All three networks morning infotainment programs today began with the same lead in their tease: Flooding in the Northeastern United States.
There was a moment on TV (7:04 am to be exact). Where all 3 networks had broadcasts of a correspondent in a canoe holding a microphone.
unfortunately, for NBC a couple of guys walked in front of the camera revealing that the water was about 8 inches deep in that spot. Matt and Katie had a nice laugh about it on the air.
Gripping stuff.
The story of the President holding a scripted conversation with some soldiers in Iraq eventually crept onto each show as well.
At 7:08 GMA described "substantial rehearsal" as it showed Alison Barber, a senior Pentagon official talking, to the soldiers.
At 7:12 Today did a close up segment showed some of the "propped soldiers" conversing with the President after being instructed by Ast. Sec. Barber.
Many have wondered, some aloud, what the consequences of having a President so lacking in intellectual curiosity has had. He needs things staged. Are we really surprised? Bush isn't the first, but let us not be so jaded by the inadequacy of his intelligence that we miss the real issue here. He has not to this point, and continues to be less than honest with both the military
Limbaugh draws parallells when the mainstream media stages things such as:
Sp. Thomas Jerry Wilson asking a planted question by:
Edward Lee Pitts about body armor towards Don Rumsfeld. Of course this is because Rumsfeld will not take on this question with the media itself.
Rush then brings up Dan Rather's mess from a year ago. This leads to a tangent extension on the role of the liberal/mainstream media, and yes he's right about some of it.
Yes, they do say all the same thing(s).
Yes, but does that mean that these question shouldn't be asked, the real message Rush sends out is that if the President want to be asked a question he should not have to answer it.
So these question about the legitimacy of war shouldn't be asked....Because Dateline blew up a truck to mess with GM in 1993.
See how confused this all is.
Here is the point. The Bush regime lied a great deal about the war and why it was being fought.
The point is there is no point. Why does Bush even have this event. Is he really that out of touch that he doesn't realize that this is a staged function. If so can he be wise or savvy enough to function appropriately.
Cannot even the most ardent Bush supporters or "patriotic" among not
What is real here?
If the President did not know about this then what can he be trusted to "know"
For someone like James Dobson to blast away at the teachers of Post-modernist thought (or what he view as Post Modernist thought) and not only except, but support this regime and its tactics is quite a hypocrisy.
Stay cynical on this President and his people. Not on each other.
Friday, October 14, 2005
Tuesday, October 11, 2005
Rush to me on Monday
After the news at 1 I thought about turning to Al Franken, but I decided to listen to Limbaugh's monologue to start the second hour, it did not take long to be pleased with this decision.
After the obligatory introduction he quickly moved to his topic.
He addressed the the liberals directly:
He had a message to us, because we think it is fun to see the Republicans have a debate (Harriet Miers that seems to fracture the party because of the vocal conservative movement.
He warned us (yes us), this is the kind of thing we liberals should fear the most. If we had context, which he seemed to assume we do not.
He then turned on that Limbaugh bravado, "The last time we flexed liked this was 1980." This was he contended the last time the people demanded conservatism from elected officials. Once Miers has been resolved one way or the other, he warned us liberals will be exposed and trounced just as we were in 1980.
Because we have nothing to offer. No agenda.
Conservatives will continue to advance their agenda because they apparently know what they stand for and they know their principles. Limbaugh proclaimed they are proud to care and embrace what they beleive.
He accused liberals of being fearful of true views and motives. This furthers his view that liberal being honest about who they are cannot win. "go ahead and get cocky" he smarmed. Once again he lauded a "healthy and growing conservative movement". And claimed that those slamming the current president are "running against ghosts".
He told us to take note. October 11, 2005 (and it was about 1:19 pm est by this point)
He then abruptly changed the topic (sort of) to John McCain meeting with the current governor of California.
McCain the voice of moderation is clearly an intellectual weakling to the mind of the Maha Rushi.
The end result of campaign finance reform was what he calls the:
"Incumbent Protection Act"
He finished the segment after he did his McCain impression.
There is nothing really new in all this, but it is interesting he felt the need to be so bold at this particular historical moment.
After turning to Franken moments later the laundry list of problems for the Republicans at large was striking:
Jack Abramoff
Tom DeLay
The war in Iraq (lack of support)
Katrina missteps
Karl Rove in the Plame case
still limited job growth in this "economic recovery"
Gov of Kentucky pardoning his own criminal political friends
and further tales of cronism
I for one am not cocky, but I do feel confident in what I beleive and that the time of George Bush's crusades are nearing an end. But, thanks for the warning Rush, it just nice to know you care, you big hearted lug you. Shucks, i am weepy.
After the obligatory introduction he quickly moved to his topic.
He addressed the the liberals directly:
He had a message to us, because we think it is fun to see the Republicans have a debate (Harriet Miers that seems to fracture the party because of the vocal conservative movement.
He warned us (yes us), this is the kind of thing we liberals should fear the most. If we had context, which he seemed to assume we do not.
He then turned on that Limbaugh bravado, "The last time we flexed liked this was 1980." This was he contended the last time the people demanded conservatism from elected officials. Once Miers has been resolved one way or the other, he warned us liberals will be exposed and trounced just as we were in 1980.
Because we have nothing to offer. No agenda.
Conservatives will continue to advance their agenda because they apparently know what they stand for and they know their principles. Limbaugh proclaimed they are proud to care and embrace what they beleive.
He accused liberals of being fearful of true views and motives. This furthers his view that liberal being honest about who they are cannot win. "go ahead and get cocky" he smarmed. Once again he lauded a "healthy and growing conservative movement". And claimed that those slamming the current president are "running against ghosts".
He told us to take note. October 11, 2005 (and it was about 1:19 pm est by this point)
He then abruptly changed the topic (sort of) to John McCain meeting with the current governor of California.
McCain the voice of moderation is clearly an intellectual weakling to the mind of the Maha Rushi.
The end result of campaign finance reform was what he calls the:
"Incumbent Protection Act"
He finished the segment after he did his McCain impression.
There is nothing really new in all this, but it is interesting he felt the need to be so bold at this particular historical moment.
After turning to Franken moments later the laundry list of problems for the Republicans at large was striking:
Jack Abramoff
Tom DeLay
The war in Iraq (lack of support)
Katrina missteps
Karl Rove in the Plame case
still limited job growth in this "economic recovery"
Gov of Kentucky pardoning his own criminal political friends
and further tales of cronism
I for one am not cocky, but I do feel confident in what I beleive and that the time of George Bush's crusades are nearing an end. But, thanks for the warning Rush, it just nice to know you care, you big hearted lug you. Shucks, i am weepy.
remember when...
It is interesting to notice the anger of Rush Limbaugh and others at the politcal motivations of prosecutor Ronny Earle. Having a prosecutor that seems hung up on pinning some frail charges on an effective leader of the other party motivated by the political gain inherent was not quite as upsetting to Mr. Limbaugh in the fall of 1998.
Thursday, October 06, 2005
WHO???
The right wing the mouth pieces of the "Conservative Christian Movement" and the callers to talk radio are not pleased. They seem unwilling to just trust the President in this nomination. Why stop trusting him now. This is the same method he used for most of his appointments.
Rush simply fears a decision made from a "standpoint of weakness". [It would be interesting to know exactly what rush Limbaugh exactly perceives as a position of weakness. More yet, to know why or how Bush got into a position of weakness - or out of the position of strength. (these questions and other that involve the preveyors of the neo conservative movement must not distract from the point at hand here, but further comment is needed).]
Both Limbaugh and others are passionately asking, "why decline this fight at this time?" "There are and have been so many courageous people to stand up for our beleifs". The people that have labored in the neoconservative movement the last quarter century are agast that Bush left them out of this most crucial decision. For once they seem unwilling to just trust him. I ask, because I dont know, why?
Rush, Sean, Levine, Coulter, Kristol and others are imploring the administration to realize there is a deep bench of known quantities. We dont know her judicial philosophy, but these rhetorical engineers are convinced this was the time to end liberalism for all time and banish it out of American politics. Why do these societal sculptors want to divide the country further?
Another question worth asking is why so-called Democratic leaders (harry reid) are not just as angry as conservatives becuase Bush again is engaging in cronism?
Listen to what this woman says, and make up your own mind. Then please for all that is holy let your voice be heard.
Rush simply fears a decision made from a "standpoint of weakness". [It would be interesting to know exactly what rush Limbaugh exactly perceives as a position of weakness. More yet, to know why or how Bush got into a position of weakness - or out of the position of strength. (these questions and other that involve the preveyors of the neo conservative movement must not distract from the point at hand here, but further comment is needed).]
Both Limbaugh and others are passionately asking, "why decline this fight at this time?" "There are and have been so many courageous people to stand up for our beleifs". The people that have labored in the neoconservative movement the last quarter century are agast that Bush left them out of this most crucial decision. For once they seem unwilling to just trust him. I ask, because I dont know, why?
Rush, Sean, Levine, Coulter, Kristol and others are imploring the administration to realize there is a deep bench of known quantities. We dont know her judicial philosophy, but these rhetorical engineers are convinced this was the time to end liberalism for all time and banish it out of American politics. Why do these societal sculptors want to divide the country further?
Another question worth asking is why so-called Democratic leaders (harry reid) are not just as angry as conservatives becuase Bush again is engaging in cronism?
Listen to what this woman says, and make up your own mind. Then please for all that is holy let your voice be heard.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
