The final nail in the Messiah’s coffin will be when the crazier of his supporters start making public threats to torch the country if their man isn’t elected.
Watch it, TomW. You know how that will be reported…
Powerline Blog Making Threats to “torch the country”!
Some chump like OldSchool will then start a thread decrying Powerliners threats to torch the country. F Tard Fitzelda will decry Hinderaker’s personal efforts to bring about the torching. Raptavio, fresh out of his critical thinking thread, will amuse himself by noting how powerliners are sinking to violence. Some dork named Estrogen will post generic pictures of Nazis, proclaiming that pic to be the pic of powerliners on a rampage. April will note that it’s really the Jews on a rampage against innocent children in Palestine. And finally, Alton will drop 20 messages straight into my tard filter.
It’s best not to ever note how violent the left gets.
Full disclosure: I have received training three times from people who have been trained by Saul Alinsky.
It took me a while to make the connection but yesterday I realized how Obama’s statement about his willingness to meet with various unsavory government leaders fit in with what Alinksy training taught about meeting with a targeted company or department of government [mayor, CEO, board] who the “organizer” feels can give the group what it wants.
After the organizer has his group together [there is a whole process here that I won’t go into] and it has chosen the issue it wants to tackle, you work on getting a meeting scheduled with the person(s) the organizer has decided on.
The only goal of the first meeting is a second meeting.
This is because the first goal of your group is to establish itslegitimacy or get recognition of the organizer’s group to negotiate on behalf of the problem in question.
The motto is: Organized people against organized money.
Obama, by stating that he is willing to meet with these “leaders” without any preconditions, has declared that he is willing to give these people recognition or legitimacy without their having to meet any preconditions.
Many in Obama’s base that I’ve talked to are totally ignorant on foreign relations. They think of it in terms of personal relationships. They think that countries dislike us because we are not “nice” enough to them. If people in other countries liked us, all would be well and world peace would follow. Obama plays well to them.
Obama may see himself as an organizer on behalf of the aggrieved peoples of the world against the wealth of the West.
EDIT: Training also included lessons on how to “cut the issue” {define the problem or state your goal] so as to insure favorable media coverage. Obama doesn’t need to worry about this one. The MSM does that for him in every article that covers him.
This is really close to my impression too. In essence, how would a “Community Organizer” deal with the hot spots in the Middle East? Talk, and more talks. Well, if that doesn’t work, what then? Refer to Chamberlain. He’s certainly put on a brave face, not having been in favor of invading Iraq and all that, but it’s still just in the opinion of a community organizer.
Jeez, I figured that by Page 2 of this thread there would be at least one of our Leftist friends here to say that the NYT wasn’t in the tank for Obama.
BTW Punch Sulzburger and his missus have parted ways. She gets half of what’s left of the paper after he finishes ruining it.
Now we know: Barak Hussein Obama is a former Muslim who converted to Christianity —the truth is out. He lied.
Even more interesting is the kind of “Christianity” to which he converted. I mean that the “Black Liberation Theology” of Reverend Jeremiah Wright is very similar to the Black Muslim “faith” of Malcom X and Louis Farrakan.
The New York Times as well as other “old media” abandoned journalism long ago. There is a old and very cogent principle in journalism - everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts.
The latest efforts on the part of the NYT to manufacture their own facts to get their square peg position to fit into the round hole of truth is just another example of liberal influence aimed at reconstructing history. To succeed in this ploy requires a basic assumption that the general population will blindly believe what is published in print.
Their tactics probably succeeded in the days when old media had absolute control over the flow of information. In that era, the ones controlling the information also controlled the ability of the people to confirm the factual basis for that information. With the advent of the internet and competing sources for the dissemination of information, old media resorts to their playbook of yesteryear, and cannot understand why it no longer works. They cannot connect the dots between their continued deceitful practices, which are now seeing the light of day, and the drop in their circulation. They refuse to connect the dots because that would mean a return to the traditional standards of journalism, which would effectively render their modern agenda-based approach as a failure.
The Times and other legacy media sources continue to die a very slow and public death at their own hands, refusing to face the reality that facts are indeed important to a thinking and educated population. And it appears that they would rather perish than abandon their role as a shill for liberalism.
Soon the comment on “osama” obama’s web site will disappear, in some manner, the video at youtube will mysteriously vanish and the MSM will continue with their charade that the statement was never made. When proof of his comment is offered, the MSM will call the proof “doctored” and toss it out as meaningless.
Anyone challenging “osama” obama in any manner on any topic, as well as those stating a choice for McCain, will be called a racist.
The MSM has anointed “osama” obama as the next president and no one had dare to fight to prove them wrong. The MSM has long been kissing his feet, how long before they demand that the US citizens do likewise? Will the MSM insist upon, not that “osama” obama be sworn into office, but that the citizens bow down as he is “coronated” not the president, but as a king?
Full disclosure: I have received training three times from people who have been trained by Saul Alinsky.
It took me a while to make the connection but yesterday I realized how Obama’s statement about his willingness to meet with various unsavory government leaders fit in with what Alinksy training taught about meeting with a targeted company or department of government [mayor, CEO, board] who the “organizer” feels can give the group what it wants.
After the organizer has his group together [there is a whole process here that I won’t go into] and it has chosen the issue it wants to tackle, you work on getting a meeting scheduled with the person(s) the organizer has decided on.
The only goal of the first meeting is a second meeting.
This is because the first goal of your group is to establish itslegitimacy or get recognition of the organizer’s group to negotiate on behalf of the problem in question.
The motto is: Organized people against organized money.
Obama, by stating that he is willing to meet with these “leaders” without any preconditions, has declared that he is willing to give these people recognition or legitimacy without their having to meet any preconditions.
Many in Obama’s base that I’ve talked to are totally ignorant on foreign relations. They think of it in terms of personal relationships. They think that countries dislike us because we are not “nice” enough to them. If people in other countries liked us, all would be well and world peace would follow. Obama plays well to them.
Obama may see himself as an organizer on behalf of the aggrieved peoples of the world against the wealth of the West.
EDIT: Training also included lessons on how to “cut the issue” [define the problem or state your goal] so as to insure favorable media coverage. Obama doesn’t need to worry about this one. The MSM does that for him in every article that covers him.
This is really close to my impression too. In essence, how would a “Community Organizer” deal with the hot spots in the Middle East? Talk, and more talks. Well, if that doesn’t work, what then? Refer to Chamberlain. He’s certainly put on a brave face, not having been in favor of invading Iraq and all that, but it’s still just in the opinion of a community organizer.
Bacchus,
At the second meeting in a “grass-roots organizer” scheme, the group’s spokesperson lays out their demands. This becomes the subject of further meetings and negotiations.
My concern is whose side will Obama be on.
Most Third-World governments do a pretty good job of dealing with the US. Look at the way Korea played Clinton and Madam Quarter-Bright. They are studying Obama and probably already have a pretty good idea of how to handle him.
What I worry about is that Obama may see himself as a Third-World spokesperson/savior against the wealth of the West. These Third-World dictators will at the least demand money or weapons or food and Obama will figure out a way to get it for them. For sure Muslims will demand that Israel give up more land.
To repeat: I’m concerned, because of the easy way Obama announced his willingness to meet with these thuggish dictators, that in these negotiations OBAMA WILL NOT BE WORKING FOR THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES.
This years election will be a throw back to the early 1800’s, when “newspapers” were openly partisan broad sheets spewing an odd mix of fact, falsehoods and rank distortions.
It would be best if these news organizations would be honest about their political philosophies, but I guess they need some air of legitimacy.
Beyond this NYT story, the national media will not touch the Chicago Annenberg Challenge Fund story where Mr. Obama and Mr. Ayres apparently worked closely together; just the opposite of how Mr. Obama has characterized their relationship. Tom Maguire at the Just One Minute blog has been following this story for some time. This story also opens questions into Mr. Obama’s ability to lead and unite.
There is nothing for the NYT to correct...it is you that is doing the misrepresenting. You ommitted
1. McCain’s second statement “If Senator Obama is favored by Hamas, I think people can make judgments accordingly.”
and
2. Obama’s repeated statements that he will talk with enemies without preconditions BUT WITH PREPARATION. Demanding another country does what we tell them to before the President even talks to them is a rediculous policy that hasn’t worked for decades. Gorbachev agreed to meet Reagan in four summit conferences around the world: the first in Geneva, Switzerland, the second in Reykjavík, Iceland, the third held in Washington, D.C., along with the fourth summit in Moscow, Russia. Reagan believed that if he could persuade the Soviets to allow for more democracy and free speech, this would lead to reform and the end of Communism.
Bsh has destroyed relations with just about everyone. Every bit of hard work that President Reagan did..has been destroyed by BUSH!
The real question is whether McCain will be more like Reagan or more like Bush.
Why hasn’t McCain ‘stopped’ and publicly corrected the mis/dis-information spun by the NYT’s? The ‘Left’ is never so errant. McCain better figure it out. And the Repubs as well, who think that Obama need not be defined through the prism of Black Liberation ‘Theology’ - the ‘political Faith’ that so informs, inspires and resonates with his Marxist values.
