Recently in Right Wing Noise Machine Category

Yeah! I got up early enough to write a quick blog post. I've checked the news. It damn near put me back to sleep. What news that is out there is being pressed into service as the next worst thing to ever happen in our nation. It's a shtick that right wing radio has had down pat for decades, but now it seems as if the Legacy Media and the various blogs are flagging that old approach well past it's death.

Yeesh. It's just a slow news day. Seriously. After 7 plus years of BushCo™, I suspect we are going to find ourselves bored with the lack of sensationalism. No one, and I mean no one, is going to displace BushCo™ as the most controversial United States administration in modern times.

We are all going to be like drunks looking for that elusive intoxication. Try as we might, we will never feel that exhilaration we first felt as we published a post about the latest outrage from the impertinent son of a misplaced New Englander.

Our drug of choice has actually been gone for quite some time. He's gone into hiding now that his popularity has sunk lower then Nixon's.

So, like any good addict, we've switched; thus lies the explanation of our fascination with Sarah Palin. In my using days, if I couldn't get pot, I got drunk. In today's blogging milieu, if we can't have our BushCo™ story, by God, we've got Sarah to take it's place. It's the same cheap, tawdry content, only with a feminine label.

Soon, though, she'll be empty. Then what? Write outrage over Obama? Does anyone really think that Barack will be as incompetent, as amoral, as ignorant as George W. Bush? If anyone out there thinks that; put down the pipe, back away, and check yourself into treatment. Or the psych ward. Because, DAMN, your either high or psychotic. Or both.

The Savaging of Scott McClellan continues. But it is not just the right that is tearing him apart. Several of our own progressive members of Blogstonia appear to be piling on just as righteously. Over at TPM, there are continued posts of Scott's past statements that, by his own recent admission, were misleading and lies. And yet, despite his admissions, he is being ridiculed, mocked, and smeared.

Was David Brock, a man most of us know to have been instrumental in the defamation, and eventual impeachment of Bill Clinton, held to this level of scorn and ridicule? Obviously not, considering his website, Media Matters, is the go-to site for all things propaganda.

Over the last 6 plus years, since the run up to the invasion of Iraq, a nation obviously not capable of mounting any type of attack against us, we have been demanding that the administration acknowledge it's propaganda agenda. Time and again, on blogs and websites across the progressive spectrum, there has been anger and disgust at the lack of honesty and forthrightness.

Now, finally, Scott McClellan steps forward, announces quite loudly, and convincingly, that the Bush administration used propaganda in the run up to the invasion, and what does he receive? Our derision and scorn.

"Where the hell were you back in 2002? Why the hell did you not resign in protest back then?" Here are some links: CampusProgress, The Register-Guardian, MetaFilter, Oliver Willis, All Spin Zone.

Stop. It. Seriously. Stop it right now.

Scott McClellan has stepped forward, just like David Brock, just like Paul O'Neill, just like Richard Clarke. Now, when those three stepped forward, did it make a difference? Did Paul O"Neill's account of the fiasco that is the Bush administration's handling of the economy make things change? Doh! Of course not. Did David Brock's admission of being instrumental in the propaganda machine -- The Mighty Wurlitzer -- of the conservative right result in the failure of the propaganda machine? Do I need to type Doh! again? And do I really need to point out the lack of serious security despite Richard Clarke's admissions? Yeah, I thought not.

Okay, maybe Scott could have done the honorable thing and bowed out earlier. In the end, it would not have mattered one iota. They simply would have filled his position with another mouth piece. Gee, in fact, they've done it twice since he's left.

So, how about instead of bitching about what he didn't do, because it doesn't really matter, and take comfort in what he has done. Because, unlike David, Paul, and Richard, Scott's book, and it's timing, might actually prevent the invasion of Iran. He has become an ally to our cause. How about we accept him?

Besides, if you really want to bitch about someone doing the right thing and preventing this mess, how about you bitch about this. Because, in the end, having a different man as president would have been the only way to prevent the failure that is the Bush administration.

Joe Kline

Just trying to beat a certain economist from Philly to the punch.

New York Times

To the public, these men are members of a familiar fraternity, presented tens of thousands of times on television and radio as “military analysts” whose long service has equipped them to give authoritative and unfettered judgments about the most pressing issues of the post-Sept. 11 world.

Hidden behind that appearance of objectivity, though, is a Pentagon information apparatus that has used those analysts in a campaign to generate favorable news coverage of the administration’s wartime performance, an examination by The New York Times has found.

The effort, which began with the buildup to the Iraq war and continues to this day, has sought to exploit ideological and military allegiances, and also a powerful financial dynamic: Most of the analysts have ties to military contractors vested in the very war policies they are asked to assess on air.

You mean they are not unbiased analysts with integrity and honor? <snark>Well, knock me over with a feather.</snark>

It is a long, and damaging article detailing propaganda at its worst.

This whole interview rocks.



Hat tip to Spontaneous Arising

Bark Bark Woof Woof

In other words, the Republicans, who can't run on their record or rely on the sharp memory of their candidate (Shia? Sunni? Iran? Al-qaeda?) or his plans for revitalizing the economy (ready for more cake?), will do precisely what they're best at: attack their opponent and try to scare the crap out of the electorate without offering anything more than platitudes, nostrums, and the firm assertion that John McCain is most assuredly not George W. Bush; he just plans to do the exact same things he did but without the fake Texas drawl.

There is no doubt whatsoever that the Republicans will do exactly what Mr. Kristol predicts; that's a given, since it's worked so well the last couple of times. But Mr. Kristol's record for predicting the future is also well-known. He's one of the bunch that said that we would be greeted as liberators in Iraq, that the war would last a couple of weeks or months, that it would pay for itself with the oil revenues that we'd get, and that our influence and model of democracy would turn Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia into the Iowas of the Middle East with freedom and McDonald's springing up on every street corner from Riyad to Damascus. With that kind of record, it really makes you wonder why anyone gives serious attention to anything he says other than to hold it up for mockery and derision.

TVNewser

Insiders tell TVNewser Tucker Carlson's 6pmET show Tucker is getting the axe, but Carlson stays on as a political contributor to all MSNBC shows at least through the 2008 election. The official announcement, expected tomorrow, will include details about who will replace Tucker at 6pmET as well as other political programming additions. Sources say the network is going to beef up its schedule with more NBC News talent.

You know, I am trying like hell to work up some sympathy for ol' Tucker. But, try as I might, it is bone dry in that particular department today.

Seriously, that boy got his chops handed to him by John Stewart and he never recovered. He was never a good newsman. The fact he tried to nail John as not asking hard hitting questions on The Daily Show was the clincher. This cancellation is a foot note to a lack luster career.

He really was nothing more than a tag-a-long of the Mighty Wurlitzer. He collected the crumbs from the big boys, attempting to mimic their blow hard bellows to only produce an effeminate lisp.

Oh, and that segment with John Stewart is still great to watch, even if it is close to 4 years old.

By way of Buzz Flash:

International Harold Tribune

WASHINGTON: As Senator Barack Obama prepared to give a major speech on Iraq one morning a few weeks ago, a flashing-red siren alert went up on the Drudge Report Web site. It read, "Queen of the Quarter: Hillary Crushes Obama in Surprise Fund-Raising Surge," and, "$27 Million, Sources Tell Drudge Report."

Within minutes, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's fund-raising success was injected via Drudge into the day's political news on the Internet and cable television. It did not halt coverage of Obama's speech or his criticism of her vote to authorize the war in 2002, but along the front lines of the campaign - the hourly, intensely fought effort to capture the news cycle or deny ownership of it to the other side - it was a telling assault.

Clinton's aides declined to discuss how the Drudge Report got access to her latest fund-raising figures nearly 20 minutes before the official announcement went to supporters. But it was a prime example of a development that has surprised much of the political world: Clinton is learning to play nice with the Drudge Report and the powerful, elusive and conservative-leaning man behind it.

That man, Matt Drudge, came to national prominence a decade ago as a nemesis of the Clintons who used the Web to peddle, gleefully, the latest news and rumor generated by the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

That people in Clinton's campaign orbit would tip off the Drudge Report to its fund-raising numbers is in part a reflection of her pragmatic approach to dealing with potential enemies like Newt Gingrich or Rupert Murdoch.

Sorry, Hillary. Sleeping with the enemy just lost you my support. The Mighty Wurlitzer has been the major cause of our political woes in this country. Willing to supplant true democracy with corporate fascism, it has manage to destroy in a few short years what Russia failed to due in over a half a century.

You have done nothing this election but desperately sink lower and lower into the very pond scum you had so successfully stayed above during the eight years of your husband's presidency. Indeed, your desperation set in shortly after your early losses to Obama. Maybe, just maybe, in the end it is Obama's willingness to stay out of the once wholly owned Republican Right Wing Noise Machine that has won over the electorate of this country.

People are tired of the same old partisan politics that have been a standard since your husband's presidency. They are looking for a change. And Obama appears to be embracing that change. It is not so much he will coddle up to the remnants of the Republican party and it's wheezing, aged Wurlitzer, as it is he will avoid the political gamesmanship so long a staple of Washington partisanship, something this article suggests you fail to grasp.

That being said, should a small miracle happen, and you still come out the Democratic nominee, you will have my support. I still see you qualified for the presidency above any Republican or Independent currently in the running. Unless, of course, Gore decides to run as an Independent. Then it is "See Ya!"

Star Tribune

FORWARD OPERATING BASE FALCON, Iraq - Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Monday endorsed, for the first time, the idea of pausing the drawdown of U.S. forces from Iraq this summer.

"A brief period of consolidation and evaluation probably does make sense," Gates told reporters after meeting with Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq. Petraeus has indicated in recent weeks that he wants a "period of evaluation" this summer to assess the impact on Iraq security of reducing the U.S. military presence from 20 brigades to 15 brigades.

In other words, you bastards lied to us about the surge, its purpose, the goals, and its actual success. Had the surge produced positive change, made the political, ethnic and religious conditions more favorable for peaceful coexistence, would there even need to be a discussion of "consolidation and evaluation?" Of course not. We could bring our service personnel home without any type of waiting and evaluating. There would be clear, observable facts on the ground even as I type this post. But that is not the case, is it?

11 Killed in Baghdad

5 US soldier killed

Arming Iraq's Future Gangs

Iraqi Women Struggle

The wingnuts can scream all they want about schools being painted, etc., etc., etc. But in the end, there is still too much conflict, death, and destruction in Iraq to claim any kind of success.

Everyone is so focused on Chelsea in this controversy that they are missing the point: Hillary Clinton is being portrayed as so morally reprehensible that she would stoop to whoring her own daughter. Again, this in not about Chelsea, this is about Hillary. Remember this?

Calling Hillary a whore is in keeping with the misogynistic chorus that produced this disgusting piece of political agitprop.
So, did David Shuster deserve to be suspended? Hell Yes!

the things in my head go 'round and 'round

Ignorant wench.

No Namaste here. I don't want my spirit soiled by association.

It struck me as funny.

New York Times

"No, your computer isn't misfiring."

That's how The Wall Street Journal is introducing Environmental Capital -- its first blog on the environment (and business), which actually is an outgrowth of, and absorbs, its existing Energy Roundup blog.

Oh sure, like Fox News is fair and balanced this blog will be about conservation and the environment.

I ain't holding my breath for any truthiness to come out of that blog.

Canadian Cynic

It's bad to kill a blob of cells with little to no consciousness that even the Bible says has no worth until it's been outside it's mother for a month.

But it's good to let people like Michael J. Fox suffer from Parkinson's disease.

and it's good to keep people like Christopher Reeves confined to a wheelchair.

And that's before he gets good and warmed up.

Orcinus

Over the past week or two, several events have occurred that show just how radically the range of acceptable political and media discourse has changed in the past eight years.

First, the New Republic finally got the Minneapolis Historical Society to cut loose its store of old Ron Paul Reports, put them online, and thus verified -- once and for all -- our repeated contention that Ron Paul's benign good-doctor pose was hiding a noxiously hateful and racist past.

Second, Bill Press called Pat Buchanan a white supremacist to his face on national TV. Of course, this isn't news to regular Orcinus readers -- but it is a first for the mainstream media. Press just put it right out there, like it was a stone cold fact -- and Tucker and Pat sat there, and took it as a fact. Even more stunningly: Nobody called him names. He didn't get his mike cut. He wasn't asked to leave. He'll probably even get asked back. Incredible.

Third, both Max Blumenthal and Joe Conason published different but similarly damaging articles on Friday pointing out the long-standing ties between Mike Huckabee and various Reconstructionist leaders. Huck hasn't said publicly that America needs to dump the Constitution and institute biblical law in its place; but it appears that some of the most influential people who do believe this are also some of Huck's very closest friends. As Joe points out, these friendships raise serious questions about his intentions as president that the voting public deserves some straight answers to.

It's tempting to view this simply as an assertive media just doing its job -- until you reflect on the fact that this is the first election in a decade that any of these of events had the remotest chance of occurring.

It is a long post, as they usually are over at Orcinus. But it is a post of hope, change, and an indication that the Extreme Right has finally lost it's false, glossy cover.

The All Spin Zone has a nugget of a post up suggesting a whisper campaign has been started against John Edwards. Now, the wing nuts basically make shit up all the time. So, on any given day, some asshole located in their parent's basement will make some claim, then demand proof it's not true.

However, should this particular "meme" develop legs, then no doubt, it's a campaign. So, let's sit tight, and just wait and see if these idiots start screeching uncontrollably.

Oh, wait, They screech uncontrollably on a daily basis. My bad.

Anyway, I think Richard is working towards the right point. But it's not so much about who's afraid of John Edwards as much as why are they afraid of John Edwards. Just like Howard Dean seemed to worry the Republicans (especially Rove) back in 2004 (as we now see why with the 2006 election) there seems to be a serious strain among the Mighty Wurlitzer mouth pieces to blow bad steam about John Edwards.

I can't help but suspect the Republican planners are well aware of their party's decline. More importantly, I think they know they are no longer a representative cross section of the American electorate. With more and more populous ideas taking root, without the stigma of "dirty fucking hippies," they are desperate, and will go to any length in stirring up controversies to distract people from this truth.

Somehow, thought, I think this whole John Edwards whisper campaign is going to blow up in their face. For one thing, I find Elizabeth Edwards to be much more scrappy, and feisty, then Hillary ever was back during the Blue Dress affair, and she will not take any of this in a cool, calculating manner. She's going to lash out, with anger, with passion, and without regard to the sensibilities of the Beltway bums. Now, the Beltway bums may go all a twitter, condemning and criticizing her, but the majority of Americans will look up to her, and see what a strong woman she is, and how she is standing by her man.

And let's hope they wing nuts failed to learn from the past. Because when they were going all out to smear and besmirch a sitting president, his approval ratings went through the roof. So, I figure, if they try to do the same thing, the results will be the same.

CNN

"I don't think it. I know it," Carter told CNN's Wolf Blitzer.

"Our country for the first time in my life time has abandoned the basic principle of human rights," Carter said. "We've said that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to those people in Abu Ghraib prison and Guantanamo, and we've said we can torture prisoners and deprive them of an accusation of a crime to which they are accused."

Carter also said President Bush creates his own definition of human rights.

Carter's comments come on the heels of an October 4 article in The New York Times disclosing the existence of secret Justice Department memorandums supporting the use of "harsh interrogation techniques." These include "head-slapping, simulated drowning and frigid temperatures," according to the Times.

Oh boy! The wing nut banshees are going to be out in full force on this one. Cries of "treason," "traitor," and all other sorts of mind numbing shrillness will commence forth with. I think they should be careful, though, because Carter seems to be a pretty spry old man. He's not some youngster of 12, you know. He's still out there building houses. Which seems a lot more constructive than mindlessly clearing away more brush.

Think Progress

On September 20, 72 Senators voted for the highly politicized, “bait and switch” resolution that condemned a newspaper ad by MoveOn.org. The amendment, offered by Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), expressly stated that the Senate would condemn “any effort to attack the honor and integrity” of “all members of the United States Armed Forces“:

(b) Sense of Senate.–It is the sense of the Senate–

(1) to reaffirm its support for all the men and women of the United States Armed Forces, including General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq;

(2) to strongly condemn any effort to attack the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all the members of the United States Armed Forces; and

(3) to specifically repudiate the unwarranted personal attack on General Petraeus by the liberal activist group Moveon.org.

On his radio show yesterday, right-wing radio host Rush Limbaugh attacked the “honor and integrity” of some members of the Armed Forces. Limbaugh attacked troops who hold a different viewpoint than his own as “phony soldiers.” Iraq war vet Jon Soltz writes that Limbaugh’s comments are directed at “the majority of troops on the ground in Iraq” because they “do not back the President’s failed policy.”

For all the Senators who rushed to make political hay over an empty resolution, the spotlight is on them. Will they now enforce their “sense of the Senate” and condemn Rush Limbaugh?

Yesterday, 341 members of the House voted to pass a companion resolution to that of Cornyn’s. They, too, face the same question.

I ain't holding my breath.