Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Just A Coincidence? Major Media Talking Point That RW Activists Are Just Like Left Wing Activists..

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
TomCADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 10:13 PM
Original message
Just A Coincidence? Major Media Talking Point That RW Activists Are Just Like Left Wing Activists..
Edited on Thu Sep-17-09 10:15 PM by TomCADem
...Under Bush. Time Magazine, CNN, LA Times, etc. have all run various permutations of the current media narrative that the right wing under President Obama is no different than the left wing under Bush.

Except for the fact that the left wing activists were absolutely correct about the fact that Bush and company justified the Iraq war based on a lie, the presence of weapons of mass destruction, whereas the right wing activists are motivated by a whole series of incoherent beliefs such as telling the government to keep its hands off of Medicare, and accusing President Obama of being an Islamic, Fascist, Communist, who is being controlled by Israel.

Yet, as the newest Time Magazine article shows, the major media always forgets to mention the crucial fact that the liberals were 100% right about the fact that the Iraq war was based on a complete fabrication.

I guess the goal of the batshit crazy right is to make sane sounding right wing extremists look moderate by comparison.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 10:15 PM
Response to Original message
1. False equivalence again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 10:20 PM
Response to Original message
2. So if the Iraq war was based on all lies, Are we pulling out of there tomorrow?
Or will we make excuses to keep our kids there?

Th RW justified the war and staying there, now the LW is justifying staying there as well.

Yes - we were right then, but are we now? Or are we just saying it is right to protect those in office we elected?

More troops to Afghanistan, still there in Iraq, and no real end in site.

We used to march against these wars, but now we don't:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-10_iPus9g

A video I made, after the war started, a plea to bring our troops home now (and the leftists in the video have a sign that says 'bring the troops home now or face mutiny' - what we say if the RW used the term mutiny btw?)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TomCADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Yes, we are pulling out on the timetable President Obama campaigned on...
Edited on Thu Sep-17-09 10:28 PM by TomCADem
Also, Afganistan and Iraq are different countries confusing the two is just like Bush saying that Iraq and Saddam Hussien helped plan 9/11. I thought it was a mistake for Republicans to deliberately confuse the two, and unless you are saying that Osama bin Ladin never was present in Afganistan, and that Al Queda is not based on the Afgan/Pakistan border, I see no reason to repeat the right wing's mistake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 10:36 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. So I go back to this:
We kept hammering on bush to get us out of Iraq 'Now' and bring home the troops. It does not matter what Obama campaigned on, the message is still the same from a progressive perspective. We wanted them home now and out of harms way, but we got someone we like in office so it is OK if they are still there and dying because they will get home in a few years?

IMHO I don't plan on being any easier on Obama than I was bush on certain issues. Wrong is wrong no matter who is behind it.

I can guarantee you that if McCain had won and said we would bring the troops home in a few years folks here would be kicking his ass over it.

Principle above party, or we all lose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TomCADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 10:56 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. So, You Will Treat President Obama The Same As Bush? I Think They Are Different Personally
Edited on Thu Sep-17-09 10:58 PM by TomCADem
You said:

###

We kept hammering on bush to get us out of Iraq 'Now' and bring home the troops. It does not matter what Obama campaigned on, the message is still the same from a progressive perspective. We wanted them home now and out of harms way, but we got someone we like in office so it is OK if they are still there and dying because they will get home in a few years?

IMHO I don't plan on being any easier on Obama than I was bush on certain issues. Wrong is wrong no matter who is behind it.

I can guarantee you that if McCain had won and said we would bring the troops home in a few years folks here would be kicking his ass over it.

Principle above party, or we all lose.

###

Bush mislead the country into an invasion of Iraq causing the death of thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, thousands of deaths in Katrina due to incompetence, and thousands of deaths in 9/11 because they were too busy plotting to invade Iraq from the get go, rather than taking the threat of terrorism seriously.

So, no. I don't plan to treat President Obama the same as Bush. Bush worked very hard to earn my contempt. If you believe that it is okay to regard President Obama in the same way, and not be any "easier" on him, that's your right. I just disagree, and believe that there is a lot of reason to treat them differently. Treating them the same is almost as the false equivalency I noted in my OP.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 10:37 PM
Response to Original message
5. some folks on DU try and make that same equivalency, actually...
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Emit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 10:40 PM
Response to Original message
6. One of the BIGGEST Left Wing Conspiracy Theories about Bushco and the Invasion of Iraq...
...turned out to be TRUE!

Bush told French President Iraq was a quest foretold in the Bible

A French Revelation, or The Burning Bush
JAMES A. HAUGHT

Incredibly, President George W. Bush told French President Jacques Chirac in early 2003 that Iraq must be invaded to thwart Gog and Magog, the Bibles satanic agents of the Apocalypse.

Honest. This isnt a joke. The president of the United States, in a top-secret phone call to a major European ally, asked for French troops to join American soldiers in attacking Iraq as a mission from God.

Now out of office, Chirac recounts that the American leader appealed to their common faith (Christianity) and told him: Gog and Magog are at work in the Middle East. The biblical prophecies are being fulfilled. This confrontation is willed by God, who wants to use this conflict to erase his peoples enemies before a New Age begins.

This bizarre episode occurred while the White House was assembling its coalition of the willing to unleash the Iraq invasion. Chirac says he was boggled by Bushs call and wondered how someone could be so superficial and fanatical in their beliefs.

~snip~

http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=librar...


AND HE SHALL BE JUDGED

On the morning of Thursday, April 10, 2003, Donald Rumsfelds Pentagon prepared a top-secret briefing for George W. Bush. This document, known as the Worldwide Intelligence Update, was a daily digest of critical military intelligence so classified that it circulated among only a handful of Pentagon leaders and the president; Rumsfeld himself often delivered it, by hand, to the White House. The briefings cover sheet generally featured triumphant, color images from the previous days war efforts: On this particular morning, it showed the statue of Saddam Hussein being pulled down in Firdos Square, a grateful Iraqi child kissing an American soldier, and jubilant crowds thronging the streets of newly liberated Baghdad. And above these images, and just below the headline secretary of defense, was a quote that may have raised some eyebrows. It came from the Bible, from the book of Psalms: Behold, the eye of the Lord is on those who fear HimTo deliver their soul from death.

This mixing of Crusades-like messaging with war imagery, which until now has not been revealed, had become routine. On March 31, a U.S. tank roared through the desert beneath a quote from Ephesians: Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. On April 7, Saddam Hussein struck a dictatorial pose, under this passage from the First Epistle of Peter: It is Gods will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men. (To see these and more Bush-administration intelligence cover sheets, visit GQ.coms exclusive slideshow).

These cover sheets were the brainchild of Major General Glen Shaffer, a director for intelligence serving both the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the secretary of defense. In the days before the Iraq war, Shaffers staff had created humorous covers in an attempt to alleviate the stress of preparing for battle. Then, as the body counting began, Shaffer, a Christian, deemed the biblical passages more suitable. Several others in the Pentagon disagreed. At least one Muslim analyst in the building had been greatly offended; others privately worried that if these covers were leaked during a war conducted in an Islamic nation, the falloutas one Pentagon staffer would later saywould be as bad as Abu Ghraib.

But the Pentagons top officials were apparently unconcerned about the effect such a disclosure might have on the conduct of the war or on Bushs public standing. When colleagues complained to Shaffer that including a religious message with an intelligence briefing seemed inappropriate, Shaffer politely informed them that the practice would continue, because my seniorsJCS chairman Richard Myers, Rumsfeld, and the commander in chief himselfappreciated the cover pages.

~snip~

http://men.style.com/gq/features/landing?id=content_921...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 10:41 PM
Response to Original message
7. Riiiiiiiiiiiiight. I remember all those protestors outside repuke gatherings with guns at their
sides.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Apr 20th 2014, 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC