The two senior WaPo pundits continue to flog Wright and ignore Hagee and Moon

David S. Broder
A Pastor's Influence
Barack Obama risks political damage by leaving vague what it was that attracted him to Rev. Wright.

Robert D. Novak
Obama's Misplay
Obama's reaction to Rev. Wright's rhetoric may not have been swift enough.

of course, this makes perfectly good sense only if you stop and remember that the mission undertaken by our esteemed "news" media and punditocracy is to destroy obama, discreetly support hillary and lionize mccain... never mind that wright is a truth-teller and hagee and moon are hateful, fundamentalist religious ideologues who are the stark antithesis of compassion, inclusion and basic human dignity...

think progress on hagee...



robert parry on rev. moon...

[I]t’s not news that a viciously anti-American religious figure has invested billions of dollars in financing the U.S. conservative movement and put fat wads of cash into the pockets of many prominent Republicans, including members of President George W. Bush’s own family.

While Sen. Obama has to explain what he knew and when he knew it about Wright’s angry sermons, the Bush Family floats above its financial and political associations with the Rev. Sun Myung Moon, a South Korean theocrat who had denounced the United States as “Satan’s harvest” and likened American women to “prostitutes.”

In his angry sermons, Moon has gone further than saying “God-damn America” – as Wright did – to vowing to sweep aside American democracy and individualism as he builds a one-world state.

Once his plan to “swallow entire America” is complete, Moon told his followers in one sermon, there will be “some individuals who complain inside your stomach. However, they will be digested.”

But Moon’s hatred of America is not deemed news, in part, because Moon has financed the Washington Times since 1982 to the tune of more than $3 billion, according to former newspaper insider George Archibald.

Moon also has lavished many millions of dollars more to pay for conservative conferences and to bail out key right-wing figures when they have found themselves in financial distress, including Republican direct-mail guru Richard Viguerie and the late Jerry Falwell.

Plus, Moon has paid large speaking fees to former President George H.W. Bush – estimated in the millions of dollars – and has feted President George W. Bush’s brother Neil at recent events for the Moon-sponsored Universal Peace Federation.

[...]

Yet, even though Moon has gained influence by funneling huge sums of mysterious money into the U.S. political process – and to the Bush Family – he has avoided the intense scrutiny that has fallen on Rev. Wright, who until recently was a little-known black preacher from Chicago’s South Side.

While the YouTube snippets of several Wright outbursts have become daily fare on U.S. news programs, Moon’s influence on the American Right and his largesse toward the Bush Family have remained virtual non-stories. That’s been the case even though Moon may represent a key nexus between international crime and the U.S. political elite.

When Moon is discussed, he’s usually presented as simply the wacky Unification Church cult leader who somehow parlayed carnation sales by his followers into a vast global fortune.

What is almost never referenced are his long-standing ties to organized crime and international drug smuggling, including the Japanese yakuza gangs and South American cocaine traffickers. Even first-hand accounts of Moon’s money-laundering from insiders like his former daughter-in-law Nansook Hong draw no U.S. media attention.

we in the u.s. are such dupes... we're led like sheep from manufactured scandal to manufactured scandal while the real dark forces continue to do their dirty work, safely protected in the shadows...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

We WILL be inured to torture as U.S. policy IF we don't stand up and fight

two-time pulitzer winner, anthony lewis, a true "dean" of journalism in a way his fellow jewish journalist, robert novak, will never be, offers his views on the horror of torture as official u.s. policy...

In these last weeks of turbulent events, the single most significant has not been the financial crisis, not the fall of a governor, not the passing of the fifth year of the war without end in Iraq. It has been an American president's formal blessing of the use of torture.

That was what President Bush did in early March when he vetoed legislation prohibiting the use of brutal methods of interrogation by American intelligence agents. His action was quickly overtaken by other news. But in its redefinition of American values — of the American character — it had profound implications.

[...]

The corrupting effects of the adoption of torture as an American practice have been widespread. First of all, on the law. The Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, which makes binding interpretations of the law for the federal government, issued secret opinions defining torture away to the vanishing point, saying it must be equivalent in pain to "organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death" — and adding that Congress could not stop the president from ordering the use of torture. (The whole idea of secret official opinions defining the law should be anathema in a free republic, one that has boasted from the beginning of having a government of laws, not men. Secret laws are the hallmark of tyrannies.)

The Justice Department opinions were not abstractions. They were immediately taken up by political appointees at the Pentagon and led directly to the torture of dozens of prisoners and the killing of some at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan.

Torture has had corrupting effects on our politics, too. Most Republicans in Congress have defended President Bush's claim of the right to use such methods, evidently as a matter of political solidarity. The corruption has even touched the man who more than anyone has been a symbol of resistance to torture, John McCain. Senator McCain led Congress in 2005 to pass the legislation reiterating the ban on the military's use of torture. But when it came to extending the ban to intelligence agents in this year's Intelligence Authorization Act, he sided with the president. It was as if he were saying that the North Vietnamese who so cruelly tortured him as a prisoner were war criminals if they were soldiers — but not if they were intelligence agents.

[...]

[T]he rest of us do not have to resign ourselves to being a Torture Nation. ... Col. Lawrence B. Wilkerson, U.S. Army (Ret.), who was chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell, wrote: "We must start now to recognize our crimes and our complicity. We are all guilty, and we must all take action in whatever way we can. Torture and abuse are not American. They are foreign to us and always should be. We need to exorcise them from our souls and make amends."

there is only one surefire way to restore our country's integrity, and that's to insure that the criminals responsible are prosecuted for war crimes in the hague, in full view of the watching world...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Two views of Obama: one is the truth and the other is Bob Novak

let's go with novak first...

Traveling the country the past few months, I have encountered habitual Republican voters so entranced by Barack Obama's potential to lead the nation that they plan to vote for him in November. Once Hillary Clinton's supporters return to the fold, Obama Republicans could produce a Democratic presidential landslide. But Obama's recent missteps jeopardize their support and imperil his election.

These apostate Republicans were never deluded into considering him anything other than a doctrinaire liberal who wants a more intrusive government, with higher taxation and tougher regulation. But they have leaned toward him as an exceptional candidate in the mold of John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan, a post-partisan leader and a welcome contrast to George W. Bush's failed presidency. That impression is threatened by Obama's performance the past 10 days, climaxing in Wednesday night's debate with Clinton.

[...]

Democratic pros feel that the San Francisco incident [Obama's declaration at a closed-door fund-raiser in San Francisco that "bitter" small-towners in Pennsylvania and elsewhere "cling to guns or religion"] halted an Obama surge in Pennsylvania that might have won him the state and ended Clinton's campaign tomorrow. What really worries them, however, is the impact on independents and Republicans who had been entranced by the young man from Chicago. Now, they wonder whether the appealing unifier is really a divider.

novak is the quintessential role model for self-important pundits everywhere, using polished and articulate language and an oh-so-reasonable argument to convince even the most discerning of readers among us that he's making trenchant observations from a perch high above us mere mortals, and dispensing those observations with a wisdom hard-earned through many years of immersion in the world of political reality...

it takes a fair amount of time surfing our fabulous internet, bouncing from news site to blog to news site to blog, to even begin to see through what a guy like novak is really doing - namely, presenting a well-crafted piece designed to unobtrusively force-feed us the prevailing opinion of the elites who really call all of the shots in this country... there are many bloggers out there who rail against novak's b.s... speaking for myself, i prefer to ignore it, unless, as in this particular instance, it serves to instruct and allows us to compare and contrast novak's high-minded drivel with the plain-spoken truth...

now, let's look at that truth, as contained in a letter to the wapo...

from yesterday's edition...

When Sen. Barack Obama made his "bitter" comments at a recent fundraiser in San Francisco ["Opponents Paint Obama as an Elitist; Clinton, McCain Try to Score Off 'Bitter' Remark," news story, April 12], he neglected to name two behaviors that blue-collar people in Pennsylvania have turned to -- abusing alcohol and drugs -- probably because his mother brought him up to be polite.

Visiting my northeastern Pennsylvania home town of Athens over the decades, I have seen exactly what Mr. Obama described -- a result of the grim realities of life in a dying culture in a dying place. Many a meth lab exists in those rolling hills, and many people are struggling with alcoholism. And, yes, many do love their guns, many love Jesus and many are trapped in an economic hell created by the neglect and marginalization they have suffered at the hands of Washington.

Mr. Obama got it right, and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton needs to stop pandering to the media's desire for sensationalism. Perhaps she should consider a trip north of Scranton and her comfort zone -- up some winding, poorly paved roads past empty farmhouses to where she will find the very folks Mr. Obama talked about. I'm sure that they have some questions for her about where she was while they slid off Earth's edge into apathy and, yes, bitterness.

i don't need to point out the difference... it leaps out and hits you right in the face... funny how truth usually does that...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

According to Novak, Bush is losing 2x with the R's, on both Gonzales and Libby

the r's think it's outrageous that bush isn't pardoning libby and even more outraged that he's retaining gonzo... at least they're thinking straight on that last one... tough shit, george... just add 'em to the list of people who hate you...

novak in the wapo today...

Washington lawyer Victoria Toensing: "If the president can pardon 12 million illegal immigrants, he can pardon Scooter Libby."

[...]

In contrast, Republican insiders are enraged by Bush's retention of Gonzales, whom they consider a political and governmental disaster.

and so, simply put, here's what novak says the r's want (never admitting, of course, that it's what HE wants too)...

[T]wo possibilities are talked about in Republican circles: Let Gonzales go, and pardon Libby. That might push Bush's approval ratings even lower, but it sure would hearten his base.

good god, the man is so out of touch...! first of all, if the r's REALLY wanted gonzo gone, they wouldn't be ready - as they are at this very moment - to scuttle the gonzo no-confidence vote... and even though george, via tony snow, said yesterday that gonzo's going to stay no matter what, they could at least go on the record strongly in opposition to keeping him... but, as i've said, they're not going to do that because they know intuitively that, like jericho, if they cut the cord now, the walls will definitely come a'tumblin' down (see previous post)...

i won't go in to the pardoning of libby other than to say that doing so would be a complete perversion of our justice system... but the other thing that blows me away is the suggestion that bush should try to appease his base even if it means he falls further in the polls... who the hell IS the base these days...? the religious right has pulled away, rightly so after being dumped by the side of the road, so novak must be referring to the likes of fouad ajami, or robert bork and his 8 other constitutional lawyers politically-connected elite buds, who not only can see themselves in libby's shoes, but are also preparing the ground for possible similar action on cheney's behalf... what novak doesn't mention, either because it hasn't occurred to him or because he's blind to the degree to which this elite "base" will try to game the system, is that bush, by pardoning libby, might also be assuring a pardon for himself later on...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

I just got off the phone with the Edwards campaign

they were calling to hit me up for $100 in their end-of-the-second quarter fund-raising drive... she was a very nice woman and i let her give her pitch... then i said i would give her my answer if i could provide some feedback first... she said, "certainly..."

what i said will be no surprise to anyone who reads this blog... i said that i appreciated what edwards was doing in trying to get us out of iraq... i said that, from what i have been reading, he gave a good speech on terrorism today... i lamented novak's completely dishonest attack on edwards this morning in the wapo... then i went for the jugular...

i said that i see the united states in the middle of the worst constitutional crisis of its history and that i am not hearing ANY candidate calling it for what it is... the only one that's come even close is chris dodd... i said that unless and until a presidential candidate stands up and calls it for what it is, and starts talking about what WE can do to set things right, he or she will NOT get my support... i asked her to please pass that along to edwards, which she assured me she would... then i said that, when edwards decides to step forward on that issue, to please feel free to get back with me...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Bob Novak wants us to know it's HIS CLASS who's calling the shots

slanted, dishonest, irresponsible journalism... would we expect anything less...?

A Contender's Worn-Out Welcome

By Robert D. Novak
Thursday, June 7, 2007; Page A27

The dynamic performance by John Edwards in Sunday's Democratic presidential debate, assailing his competitors for the nomination, got high marks from political reporters, Republican politicians and left-wing activists. But not from the Democratic establishment. Once their great hope for the future, Edwards now is massively unpopular among party regulars, who neither like nor trust him.

"massively unpopular"...? "massively"...?? where the hell are you getting your information, you twit...?

Democrats are surprisingly candid about him. Mark Siegel, a 35-year party insider, told me: "He came to Washington as a 'New Democrat,' but he's not that kind of Democrat anymore. He's into class warfare."

Edwards has not worn well with party colleagues. Campaign consultant Bob Shrum was enthusiastic about Edwards after working on his 1998 Senate victory in North Carolina and unsuccessfully advised Gore to make him his 2000 running mate. But Shrum chose Kerry over Edwards as his 2004 presidential client. In his newly published memoir, "No Excuses: Concessions of a Serial Campaigner," Shrum explains: "I was coming to believe he wasn't ready; he was a Clinton who hadn't read the books."

During the 2004 primaries, Democratic activist James Carville was enchanted when Edwards shifted his centrist posture to a populist depiction of "Two Americas." Carville told me -- and then repeated it on CNN -- that Edwards was the best stump speaker he ever had seen. When I asked him this week whether he still thought that was true, Carville replied: "Maybe he's not as good now."

oh, ok... i've got it now... edwards is "massively unpopular" with the democratic LEADERSHIP, the INSIDERS like siegel, carville, and shrum, three people who certainly don't speak for me, and certainly not, in my opinion, for most grassroots liberals and progressives... and that bit about "class warfare"... feeling threatened, are ya, bob...?

then, in keeping with the unbelievably shallow attacks that have become a staple of the traditional media, novak goes on to babble about edwards' "haircut," his speaking honorarium, and his hedge fund salary...

but it's in the last paragraph that he fully reveals his hand...

Iowa Democrats in 2004 pulled back from catastrophe at the 11th hour and abandoned Howard Dean when they contemplated the impact of a Dean victory. Party leaders hope Iowans will take a similarly hard look at John Edwards.

you see, it's all about the PARTY LEADERSHIP, and has nothing to do with folks like US who actually CAST THE VOTES... novak's making the case that it's HIS CLASS, the INSIDER CLASS, who needs to call the shots... god forbid it should be US COMMONERS, or, as they would call us in shakespeare's day, GROUNDLINGS...

it's also very telling that novak should bring up howard dean, the "catastrophe" in novak's twisted world view... howard dean was a phenomenon created and led by the grassroots, a movement that struck such fear into the hearts of the insiders that they had no choice but to destroy both it and dean along with it... and, ironically, horrified as i was by what i was seeing with the bush regime, it was howard dean who brought me out of my shell and into the world of political activism for the first time...

p.s. i am certainly not declaring myself as an edwards supporter... there's way too much time between now and november 2008 for me to be jumping on any candidate's bandwagon... but i simply can't and won't tolerate naked efforts to destroy a candidate on bogus grounds, and that's precisely what novak is attempting to do... of COURSE, he would be more comfortable with hillary (or, should i say, mark penn) and obama too, for that matter... after all, they both support the war, which, by extension, means they support the power structure that keeps a shill like bob novak in good standing with his fellow elites...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Karl "evil incarnate" Rove

robert novak circles the truth...

Conservative commentator Robert Novak writes that while many on the right view White House adviser Karl Rove as their 'Captain Ahab,' a number of liberals refer to him as "evil incarnate."

"The White House is letting it be known on Capitol Hill that [Rove] will play no part in President Bush's forthcoming big push to pass a compromise immigration bill," writes Novak in the latest Evans-Novak Political Report.

Novak implies that one reason for the White House's move is that President Bush's trusted adviser "is viewed by Democrats as evil incarnate."

referring to rove as "evil incarnate" is dead on... i have been of that opinion for many years... no one has ever poisoned the political and social discourse of the united states more than karl rove... his behavior, minus any accountability, has served to provide implicit permission for others to follow suit, thus expanding his dark influence in a geometric progression... i have only been hoping and praying that satan will call in the marker on his soul earlier rather than later...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Going after Hayden for confirming that Plame was "covert"

un-frigging-believable...

Hayden’s approval of Waxman’s statement about Plame’s covert status “confirmed Republican suspicions that Hayden is too close to Democrats,” Novak wrote. “When Hayden’s role was pointed out to one of the President’s most important aides, there was no response.”

Novak, it appears, has gone from acting as Bush’s water carrier to becoming an instigator for reprisals against public officials who are not sufficiently “loyal Bushies.”

Hiatt and his colleagues on the Washington Post editorial page apparently see nothing wrong in conveying these thinly veiled threats of reprisals to the broader Washington community.

novak and his principal enabler, fred hiatt, should be fired - immediately...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

She's lucky she hasn't been assassinated

until you've spent time walking the streets of another country, particularly a country in the developing world, you have no idea what it feels like to be truly exposed and vulnerable... it's not like you aren't exposed and vulnerable when you're in the u.s., but at least you can rely on a semblance of law and order and, hopefully, until bush and his buddies wipe it out completely, due process... but in a foreign country, you're pretty much on your own, and whatever happens, happens... you're basically SOL...

"I was a covert officer for the CIA," Plame said, until her cover was blown in a July of 2003 article by conservative columnist Robert Novak. Plame testified that her "career path was terminated prematurely" due to the revelation, because she could no longer do the work that she was trained to do, such as traveling overseas.

Plame said that her "name and identity were carelessly and recklessly abused by senior officials in the White House and State Department."

"Politics and ideology must be stripped from our intelligence services," Plame said, after accusing Bush Administration officials of releasing personal information about her deliberately in order to damage the credibility of her husband, former Ambassador Joe Wilson. "The harm that is done when a CIA cover is blown is great," Plame added.

Plame said that she was "surprised at how carelessly" White House officials had acted in regards to her cover, and said that her exposure left her feeling like she was "hit in the gut"

"They should have been diligent in protecting me and every CIA officer," Plame testified.

i would surmise that valerie's opportunities to enjoy vacations outside the u.s. are now about nil...

naturally, we have fox doing its level best to spin and discredit testimony given under oath...

During its coverage of the hearing, Fox News Channel cut down the sound to feature commentary by Novak who labeled Plame's contention that she was a "covert operator" as "absurd." Novak also brought up Plame's political contributions to the Democratic Party, to imply that she was partisan.

novak really ought to look into cryogenic preservation... if he could be brought back in 50 or 60 years, he would be a genuine fossil, and the subject of much public interest... right now, he's just another senile, empty suit...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments