad as Egypt is, the situation in Iran is worse.
The situation in Egypt seems to be part theater and part real. The miltary is still in charge, but on the other hand they can't very well be as obvious about it as under Mubarak, so there will have to be some changes, and that may again bring about some other changes.
And then there are Tunisia, Algiers, Yemen, etc. Maybe just some bonfires in the night; maybe something will come of it.
Qui vivra, verra.
That's the George Bush liberated Iraq and Afghanistan, by the way. The same Iraq where those on the left are still saying that it was wrong to invade and remove Saddam from power, and the same Afghanistan where Obama officials are having negotiations with the Taliban for power-sharing.
[...] when she means Obama.
And your actual, verifiable evidence that she does, in fact, "mean Obama," in this instance, is...?
"Also, you and Rush and the rest of you morons can drop the meme that the Egyptian revolution was led or organized by the Muslim Brotherhood. It simply wasn't. To constantly repeat this lie belies a shocking ignorance of what happened in Egypt. I expect Rush to be so intellectually lazy and dishonest, but then again, I don't really expect better of you either."
Speaking of intellectually lazy and dishonest, can you point to even one example of my stating the lie that you say is being "constantly repeat[ed]." I have consistently avoided purporting to know anything about Egypt that I don't know. I have held back and observed and talked about other people saying things that go beyond what I think they can know.
And please inspect the 2 paragraphs of your comment, Freder, and explain to me why you aren't laughing at yourself?
My post title question reflects the way many people, including mainstream media, reacted completely differently to crowds of people showing up in a public place in a political way. To me, it's very odd. What does a crowd mean? How do you read a crowd? What will result if they cause political change? What does that have to do with what was in the minds of individual people when they decided to lend their bodies to the mass? I'm a pretty distanced observer to things like that.
Obama is fundamentally sympatico with everything anti-liberal, in the classic sense of that term.
The worldwide fight for Western values, including democracy, is important. But it's not as important as the fight against Republicans. They want to ruin the country. They want to violate the rule of law. They want to turn everyday people into corporate slaves. They want unlimited power. They want a corrupt government and will pass out whatever massive payouts they can get away with to their clients to their clients. They Republicans are the biggest evil that the world knows.
With the Tea Party being just an offshoot of the Republican party, it is reasonable for the first priority to be to attack them. Egypt is waaay over there in Macacaland and is not as important.
And when has a President since Nixon ever paid attention to a ruling of a District Court judge? C'mon... get real! Besides, Republicans and Tea Parties want to stop Obamacare so that business can keep employees sick and poor, in their state of effective indentured servitude. It is important that their evil plans be stopped.
Don't you want an American President to fight evil at home first, before trying to export Western values to the world?
The only moron pushing that "meme" is Freder/Montaigne/Alpha
That doesn't even make sense.
@troll
"Other than in Rush's fevered imagination, when has the President ever criticized the Tea Party in the way both you and he presume? (Of course you will weasel out of it by saying "I never said Obama, I said 'some people'") And please provide actual quotes, not vague statements about "civility" that were never aimed at a particular movement."
Go ahead and stick your head back in the sand. Nobody has imagined the words uttered by Zero that up until this regime would have been considered unseemly exiting the mouth of a sitting president.
This clearly illustrates the task of leftists that support Zero - trying to uphold a castle of sand on their shoulders. Pitiful, really. I'll just sit here and watch as you flail.
I am not an Obama fan, but at the same time why is that Rush is so willing to assume the worst of the Egyptian protesters? Because of the Muslim Brotherhood? Really? Those people do not have freedom of speech or press. In Egypt the number 2 guy went to jail under Mubarak. A blogger was tortured to death in police custody.
What would Mubarak have done to a critic who went after him the way Rush likes to go after Obama?
Maybe some people on the left have a problem with the Tea Party people because they see them as a threat to their continued political dominance. But Rush seems to be just as unwilling to accept the fact that maybe rank and file ordinary Egyptians are tired of their country being run by a dictator for decade after decade.
"Why do some people presume the best of the Egyptian protesters and the worst of the Tea Party protesters?"
Because they agree with what they hope the intent of the Egyptian protesters will be?
Because they disagree with what they presume is the intent of the Tea Party protesters?
The crowd in Cairo and the tea partier crowd in D.C. have that peculiar thing in common; they both cleaned up after themselves.
I believe they are the only revolutionary mobs in history to do that.
I think Rush's point is that Barack Obama wouldn't mind at all to see the Muslim Brotherhood triumphant in Egypt.
Why?
Because he seems to support terrorists wherever he finds them. Oh, he calls them "community activists" but we all know what they really are. Those are just code words.
Obama supports terrorists whether they be in Saudi Arabia where he bowed to them, in Egypt, Iran, or in his old Chicago neighborhood where he launched his political career in the living room of the United States terrorist bomber Bill Ayers.
Barack Hussein Obama (remember, he requires that we call him by his Muslim name) is of a piece with the terrorists of the Muslim Brotherhood ... so of course he engineered with Google the overthrow of the man who has been holding the folks in the 'Hood back.
The teabaggers, on the other hand, threaten to undermine Barack Obama's socialist conversion in America ... by suing in court to assert their once-sacrosanct Constitutional rights.
Obama doesn't care about rights ... that's why he's ignoring the court (flipping off the court, as it were) with respect to his unconstitutional health care bill that he's continuing to implement in defiance of the court.
In defiance of the court.
Barack Obama says a lot of things. But of course what he says is unimportant and often a bald-faced lie. What he does is important.
He supports terrorists by his actions. By his actions, he defies our Constitution and the courts which uphold it.
Obama is rogue.
It think that's what Rush is trying to say.
This morning on Chris Wallace the entire panel, including Liz Cheney came out in support of the Egyptian people.Not all conservatives were cheering for the dictator.
"Why do some people presume the best of the Eqyptian protesters and the worst of the Tea party protesters."
I don't believe the people in question {cough}liberals{cough}actually do believe the worst of the Tea Party protesters. They just claim the worst intentions for their own political gain.
In other words; they're lying.
Scenario 2:
1. Egyptians are the right skin color for the PC left. Therefore, they must be noble and good.
2. The Tea Party is too white. Thus, they are ignoble and bad.
Speaking of intellectually lazy and dishonest, can you point to even one example of my stating the lie that you say is being "constantly repeat[ed]."
I do apologize for that, you have not claimed the MB is behind it. In your typical fashion, you refuse to truly commit yourself to any concrete fact. But the meme has been echoed time and again throughout the comments here. But as you always say--you are not responsible for the uninformed statements of your commentors.
"Speaking of intellectually lazy...
Explains why the physics class lessons never sunk in.
That may be so Original Mike but it's a dangerous flirtation which could backfire.
Just like voting for Obama in 2008 was.
"Other than in Rush's fevered imagination, when has the President ever criticized the Tea Party in the way both you and he presume?"
I understand why you wouldn't trust Rush ... but would you trust the New York Times?
Here is the NY Times, on how Obama and the Democrats plan to make the Tea Party out as a party of extremists.
"We need to get the message out that it's really dangerous to re-empower the Republican Party."
Barack is trying to make the Tea Party out as dangerous extremists ... aka terrorists.
And Democrats aren't every shy about discussing this strategy. They freely talk to the press about it.
It's no secret that Barack Obama hates the Tea Party and will do anything he can to destroy Americans involved in the movement.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/20/us/politics/20dems.html?_r=2
I have also noticed that here of late Obama is starting to sound a little more like Bush when it comes to Iran. He allowed a real opportunity to go by when the Iranians took to the streets, I think he honestly thought he could use his personality to engage the Iranians. Of course that was a disaster. The mullahs do not want to be engaged. They want to cause trouble and destroy Israel and chant death to America all day every day.
Maybe Obama is beginning to catch up to events. Too little too late.
Freder Frederson,
You and Rush and the rest of you morons can drop the meme that the Egyptian revolution was led or organized by the Muslim Brotherhood. It simply wasn't.
No, it wasn't, but whoever did it was in the Bush White House in 2008, so - if you're entertaining some Left-Wing fantasy about it's origins - you're just a delusional as they are.
But I do find it fascinating how lies keep spreading even after the facts are out there. Ann knows this was fostered by Bush - she did a post on it - so why wouldn't she continue from that premise, instead of tagging along with the media line, whether put out there by Rush or anyone else?
I was thinking this morning about how she chastised me a few days ago, about my insistence that her lack of interest in cultism is a failing, but I think it's also part of a larger Boomer failing:
A lack of interest in truth, generally.
Maybe the Muslim Brotherhood have changed their spots in 30 years, but I do remember how Anwar Sadat died, so I would like to see a lot of evidence for that before I go to believing it.
Freder Frederson Wrote: "Other than in Rush's fevered imagination, when has the President ever criticized the Tea Party in the way both you and he presume?"
And the First Lady has also joined in the hate campaign against Americans participating in the Tea Party.
Here let's go to ABCNews ... on Michelle Obama visiting the NAACP to support their calling the Tea Party a racist organization.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/naacp-tea-party-civil-rights-group-considers-resolution/story?id=11144640
Both Barack Hussein Osama and Michelle Obama have taken affirmative steps to demonize Americans who align themselves with the Tea Party. They've called them "extremeists," "racists" and said the Tea Party is a "dangerous" re-empowerment of the Republican Party. He even likened the Republicans to hostage-takers.
The Obamas want voters to believe that the Tea Party is an extremist racist group. They've taken actions toward that end (unsuccessful ones so far, but there you have it).
And it's no secret. The mainstream media have been reporting their actions all along. It's trivial to link people to their demonizations of average Americans.
Clearly you haven't been paying attention Freder.
Speaking of protests, will you be attending the union-sponsored demonstrations at the capitol today, AA? I see the Madison papers are all about "assuming the best" towards those protesters and already comparing Walker to Mubarak, which I guess means those poor government employees are somehow the equivalent of the oppressed in Cairo?
Barack is trying to make the Tea Party out as dangerous extremists ... aka terrorists.
Huh? Where do you even get this from that statement. First of all it was about Republicans, not the Tea Party. And he said "dangerous" not "dangerous extremists", so you are distorting his words.
In the middle of the thread where the president has already been called "our Mubarak" and "supporting terrorists wherever he finds them", that is rich.
I see the Madison papers are all about "assuming the best" towards those protesters and already comparing Walker to Mubarak, which I guess means those poor government employees are somehow the equivalent of the oppressed in Cairo?
Why am I suddenly experiencing the highly unappetizing vision of dozens upon dozens of beefy, perennially cosseted batteners-upon-the-state-teat shaking their fists and croaking in huffy, red-faced unison: "Tin soliders and Walker comin'... Four dead in Wis-con-sinnnnnnnnnn"...?
No, it wasn't, but whoever did it was in the Bush White House in 2008, so - if you're entertaining some Left-Wing fantasy about it's origins - you're just a delusional as they are.
Give me a freaking break. The Bush White House didn't say a word when Mubarak had his main presidential opponent jailed and banned his party because it looked like he had a chance in the last election. Condi Rice even went to Egypt shortly before the election and didn't even raise the issue. Bush fell over himself congratulating Mubarak when he won that, now unopposed election.
And now you think that some Bush operative, two years after Bush left office, managed to orchestrate a mass uprising as some grand delayed plan Bush had?
Yeah right!
"I am not an Obama fan, but at the same time why is that Rush is so willing to assume the worst of the Egyptian protesters? Because of the Muslim Brotherhood?"
Rush is not assuming the worst of the Egyptian protesters. He's been saying, as I have, that we can't really know what's happening and that it's odd the way the media is assuming things it can't know and effusing over the protesters. His theory, stated repeatedly, is that for the media, it's all about promoting Obama and helping him get reelected, and so, for that reason, they are portraying the protests as a wonderful accomplishment by Obama. Read the whole monologue at my link and you'll see that's clearly his point. As to what's really happening, with respect to the Muslim Brotherhood, he only talks about how there are various possible things going on. How do we know what's down the road? How do we know Egypt won't end up like Iran? Etc. etc.
In your typical fashion, you refuse to truly commit yourself to any concrete fact.
In which case it was pretty fucking stupid of you to accuse her of making such a commitment, wasn't it?
His theory, stated repeatedly, is that for the media, it's all about promoting Obama and helping him get reelected, and so, for that reason, they are portraying the protests as a wonderful accomplishment by Obama.
His theory is nonsense. Get a clue. The whole world doesn't revolve around the U.S. If he, you or anyone else had bothered to look at foreign coverage of the revolution, it has very little to do with Obama.
And where on earth has the MSM been pushing the idea that this is some great accomplishment by Obama? My perception of the MSM coverage is that the White House has been reacting to events in Egypt, and really has had very little idea what was going on throughout the whole event. I think it is fairly accurate and like the events of 1989 shows that our intelligence apparatus is far from perfect.
"Huh? Where do you even get this from that statement."
I got it from the NY Times. You can read, can't you?
Here' let's quote the NY Times directly.
NY Times: "President Obama’s political advisers, looking for ways to help Democrats and alter the course of the midterm elections in the final weeks, are considering a range of ideas, including national advertisements, to cast the Republican Party as all but taken over by Tea Party extremists, people involved in the discussion said."
So, there you have it. Written by the Democrats' own NY Times. Obama and his political strategists calling Tea Party Americans "extremists." He also likened Republicans to "hostage takers." Hmmm ... "extremeist hostage takers" ... isn't that code words for "terrorists?"
His own spokesman said re-empowering Republicans was "dangerous."
So, "dangerous" "extremist" "hostage-takers." Not to mention siccing his wife on Americans by calling Tea Party members "racists."
But don't take my word for it. I read it in the NY Times. And on ABCNews. You know ... mainstream media.
Not Rush Limbaugh.
(FYI: The Tea Party is not a third political party. It is a loosely-knit group of conservative Americans allied with the Republican Party.)
In which case it was pretty fucking stupid of you to accuse her of making such a commitment, wasn't it?
And I apologized. I should have left the "you" out.
They presume it for the same reason Rush presumes the worst about Obama.
Ideology.
OK, let me state this a third way.
We like demonstrators who we think agree with us. We don't like demonstrators who we think disagree with us.
I've explained this so deeply and thoroughly.
Is that him, baby, or just a brilliant disguise?
And where on earth has the MSM been pushing the idea that this is some great accomplishment by Obama?
Chris Matthews on Egypt and Mubarak: 'It Took Obama to Have This Happen'
"He's been saying, as I have, that we can't really know what's happening and that it's odd the way the media is assuming things it can't know ..."
Here's what we do know, however.
The CIA run by Barack Obama tried to convince Congress that the Muslim Brotherhood is a "secular" organization opposed to violence.
So, you have the CIA's top men perjuring themselves before Congress - trying to convince a disbelieving America under that a bunch of fucking Muslim murderers aligned with Osama bin Laden have the best interests of Egypt at heart.
Gee ... I wonder where anyone got the idea that Hussein Obama is supportive of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Freder Frederson said...
No, it wasn't, but whoever did it was in the Bush White House in 2008, so - if you're entertaining some Left-Wing fantasy about it's origins - you're just a delusional as they are.
Give me a freaking break. The Bush White House didn't say a word when Mubarak had his main presidential opponent jailed and banned his party because it looked like he had a chance in the last election. Condi Rice even went to Egypt shortly before the election and didn't even raise the issue. Bush fell over himself congratulating Mubarak when he won that, now unopposed election.
And now you think that some Bush operative, two years after Bush left office, managed to orchestrate a mass uprising as some grand delayed plan Bush had?
Yeah right!
As usual, Freder/Montaigne/Alpha just regurgitates the Kos talking points.
Dubya's speaking out against repression in Egypt is well-documented (even the Lefties have had to admit it), as is The Zero's silence as part of his wildly successful Reset policy.
But we don't need to even look that far. Polls show the US was twice as popular under Dubya than under The Zero.
@fort
"They presume it for the same reason Rush presumes the worst about Obama.
Ideology."
No. Its more about direct actions, and demonstrable associations.
wv - gutsishh
Nobel Peace Prize: Next up - The Muslim Brotherhood
Teacher! Teacher!
I actually answered the question you asked.
And I did a pretty good job of it!
Gimme an A! I deserve an A!
These other guys are just ignoring your question, schoolmarm, and re-directing the post toward the usual hate him/love him argument about Obama.
I alone deserve a gold star.
It is political theater.
I've been ignoring all the advice and recriminations about Egypt from the left and the right. The White House has no power over events over there and no clear winning path.
A comparable situation was the interrupted coup that nearly remove Hugo Chavez from power during the W administration. Lukewarm calls for stability from that White House were used for Chavez and his supporters for years afterwards as a platform for anti-americanism.
Another comparable situation was Tiananmen Square. The MSM and White House celebrated the Tiananmen protesters as a pro-democracy movement. In many ways it certainly was. But I remember reading with some amusement an article in one of those arts-n-progress weeklies proving that the protesters were really against third-way capitalism. The author was outraged that the MSM was covering this up.
Freder ... I see you making a bunch of claims.
And then I see those claims being retracted once a few commenters call you out and link you to the evidence you say isn't there:
1) You claimed Ann made statements she didn't make ... then retracted.
2) You claimed Obama hasn't participated in a hate campaign against Tea Party Americans ... when it's been reported in the NY Times.
3) You've claimed the MSM isn't saying Obama caused the Egypt coup ... but it is trivial to link you to Chris Matthews making that precise claim.
You say a lot of stuff that seems to be easily batted down by people providing links to source material that is widely available to anyone who knows how to use Google.
The internet is empowering in that way. It's really easy to link readers to other sources of information to debunk Democrat Party spinmeisters such as yourself.
Rush Limbaugh is just being antagonistic by drawing a loose and false parallel. It's what he does. He knows full well Obama does not support Egyptian protestors any more than he supports Tea Party activists.
I sense Obama would have supported Tea Party activism had the movement come to bloom during Bush's term. But that didn't come about until after his election and his own policies became clear which made much worse the very things that brought about Tea Party activism in the first place. Their full fruition is yet to be seen.
Freder Frederson, this is Sunday, goddamnit be nice. if you had the slightest concern about torture you'd stop being so torturously idiotic. See the subject here is attitude toward Egyptian protest cf. American protests, not the enduring hatreds you harbor that distort your personality and warp your conversations. You disparage memes you imagine in others while persisting in hammering away at your own, years past their expiration.
Here now, have a Valentine pie.
Ann didn't care and still doesn't care when George W. Bush was violating the Convention Against Torture.
Don't you just love how the left just makes stuff up, and then tells each other whatever fable it was enough times, that they actually start believing that it is true, and that it has been proven to be true?
/via Blackfive
On Tuesdaythe Obama Administration asked Hosni Mubarak to step aside.
On Wednesday they said that transitioning power “now means yesterday.”
On Saturday morning the Obama Administration said Mubarak must stay.
On Saturday evening the Obama Administration said Mubarak should step aside.
On Sunday Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Mubarak must stay in power.
On Tuesday the Obama Administration said that political reform will be a gradual process.
"On Tuesday the Obama Administration said that political reform will be a gradual process."
That's the takeaway.
Look ... it's all a bunch of political posturing and spin bullshit.
The sad fact is that we've hired a bunch of wannabes to run our country and their actions speak volumes.
The topper was James Clapper's laughable perjury before Congress ... trying to convince us the Muslim Brotherhood should have a Saturday morning cartoon on PBS or something.
I mean, it's obvious that these people are just rank fucking amateurs and we just need to fire them as quickly as the Constitution allows us to before they do more damage.
@Fen: Our foreign policy hasn't merely been lobotomized, under the ham-fisted auspices of the current administration... it's actually been, God help us (*choke*), BIDENized.
Freder Frederson,
I apologized. I should have left the "you" out.
Damn it, Freder, I was ready to give up on you and then you had to go and be decent - fuck. So, if you can do that, then why's it so hard for you to accept the rest of it?
You think that some Bush operative, two years after Bush left office, managed to orchestrate a mass uprising as some grand delayed plan Bush had?
Yeah right!
I told you Ann already provided a post stating the protest leaders were in the Bush White House - why must you reject that now? It just makes you look stupid and hard-headed, like you enjoy fighting - with reality.
I swear, the biggest obstacles to getting anything done is assholes rejecting the truth in favor of being immature and rebellious.
As usual, Freder/Montaigne/Alpha just regurgitates the Kos talking points.
I don't think that this is precisely true. Freder does seem to think a bit more than does Alpha, but my theory about his problems is that he spends a month or so in leftist echo chambers, then comes out for air, comes over hear, repeats what he has been hearing for so long there, and is surprised when it isn't taken as received wisdom.
It is as if half the stuff he says here is knee jerk stuff, and half has been thought out some.
There's nothing disingenuous about Althouse's comparison of Egyptians protesting Hosni Mubarak with the 30% of Americans (at most) identified with the Long Island Iced Tea Partiers as they protest the much more advanced, civilized, rational and decent administration of President Obama! Nothing at all! Now pay no attention to that Nancy Grace look-alike behind the curtain while her little bitch Chip bakes you a cake so that you can forget about everything that makes Egyptian political society different from America's (with the exception of the bad, scary Mooooslim Brotherhood!!!! They're soooo different from the John Birchers here in our midst.)
Sunday School Lesson of the Day for the Baggers:
Satan = Obama.
Holy Trinity = Jesus, Reagan and Palin.
Paul = Glenn Beck.
Now go back to debating Freder, who makes the mistake of taking a morbidly obese drug addict seriously. If it weren't for the brainless Baggers, he'd be spouting his nonsense from a street corner with the other junkies. And with a lot less girth to constipate his vocal cords.
When people tell/show you who they are, believe them.
Everyone winds themselves into knots trying to figure Obama out, but you start from the false premise that he actually cares about America - one that the Founders envisioned. Once you erase that fallacy from your thinking, everything will make sense.
What does he care about? He doesn't really care about reelection, only that he has time to finish what he's started. The MSM falsely believes that reelection is all anyone could ever want, but it serves his purpose nonetheless.
He is for One World order, with no more power alotted to America than any other sovereign, if he even thinks that America should remain sovereign. He does not care for America to be a leader. He is not a leader. He is for organizing equality of outcome. Why is this so hard for everyone to understand?
The problem with this thinking is that the world does need a leader, regardless of how much you want to dream for a utopia. America needs to be that leader. We need to live up to the tenets of America as our Founders set them out, and to stand up for democratic principles. Once you accept that Obama has done everything to thwart those ideals, it will be very easy to explain his actions, which speak louder than words, if you allow yourself to hear them.
Obama is right about one thing - he is simply a canvas upon which you can cast your own expectations. You can keep twisting about trying to explain him with the idea that he wants what's best for America. When you finally wake up, you may not see the same America you thought existed. Face the truth and stop trying to make him into what you want him to be.
The only thing that gives me hope about this is that it means that there are plenty of people out there who still do believe in America.
He's been saying, as I have, that we can't really know what's happening...
Good. Nancy Grace is finally getting somewhere. Now repeat that to yourself every time you hear some crap being spouted out of Fat Limbaugh's constipated vocal cords and apply it to the rotten sewage floating along in his own stream of addled consciousness.
Ritmo_Libtard: 30% of Americans (at most) identified with the Long Island Iced Tea Partiers
How desperate of you.
"with the 30% of Americans (at most) identified with the Long Island Iced Tea Partiers as they protest the much more advanced, civilized, rational and decent administration of President Obama!"
I see Bagdhad Bob is making his predictable appearance.
"But it's not as important as the fight against Republicans. They want to ruin the country. They want to violate the rule of law. They want to turn everyday people into corporate slaves. They want unlimited power. They want a corrupt government and will pass out whatever massive payouts they can get away with to their clients to their clients. They Republicans are the biggest evil that the world knows."
Julius, you've just put your finger on exactly why I think the Dem/Prog platform is so weak and pathetic...yet over on the Republican side they're trying to get someone ready, and may not be able to
I figure the libertarians rise in opposition to the liberals, liberals are still revisiting the 60's and excessive freedoms and relativism, while the repubs and social conservatives are wondering what happened to their country.
Barry is way too far left for me. On EPA regulations alone I will certainly vote to get him out.
Big things and nothing.
Fine Fen. Provide your own estimate for the number enlisted in fat cat Dick Army's (who is much like Hosni Mubarak himself in many ways) astro-movement.
But as you always say--you are not responsible for the uninformed statements of your commentors.
@ Freder.....including yours
Bagger please! The Retropublicans won by the margin they did because it was a midterm election (i.e. no youth vote) in a bad economy. If you think your fellow baggers therefore represent a proportion of the American public equal to the margin of their wins in the House, you are either sorely mistaken or not that bright.
I really don't expect that Obama would do anything except to demonize his domestic political opponents. The Chicago/Alinsky environment that he learned politics in would demand nothing less.
What bothers me though is how he handles the rest of the world. The tentative Iranian revolution might have actually worked if he had thrown at least some of our moral power behind it. We are left asking how many more Iranians are going to die for Carter selling out the Shah. As with what is happening in Egypt this last week or so, the Carter Administration blinded itself to what was happening for philosophical and political reasons, and we have been paying for it ever since. And the Iranian public even more.
No one knows right now how powerful or popular the Muslim Brotherhood is going to be over the next bit of history. We do know that they were banned from Egypt because of their violence, and that they are the spiritual parents of the organizations across the Muslim world causing most of the death and violence there. And we know that they have been our enemy since at least WWII, when they were allied with the Nazis (while the last Shah's father was helping us ship military material to the Soviets).
They claim to be non-violent, but they also demand that Sharia law be imposed in Muslim countries, and for a new Caliphate.
The problem is that there is enough that is troubling in their past and in their heritage to worry about them anywhere near power. And our Administration seems willing to believe anything positive they hear about this organization, regardless of plausibility (such as that they are a secular group).
The problem is that the Administration doesn't appear to have much of a clue about what was going on in Egypt, apparently even listing to CNN (remember, the "news" organization that worked so closely with Saddam Hussein) to get some of their information. And, they appear to be totally ignoring Carter's mistakes 30 years before.
Combine this with the fact that this time, the stakes are a lot higher. Egypt is at the center of the Arab world. It is where the culture was, for millenia when the ancestors of the Saudis were still running around the desert on their camels. Iran is a significant distance away, and is run by Shiite Persians.
Egypt has been instrumental in keeping the peace with Israel over the last 30 years or so, works closely with Israel with the Gaza arms embargo.
So, the stakes are much higher this time, and the Administration seems to have been picking sides based on skin color and revolutionary credentials.
Maybe we are wrong here. But can we afford to rush into things as we have, with that hanging over our heads?
Why compare the Tea Party to anti-Mubarak demonstrators? Why not compare them to these guys?
I'm just going along with Oxy's and Nancy Grace's we don't really know who's who and what's what! meme.
"Freder does seem to think a bit more than does Alpha"
There are soap dishes in my house that pull off that accomplishment.
To answer the question... Thinking the worst of the Tea Party protesters is because they are a political threat. The protesters in Egypt are not a political threat.
Also, supporting the protesters in Egypt and stating the expectation that it will all shake out in favor of democracy and freedom is (or should be, if that's what is happening) a statement of intent designed to help that outcome along.
Or it would be if Bush was saying it... and he *would* be saying it, Muslim Brotherhood or not.
Obama? Who knows. He's never been seen to support the right side in any foreign governmental upset yet. He actively avoids any unseemly declarations presuming that people *must* desire freedom and declaring our willingness to help.
So it might not be political theater for the purpose of pushing expectations of democracy and freedom. It might just be political theater to make people at home happy.
People here, both left and right, are insufficiently cynical. What has happened is that the military has staged a coup, and Mubarak and his son are no longer in power. Perhaps the military permitted and used the demonstrators as a lever to remove the Mubarak family Now military officers unaffiliated with the Mubarak family can get a fairer share of the bakeesh.....There is great popular support in Egypt for the benefits that democracy brings. There is less support for the responsibilities that democracy entails When I see crowds in the Muslim nation demanding greater rights for women or greater respect for minority population then I will believe that there is a new dawn
"So, the stakes are much higher this time, and the Administration seems to have been picking sides based on skin color and revolutionary credentials."
This.
When I see crowds in the Muslim nation demanding greater rights...
You're not likely to get that absent democracy, William.
Egypt doesn't yet have and the army may cynically move to block democracy, but the fact that that institution has more popular legitimacy than a privileged kleptocrat, who's stolen billions from the Egyptian economy at the expense of a great many people getting by on $2 a day or less, shouldn't be lost on those Americans on the right agitating against Obama for his handling of the political economy.
The right has insufficient appreciation for democracy. Yes, it's not the same as individual liberties. But it limits power throughout society in a way that makes the elites less likely to get away with ignoring and subverting your rights.
Freder, apparantly Holder thinks your attack on previous administration is political rhetoric
I do not trust the Arabs to do the right thing.
Obama seems to now although it was he and the Left that consistently told us the Democracy project neocons like Bill Kristol were pushing would backfire.
We would like to imagine that every human heart longs for freedom and democracy and in the west perhaps they do. But I am not so sure about the Egyptian outcome. Huge unemployment permits thousands to continue the protests until....something. In the meantime the business of the country is going to hell. The protesters I have seen and heard interviewed seem to think that magically something...something is going to happen. Or else.
Would our leftie commenters be as clear in support of similar protests in Cuba? Also, what happened to our anti-war movement, it seems to have petered out. What do they do with the puppets?
Jonathan Alter quotes Obama in his book "The Promise: President Obama, Year One"
"the unanimous vote of House Republicans against the stimulus bills “set the tenor for the whole year … That helped to create the tea-baggers and empowered that whole wing of the Republican Party to where it now controls the agenda for the Republicans.” "
By the way, I was hopeful that the Democracy project pushed in Iraq would work but have lost faith in that idea over the course of the last 8 years. I am back to believing what I believed before about the "desire for freedom" in the Arab world.
"My post title question reflects the way many people, including mainstream media, reacted completely differently to crowds of people showing up in a public place in a political way. "
This is such an absurd exercise.
A while back Meade (not to mention others) foolishly complained about not living in a free country (as if they're slaves, or BHO is a dictator, or....something).
Now we're supposed to believe that the TPers are in the same boat as the Egyptians who've lived w/ the tyranny of Mubarak for thirty years. And, if you don't react to both victim groups as if they are comparably suffering: LIBRUL LAMESTREAM BIAS!!11!!!111!!!!!!1!!!111.
What happened to non-P___y conservatives?
It's like we're supposed to have affirmative actions for cons. Just because they lost in big-time in 06 and 08, that doesn't mean that they shouldn't still be in charge of the government. Whereas, the TP babies don't have any problem w/ BHO and folks getting shellacked, and then having the winners use the levers of government to pursue their policies.
One-way democracy, isn't democracy. The whole point is that elections have consequences regardless of whether or not "your" side is in the win column.
And, yet Althouse is stumped as to why folks may not equate the TP whiners w/ the Egyptians?!
Michael - "The protesters I have seen and heard interviewed seem to think that magically something...something is going to happen. Or else. "
I fear that decades of radicalization thanks to the combination of the Muslim Brotherhood, Saudi petrodollars and hours of free time for young, angry, UNEMPLOYED men will lead them to believe that the "magical" answer is NOT the freeing of markets and people but, rather, the will of Allah. We have a recipe for disaster brewing in the Middle East.
What the Egyptian protestors want is beside the point. They're an unruly mob, nothing more.
What matters is who wins the behind the scenes power struggle and what do they want?
I don't think anyone has any idea at this point. Certainly not our super-genius president and his bumbling national security staff. They're flying just as blind as the rest of us.
Interesting times.
The last two Presidents elected were elected in circumstances one could hardly argue were 'fair and free'.
Bush did not win. He did not win Florida but was given the points by the S.C.
The conditions under which Obama was given the nomination was highly discriminatory. Obama would have lost if Michigan had been counted. And even excluding Michigan, it is only through the use of highly discriminatory caucuses which make it easier for those without obligations to participate. The caucus system discriminates against families with young children. Of course, the gross sexism exhibited during the primary certainly supported his bid.
The Egyptian army suspended their constitution today. They are 'rewriting' it and claim it will go up for referendum in six months.
I'm not sure I believe that will happen but even if it does.. the opposition party is a bare shadow, Mubarak's party has collapses, who does that leave?
The Muslim Brotherhood... Hamas' alter ego.
I would anticipate seeing people flying off roofs soon.
The Left, including our President, tend to stand by any person who takes down what is seen as a "right-wing" dictator. Mubarak, according to their logic, is "right-wing" and all protesters who demonstrate against him are on the correct side of the argument.
That's why the Iraq war was such a crazy time for the Left. They had to deal with the idea that a "right-wing" president in Bush was toppling a "right-wing" dictator in Saddam. In order to square this circle, they suggested that it was for nefarious purposes rather than legitimate ones - blood for oil, to avenge daddy, etc.
"Bush did not win. He did not win Florida but was given the points by the S.C."
Really?
Who rides the strongest horse in Egypt today and what do they call him?
I think first this is a straw man argument as Obama has recognized the importance and affect of the Tp when he pointed out that "we have passed 25 different tax cuts last year and held down taxes on families making under $250,000 per year. And as far as I know the TP has not been confined to free speech zones as were the protestor under the Bush Administration. Secondly to compare the TP groups to an oppressed Egypt is quite the strain, but if one wants to follow Rush's thought, yes protest groups do kick up violence as witnessed in Egypt, so I could conclude that the TP is responsible for some of the violence here?
Lisa:
It may or may not leave only the Muslim Brotherhood. We don't know what will be there in 6 months, but the larger point is that Mubarak did not allow any opposition groups to grow to any prominence. The man is 82 years old and he did his best to make sure there was no one but him and the Muslim Brotherhood. That means that when he died, we would be looking at some kind of upheaval in any event.
So blame Mubarak for this scenario, he created it.
Lisa:
Bush won, in fact everytime they counted the votes in Florida, he held onto his lead. And if that loon Gore had managed to carry his own state Florida would not have been an issue...but yes, Bush won.
Frederson wrote in direct reply to Althouse: In your typical fashion, you refuse to truly commit yourself to any concrete fact.
Yes. And it is very typical of Ann, as it is of any truly learned person. I say learned, as opposed to educated, because too many are far too impressed by academic credentials. There are a lot of people walking around with advanced degrees who don't know shit from shinola. Will Durant once wrote "Education is a progressive discovery of our own ignorance." That's the best capsule definition of learning I know of. It is very risky to reason with questionable information. One's conclusions can be totally valid and totally wrong. This was the fundamental error of the George W. Bush presidency, which soiled everything else he did.
Defenders of Obama's passivity tend to assume the best intentions of the mob in Tahrir Square because it puts him on the winning side, or more specifically on the apparent winning side, which they also assume (with no real evidence) is good, good in this context meaning consistent with American notions of civic virtue, constitutional governance, and orderly statecraft. They also are sympathetic with the notion that the Muslim Brotherhood is either marginal, secular (blissfully oxymoronic, what?) or both. The history of that organization strongly suggests otherwise. But I don't know, and nothing I've read by any writer in English gives me confidence that anyone knows enough about the strength or intentions of the MB to judge the situation.
C4-BDH said...30% of Americans (at most) identified with the Long Island Iced Tea Partiers as they protest the much more advanced, civilized, rational and decent administration of President Obama!
I reckon that fewer than 30% stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the nobel POTUS in his epic struggle which you so admire. ;)
The new year is just beginning.
Maguro:
What makes you say they are an unruly mob? It seems to me that there were all sorts of people out there.
I saw students and business people and executives as well as unemployed and disaffected young people.
I would imagine that every authoritarian ruler from Nero to Chavez to the mullahs looks at the people and sees an unruly mob. That does not mean it is true.
pbAndj said...
"My post title question reflects the way many people, including mainstream media, reacted completely differently to crowds of people showing up in a public place in a political way. "
This is such an absurd exercise.
A while back Meade (not to mention others) foolishly complained about not living in a free country (as if they're slaves, or BHO is a dictator, or....something).
Now we're supposed to believe that the TPers are in the same boat as the Egyptians who've lived w/ the tyranny of Mubarak for thirty years. And, if you don't react to both victim groups as if they are comparably suffering: LIBRUL LAMESTREAM BIAS!!11!!!111!!!!!!1!!!111.
And, for 50 years, the American people have struggled under the pro-Communist regime of the Democrat Party and its apparatchiks in the media, courts, churches, and elsewhere (that includes RINOs) where dissenters were driven from public life. At which point, where it looked as if all they held dear would be destroyed, they formed a movement to overturn the status quo.
Other than that, there's no resemblance whatsoever.
Lisa, SCOTUS voted 7-2 to stop recount is Florida and even SCOFL agreed with decision that there was not enough time to finish a recount on 12/12/2000. Even the media recount show that W would have won.
WV: unnart Some know art, others know unn art.
Qaestor:
I am not naive about the Muslim Brotherhood, but I think a lot of folks are naive about the fact that you can keep the entire population of Egypt under the boot heel forever just to keep down the Muslim Brotherhood. A lot of people have shown this sort of blindness on this subject...is the Muslim Brotherhood bad? Well then Mubarak is good...never mind the fact that most people in Egypt reject them both...and never mind the fact that Mubarak is an old man and sooner or later something must follow him. In fact Mubarak has been helpful to the Muslim Brotherhood in that he has given them a handy foil.
edutcher:
I am not a Democrat, but I have to say that it used to drive me crazy when people on the left compared Bush to Hitler...and it is just as ridiculous to compare the Democrats to Mubarak..especially when a lot of pundits supported Mubarak.
The truth is that in Mubarak's Egypt there was no freedom of press or speech...people were imprisoned for disagreeing with Mubarak..they did not go on book tours or make millions talking on the radio.
Both sides in this country need to stop comparing the leaders of the other party to totalitarians and fascists and the like.
William:
I heard Krauthammer say it would be better for the US if the Military did stage a coup in Egypt because Mubarak was delusional and needed to go.
So yes, in the end the military acted..which is exactly what a lot of people were hoping they would do.
I was being somewhat facetious.
roesch-voltaire, Have there been any tea party protests close to Obama. You left out the Obama tax cuts for the rich and our money that he gave to rich Wall Streeters. The only people at Tea Party protest mean to Obama were the LaRouche Democrats. King George III was the first autocrat to use term "teabagger" and it seems that Obama follows his example.
It's important to understand that Obama is a jive turkey - not to mention being the quintessential welfare recipient, the #1 freeloader of all time.
Moral: Debating commentary from a jive-ass, jive-turkey is an exercise in street-corner ignorance.
To put it another way, Obama knows as much about Egypt as he does about quantum physics and statistical mechanics. Or making ice cream.
Ponder, leftists, the great lessons that the Algerian insurrection provides. No, not the current one, but the leftist approved one in the sixties. In that great triumph of the human spirit we saw the pied noirs ethnically cleansed and their Arab sympathizers ruthlessly slaughtered. There are those racists who claim that the pied noirs had been living in Algeria longer than the Kennedys and Eisenhowers had been living in America and that they, thus, had a right of occupancy. Nonsense. These people were Europeans and could not possibly contribute anything worthwhile to the Algerian economy. As Franz Fanon pointed out, the murder of pigs like Albert Camus does double duty by ridding the Arab of an oppressor and likewise freeing himself from the interior shackles of oppression. Win-win.... As for those thousands of Algerians who were murdered after the FLN came to power? Well, same principle. Nothing so makes a country homogeneous and united as the murder of those who are not supportive of the revolution. We must commend not just the FLN but the left for their tactful silence while these slaughters were going on.....The Algerians mastery of slaughter and torture paid particular dividends during the Islamic insurrection a generation later. It must be remembered that these Islamists were revolting not against Western oppression but against Algerian Marxists. As such we must applaud the brisk measures the Marxists took against the insurrection. The slaughter of entire villages seems a bit much, but it must be remembered that these villagers were not Marxists and were not supportive of the revolution.....Just recently a few thousand gathered to protest the corruption of the Algerian regime. They were outnumbered by the police and quickly rounded up. Another triump for the revolution. It must be remembered that it an oxymoron to say corrupt Marxist and that this demonstration was probably engineered by western interests.
25 year old white Harvard grad disses black presidential candidate
http://theothermccain.com/2011/02/13/cpac-ends-media-lies-continue/
William: Lefties believe in nothing enough to fight for. Algeria and Cuba,not to mention the horrors of the Soviet were all proxy entertainments for the left. Your reminder of the horrors of Algeria and the silence of the left reminds us again of the utter depravity of left wing "thought"
Well, the tea party is a revolt of the privileged. Members traffic in conspiracy theories. Speakers at rallies make hyperbolic statements about their freedoms being taken away. Tea party members are not revolting against three decades of authoritarian rule, but three decades dominated by the party they've voted for. The movement is bankrolled and facilitated by billionaires. Tea party members act like they are in danger but are not; they are also supported by an entire news organization, Fox.
When I watch tens of thousands risk their lives to up end a government that truly has "taken away freedoms," I tend to think well of them, just as I did when the former soviet union fell country by country.
Terrye, if it's the same... it's been awhile. Good to see you're still around and commenting. But...
...never mind the fact that most people in Egypt reject them both
This we really do not know.
A lot of people have shown this sort of blindness on this subject...is the Muslim Brotherhood bad? Well then Mubarak is good...never mind the fact that most people in Egypt reject them both...
Well, the fact that most Egyptians don't belong to the Brotherhood is neither here nor there. Most Iranians didn't support the mullahs in 1979 and most Russians didn't support the Bolsheviks in 1917. In a revolutionary situation, the best organized, most motivated activists often win out even if their movement doesn't have a lot of popular support.
Maybe it's all a moot point anyway if the military consolidates its power and keeps running the place like they have been since the 50s. They could hold some sham elections to put another retired general in the presidency and try to keep the status quo going for a little while longer. What would Obama do about that, eh?
Teacher:
"Speakers at rallies make hyperbolic statements about their freedoms being taken away."
Response:
A debt that must be repaid eventually is a promise of future taxes. The Obama Administration has increased the debt more than any president before it so they have raised future taxes. Those future taxes are a burden on freedom moving forward.
Also, deciding that I must perform some activity (e.g. buying health insurance) if I wish to avoid the the state's monopoly on the use of force (e.g. fines and/or jail) is a burden on the freedoms enjoyed by Americans for 222 years. The rights of US citizens should not be so infringed.
"Well, the tea party is a revolt of the privileged."
How do you figure? I thought the tea party was old crotchety folks and ladies in denim jumpers. What counts as "privileged?" Sure, Pelosi tried to say something about looking out for the expensive suits, not that anyone was wearing any. What counts as privileged? Filing your medicare?
"Members traffic in conspiracy theories."
Other than a few birthers, what "conspiracy" is that? Obama has a socialist, nanny-state, agenda and views government as the answer and thinks it's okay to own GM?
"Speakers at rallies make hyperbolic statements about their freedoms being taken away."
I'm gonna get the giggles, really I am. Rally speakers are hyperbolic. OMG. That's never happened before.
On Tuesdaythe Obama Administration asked Hosni Mubarak to step aside.
On Wednesday they said that transitioning power “now means yesterday.”
On Saturday morning the Obama Administration said Mubarak must stay.
On Saturday evening the Obama Administration said Mubarak should step aside.
On Sunday Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Mubarak must stay in power.
On Tuesday the Obama Administration said that political reform will be a gradual process.
That way no matter what happens there will be an administration quote that can be recycled to be used to say, "We were right." Pretty clever in a diabolical way.
Maguro:
Yes, maybe it is a moot point. Maybe it always was, because it is not our decision, it is theirs. Like it or not, it is not realistic to think the Egyptians are going to tolerate the status quo indefinitely just because we fear the Muslim Brotherhood. And it seems to me that since Mubarak is 82 years old it was only a matter of time before things changed anyway.
Luther:
Hello. No, we don't know. But I did hear a lot of young people say that they rejected them both...and those young people were actually Egyptians which is more than be said for any of us.
"Or is it political theater?"
I'd go with that theory. I have my doubts that Obama is really happy with this outcome in Egypt. Just as Tunisia had an effect on Egypt, another successful overthrow of a govt. will send shock waves across the ME. Who wants an even more unstable ME on their watch? Certainly not the ditherer-in-chief.
Terrye,
An Egyptian blogger, Big Pharoah, whose name escapes me gave Michael Totten a tour of Cairo some while back. That person was under the distinct impression that the Muslim Brotherhood was radical and would fill any power vacuum left by a departing Mubarak.
and those young people were actually Egyptians which is more than be said for any of us.
That may be but we have no idea if a 'majority' of the people in Egypt feel that way. And as Maguro points out 'majority' doesn't always mean that much anyway. I suspect that we will all find out about the same time what happens there, as for sure no one here, most especially our government, has any idea.
"Well, the tea party is a revolt of the privileged."
Also known as "the people who work for a living and obey the law". :)
I reckon that fewer...
What's up with the Southern Speak, Chickie? Does it represent your full-fledged capitulation to Red State Tea Party madness?
If only reckoning, like it's cousin, "feeling", were an accurate way of knowing things.
Well, the tea party is a revolt of the privileged.
And here I thought they were dumb, uneducated, racist hicks.
Damn, keeping up with the leftist meme's sure is difficult...
Nice Revenant. Portraying your faction as the only law-abiding employed folks is very Nixonian.
The movement is bankrolled and facilitated by billionaires.
Something you couldn't possibly prove.
Jay apparently assumes that elitist means "intelligent".
Althouse and Rush have the essential truth here, which is that we are surrounded by bullshit, much of which emanates from our elected leaders, and in particular from Leader Obama.
Beyond the bullshit there is ignorance, which is the child of laziness, in turn the essential nature of our news media.
There are leaders, and there are manipulators. So far Obama is a manipulator.
C4-BDH: What's up with the Southern Speak, Chickie?
Die Rechnung, bitte! Mach damit was Du willst.
David said:
"Blah blah blah YouTube videos out of Egypt and interviews with large numbers of street protesters documenting their demands and interests are just a form of manipulative propaganda."
Well, actually he didn't say it like that. He said it like this:
Althouse and Rush have the essential truth here, which is that we are surrounded by bullshit, much of which emanates from our elected leaders, and in particular from Leader Obama.
Beyond the bullshit there is ignorance, which is the child of laziness, in turn the essential nature of our news media.
There are leaders, and there are manipulators. So far Obama is a manipulator.
I give up. Stick to the Glenn Beck, guys. Moar ME countries on fire!
I love constructions like "essential" truth and "essential" nature. Essentially, if you can't say something rational and supported by facts, just inflate it with a hyperbolic and completely unnecessary adjective. That will essentially substitute for the factually true and reasonableness functions.
I didn't mean Southern German (high German?), Chickie.
Also, it's very kind of you to reference Obama's Nobel. But you should capitalize it when making reference to his well-deserved prize. When referring to his honorable character, just spell it "noble". That'll do.
Jay-- There is a well established relationship between Koch Brothers and the Tea Party, as well as the Koch Brothers and Dick Armey (or Dick Armey and the Tea Party for that matter).
And, as far as "leftist memes" go-- they don't interest me. If the best you can do is accuse a tea party critic of "meme speak," you've let down your side.
The Tea Party doesn't strike me as a bunch of hicks-- at least where I live, in upstate New York, just a group of folks who have learned to speak the language of the privileged white victim. Another bunch of white poor mes. The tea party candidates around here are wealthy lawyers, developers, and financial industry professionals.
But you should capitalize it when making reference to his well-deserved prize.
LOL. Now I know you're not for real.
You guys can speculate all you want. In the end, we know what finally drove Mubarak from power. (H/T Republican Congressman Chris Lee).
There's where you're wrong, Chickie. You've got to understand how this game is played, and how the Baggers are playing you. Yes, you have a legit grievance against hyperactive PC policing and moves that might limit HSAs, but the right doesn't care about what you want and is just doing an optics game.
If Egypt (nearly one third the Arab world) is freer and more democratic in a year, Obama will be hailed as a great statesman. If not, blame the policies of Bush. It's very easy. As long as the right wing refuses to reason, they will play the undue blame/credit game and there is no reason not to turn it right back around against them. (Except when sounder analysis is available, which they generally would tend not to recognize anyway).
Thank God we can count on the blogger lady to clue us in to what Rush is thinking because he will never submit to this Commie subversion!
She listens so we don't have to!
I salute you!
That's one hell of a Photoshop. For the first millisecond I thought that it was my lying eyes I couldn't believe.
Oxy and Nancy make a great media power couple, don'tcha think?
"The Tea Party doesn't strike me as a bunch of hicks-- at least where I live, in upstate New York, just a group of folks who have learned to speak the language of the privileged white victim. Another bunch of white poor mes. The tea party candidates around here are wealthy lawyers, developers, and financial industry professionals."
Doesn't this also describe those behind the American Revolution? Washington, Jefferson, Adams, etc. weren't exactly on the verge of ruin.
Dumb hicks, gentry farmers, financiers, wealthy lawyers, inventors, etc. joined together for a common cause. With the rich folks actually doing a pretty interesting service in fighting for and organizing rights which most everyone benefited from.
Lots of privileged "white victims" alongside people who really just want to be left alone by government, alongside people who are just trying to get along the best they can.
Have I stumbled into the answer to my original question up there in the post title?
Is there anything that this administration does that is anything but political theater? And poorly done, I might add.
When I worked for the NYC Welfare Department many eons ago my black supervisor called me a turkey, not once but many times. I was so young and naive at the time that I thougtht it was just good fun from a noble black man (could there be any other kind?). But now I know what that piece of shit from hell meant and there is no forgiveness. Never!
Now carry on with your oh so reasonable discussion about the noble O.
You think that some Bush operative, two years after Bush left office, managed to orchestrate a mass uprising as some grand delayed plan Bush had?
Yeah right!
From today's Boston Globe:
Bush program helped lay the groundwork in Egypt
Vote monitors trained with funds from US
Also, to PaulV:
25 year old white Harvard grad disses black presidential candidate
I didn't hear him "diss" the Herman Cain. He definitely didn't hear the same speech I did, but he didn't diss him. I must say, though, while just as wrong, your headline is less racist than Glenn Reynolds':
25-Year-Old White Boy From Harvard Disses Herman Cain.
And then he's got the nerve to follow it with a statement about the college-educated "bitterly clinging to their credentials and their privileged opinion perches. . . ." I'll remind him the take-away line from Cain's speech was "Stupid people are ruining America!"
I swear, it's like these law professors are stuck in the 60s.
I give up. Stick to the Glenn Beck, guys.
I don't watch Beck. I do watch MSM in times like the Egypt crisis, and learn very little.
Case in point: CNN has Ben Wiedeman, an outstanding newsman who has lived in Egypt for over 20 years, is fluent in arabic and knows more about Egypt and the Middle East than the rest of the MSM put together.
What does CNN do? It sends pretty boy Anderson Cooper to grandstand and pushes Wiedeman into the shadows.
As for Obama, he was not a leader in this matter. But he did play one on TV. Basically he was irrelevant, though he pretended not to be.
Let's turn to O's leadership on the issues of the day.
Deficit: his strategy is to NOT make any substantive proposals but let others come up with ideas. He ignored the issue on the state of the union, and has ignored the ideas of his own deficit commission.
Mortgages and Fannie Mae: He has put out a proposal that is completely contradictory internally, with no real path to solution.
Tax system: Platitudes.
Afganistan: He's in the four corners, rhetorically and substantively.
Defense Policy: What is his defense policy? What should our military be in 5-10 years, given the rise of China militarily.
Energy: He wants fast choo-choos and lots of windmills. What's his policy on nuclear? Shale? Natural gas? Power transmission?
Education: How do we get rid of the encrustations and incompetencies that plague our urban school systems? What's his plan? Has he spent any personal energy selling it?
Etc, etc.
Ann: Not just theater -- but political Kabuki theater. That takes talent.
"The Tea Party doesn't strike me as a bunch of hicks-- at least where I live, in upstate New York, just a group of folks who have learned to speak the language of the privileged white victim. Another bunch of white poor mes. The tea party candidates around here are wealthy lawyers, developers, and financial industry professionals."
What is "the language of the privileged white victim?" If someone wants to claim that Tea Partiers have learned to use the language of the oppressed for their benefit I'd likely agree and suggest that only someone too stupid to *learn* would do anything different than that.
But where it becomes "white" in any way really suggests that the movement is racially based and "white victim" can only be an allusion to white supremacist rhetoric and, frankly, that's not someplace you really want to go.
Really.
Or perhaps the logic is that white people are automatically privileged and because of that never have a legitimate grievance.
They deserve whatever they get.
Or perhaps the logic is that people in upstate New York need to stop being mostly white, even though they are. And people in Minnesota need to stop being Scandinavian. And people in Pennsylvania need to stop being Deutch. And people in Nogales need to stop being 90% Hispanic.
And, as far as "leftist memes" go-- they don't interest me...
Oh yes they do.
Or are you just unaware?
The Tea Party is, at this point, more popular among Americans than either the Democrats or the Republicans.
Make of that what you will.
"...that's not someplace you really want to go."
I don't know, Synova. It seems to me that if there's one thing the left side of the aisle really really really wants to believe about the TP, it's that at heart it is a sort of John Bircher - KKK zombie hybrid risen from the political grave.
Synova,
Perhaps the logic is that people in upstate New York need to stop being mostly white, even though they are. And people in Minnesota need to stop being Scandinavian. And people in Pennsylvania need to stop being Deutch. And people in Nogales need to stop being 90% Hispanic.
There's no getting through to such people. They've internalized the racism of the past - like Halle Barry with the 1% rule - and refuse to accept A) that's a stupid thing to do because B) it makes them the bad guys now.
Nice try, though, and I salute the effort:
You're definitely one of the good ones.
Or perhaps the logic is that white people are automatically privileged and because of that never have a legitimate grievance.
No, that's not it. The antiwar demonstrators were overwhelmingly white but we were assured that they were a grassroots movement with totally legitimate grievances.
It must be something else...
Oh, I remember. Demonstrators for left-wing causes are always independent-minded, authentic and legitimate while demonstrators for right-wing causes are either mercenaries hired by the eeeevil, mustache-twirling Koch brothers or moronic dupes who stupidly work against their own self-interest.
Pretty sure that's the formula.
Henry--
Are you accusing me of false consciousness? I didn't take you for a Marxist.
Well, thanks for the come to Jesus moment. I'll visit The Blaze right away . Do you think there's time for me start to buy gold and hoard food before the Iberian Penninsula bursts into flames and New Zealand falls to the Chinese Communists?
Only the Tea Party stands against the Caliphate. Should I click my shoes and say that three times, Henry?
Maguro--
Let me get this straight. Endless carping about George Soros pulling the strings on a left wing conspiracy to institute world government and currency,yes, but tea party is immune to any criticism about the involvement of the Koch brothers?
I know the answer to that is yes, probably because of some romanticized notion that the tea party is made up of "real" americans who understand what the "founders" meant.
I've been reading Althouse for five years it never ceases to amaze me how the right wing here sounds identical to the left wing I have to put up with at my work in a University.
Endless carping about George Soros pulling the strings on a left wing conspiracy to institute world government and currency,yes, but tea party is immune to any criticism about the involvement of the Koch brothers?
No, I think we can all agree that the left's criticism of Koch involvement in the Tea Parties is every bit as sensible and legitimate as claims that George Soros is trying to force world government onto Americans.
Let me get this straight. Endless carping about George Soros pulling the strings on a left wing conspiracy to institute world government and currency,yes, but tea party is immune to any criticism about the involvement of the Koch brothers?
The funny thing is that you really didn't "crticize" the Koch brothers involvement in the tea party movement. You just said that there's a "well established relationship" between the Kochs and tea party, as if it's self-evident how their involvement invalidates the whole movement. You never explained why the Kochs are problematic or why anyone should care about the fact that they support the tea party.
Why should anyone care about the Koch brothers? Why does their involvement invalidate the tea party's message of fiscal responsibility? Explain.
Fort said...
They presume it for the same reason Rush presumes the worst about Obama.
Ideology.
Darn tooting. Obama has said plenty of things that ought to make the hair on peoples neck stand up. For example, the comment about if you are a coal consuming power plant, we're going to tax you like crazy. Or the 'bitter clinger' comment. Or, as a Senator, being in favor of a single payer health system. Or to Joe the Plumber about spreading the wealth around. Or his 'I haven't spoken with the CEO of British Petroleum because you know those people, they will tell you whatever you want to hear.' The list goes on and on and is frightening to sober thinkers. Obama has given his opposition plenty of reasons to have grave concerns.
"I'll criticize and investigate mine if you criticize and investigate yours!"
Now we know why Obama is such a horrible guy! He fired* ripcord! The bastard!
*Well, not personally. But as the alleged emissary of all blacks, this seems to be what Ripcord implies.
What's wrong with our Supreme Court justices taking Aspen vacations with other conservative lawmakers, industry leaders and media pundits anyways???? What could wrong? I'm sure they were only discussing STRICT TEXUALIST CONSTRUCTIONIST PRINCIPLES11!!!ONE!!TWO
Hoocanode they would come up with a Citizens United ruling!! The gondala rides just "look" bad.
FrEE sPeecH !!!!!!
Did I tell you lately that the Green Bay Packers won the Super Bowl?
And their fans can't even be happy for a couple of weeks after the big game.
What's up with that?
Maybe they got some bad cheese.
"Let me get this straight. Endless carping about George Soros pulling the strings on a left wing conspiracy to institute world government and currency,yes, but tea party is immune to any criticism about the involvement of the Koch brothers?"
World government and currency? Somehow I'd never heard this in relationship to Soros only that he finds it necessary to fund a number of things and that it's reasonable to assume that those organizations he funds represent his beliefs and desires.
Which still wouldn't be *important* except for the (drum roll please) hypocrisy of those vilifying big business being funded by him.
Now, if the Tea Party were all about how evil rich people are then the involvement of a few rich guys would matter more. It still doesn't change the genuine grass-roots nature of the inception of the Tea Party that some of these guys might have signed on later, but it's just really *not* the case that there is an incoherency of message implied by having wealthy business people agree that we're taxed enough and that government suffocates the economy.
Pointing out Soros is pointing out an incoherency if not outright hypocrisy on the left.
Make the other side live up to their own rules.
Soros is a Jooooo and that's what makes him sooooo dangerous! Just like 7 of the 8 other evildoers bringing humanity to the brink, that the wise former alkie Glenn Beck has warned us about.
How can you trust the agenda of a bunch of wandering Hebraic nomads who swear loyalty to no nation? Synova, enlighten us on the Soros problem. I believe it started with Hitler...
Why do those with a clue believe that the Muslim Brotherhood were a significant force behind the timing of the uprising in Egypt?
Mubarak was in power for three decades, he didn't just magically turn into a prick in the last two months, he was a prick all along. Nothing new or recent there.
There have been major opposition movements calling for Mubarak's ouster nonstop since 2007, others longer, but a continuous and contiguous effort since 2007. Nothing new or recent there.
Facebook, Twitter, et al have been in use in Egypt since before 2010. Nothing new or recent there.
Elections were already scheduled in Egypt for this autumn, Mubarak's health precluded him running for another term, and he likely would have died of natural causes before completing this term.
To suggest that Egyptians lived through 30 years of Mubarak but somehow couldn't take another 8-9 months, is like swimming 3/4 of the way across the English Channel and then turning around and swimming back because you didn't think you could make it the whole way.
Yes, events in Tunisia likely lit the fuse, and social media certainly greased the skids of democracy, exposing the actions of Mubarak and his henchmen while at the same time preventing the MB from filling the information vacuum or hijacking the grass roots effort, but the grass roots effort would have been mowed down without the numbers that the MB brought in from outside Cairo and outside Egypt.
If Egypt makes it through the next year without falling behind the sharia curtain, it won't be because the MB didn't have a significant role in the uprising, it will be because social media was as unfriendly to the MB as it was to Mubarak.
Ritmo - let's just get things straight. You believe the Republican Party are dangerous extremists.
Ritmo - again FAIL. Soros is the one who keeps invoking Hitler all the time. Why do you libs need to call everyone Nazis when you disagree with them?
I've been reading Althouse for five years it never ceases to amaze me how the right wing here sounds identical to the left wing I have to put up with at my work in a University.
Me thinks you're a moby.
"Synova, enlighten us on the Soros problem. I believe it started with Hitler..."
Too bad for you he's not a black jew lesbian.
Typical though.
The Obama Administration has ignored more than Judge Vinson's health care ruling. The Administration also ignored Judge Martin Feldman's injunction lifting the Administration’s offshore drilling moratorium, and then tried to circumvent it by issuing a new, basically unchanged moratorium. Earlier this month, Judge Feldman held the Interior Department in contempt.
Yes, because Ann doesn't have the guts to say Obama when she means Obama.
I often wonder, when I read something like this, if having those telepathic powers makes ordinary life more difficult.
Soros is the one who keeps invoking Hitler all the time.
Hahahahahahaahhahahahahhahhahaa.
The Republicans have let their extremists define who they are.
They did this underhandedly, by letting Dick Armey (i.e. "Military Penis") set up a group called Freedom Works which gave rise to the Tea Party. The Tea Party declared itself an entity independent of the Republican Party, in order to pretend that the fiscal incompetence of their faction was something they could dissociate themselves from.
But the rest of us know it was all marketing.
I think you're right this is political theater. It reflects President Obama's view that life is like a pie and the issue is how to divide it up.
Thus, domestically, the poor should get bigger slices than the rich. And internationally, American interests should be sacrificed because what's good for America is bad for the rest of the world.
hey dumbass, aka freder, ever heard of google? check it out
http://www.google.com/#q=obama+calls+tea+party,+tea+bagger&hl=en&prmd=ivns&ei=NoVYTYLJBdK_tgfYo8j-DA&start=10&sa=N&fp=c1f3adc9cfc4964
I didn't mean Southern German (high German?), Chickie.
Leider nicht, Narr. Hoch Deutsch ist in die Nähe von Hesse (zB Frankfurt am Main, Wiesbaden und Mainz) gesprochen. Im Sud, spricht mann Allemannisch oder bayerisch.
"Thus, domestically, the poor should get bigger slices than the rich."
That reminds me of something a certain author once wrote:
If one person was poor and the other wealthy it did not matter what precisely had ruined one or made the other rich; the difference itself was unfair, and the poor man who did not denounce it was as wicked as the rich one who ignored it.
-- Nabokov, Pale Fire
Soros should know all about Nazis, having collaborated with them as a 14 year old child in Budapest -- one of any number of Jews who found it convenient to cooperate with the Nazis in lieu of being deported to a concentration camp themselves. One could also research Abraham Gancwajch, Adam Czerniaków, "Group 13" of the Warsaw Ghetto (a.k.a., "the Jewish Gestapo"), and Mordechai Chaim Rumkowski, among others.
Yeah, it felt funny to type the words "Jewish Gestapo," but they were who the were and did what they did.
What's up with the Southern Speak, Chickie?
Oh for Gods' sakes, Narr. Are you really sufficiently illiterate to think that "reckon" (from Middle English rechnen) is somehow a Southern US idiom only?
Or is it merely that this labored attempt at ad hominem is the best argument you can muster?
Charlie, sie haben recht. Oder kann ich "du" sagen?
Soros should know all about Nazis, having collaborated with them as a 14 year old child in Budapest
So he's kind of like the Pope, then?
People think in dichotomies. People who support the Egyptian protesters and oppose the TEA parties do so because they support Obama and oppose Mubarrak.
For the record, I was more confident that the results of the November elections were good than that the results of the Egyptian protests will have been an improvement. But if I had to vote between Obama and Mubarrak for pretty much any office, I would vote for Obama. And I'm still hopeful about the situtation in Egypt.
But if I had to vote between Obama and Mubarrak for pretty much any office, I would vote for Obama.
Now there's a ringing endorsement.
It's kind of like saying you'd rather vote for Obama than have the clap.
I have no idea how the Koch Brothers came into their money. I have heard Soros got a great deal of money from manipulating British currency, to the ruin of many others. At the age of 14 wouldn't George have had a Bar Mitzvah? Then he was an adult, and old enough to make adult choices. He chose to help the Nazis, and his excuse, "If I didn't do it, somebody else would have." is the excuse of a coward. Liberals get into politics to control others. Conservatives tend to get into politics to defend themselves from the predations of the liberals.
To be sure, Mubarak is not a model citizen. We can take corporate responsibility for not encouraging reforms earlier. What would those reforms look like? How about cutting American cotton subsidies? Then cotton farmers around the world would do better. Including the ones in Egypt.
As bad as Egypt is, I wouldn't be surprised if Saudi Arabia will be worse. We have propped them up for a very long time.
I sincerely believe that if a country knew the financial manipulations of a single individual were responsible for the destruction of their currency, that county would be justified in lethal means to revenge that attack. The message needs to be given "Don't mess with us."
It'll be really interesting to look back at this thread six months or a year from now. I have a feeling that in the future a lot of people on this thread will have claimed to have never said what they are saying here right now.
At the age of 14 wouldn't George have had a Bar Mitzvah? Then he was an adult, and old enough to make adult choices.
Weak.
This may seem snide, but tea partiers are actually living in a representative democracy. They just act like they don't and are engaging in rhetorical theater based on a delusional world-view.
The Egyptian protesters are protesting 30 years of basic dictatorial reign.
Is that too simple?
"...tea partiers are actually living in a representative democracy. They just act like they don't..."
They don't? What are you talking about?
Oh yep you betcha! The Nazis were really keen on letting hidden Jews openly celebrate major rites of passage with their communities! Especially those that signified having become a responsible adult untermensch. That would have really been cool with them.
The commentariat here keeps coming up with dumber and dumber stuff by the minute.
Is that too simple?
Obviously it is, or tea party critics would criticize all the OTHER protest movements in America, too. There's another thread here about state union protests in Madison. Check the comments for tea party critics attacking the union folks.
We can reject your theory on the grounds that it does not match the evidence.
German is utterly the ugliest language that exists. I really do regret having kicked off the lederhosen brigade but I guess that's what I get for engaging Chickie in the kind of knowledgeable humor that most of the commentariat is just too humble to ordinarily partake of.
Survival. What a horrible choice for a young adult to make.
Post a Comment