Posted on 03/11/2012 11:46:08 AM PDT by Politics4US
"The release of the highly anticipated videotapes of Barack Obama speaking at an affirmative-action rally when he was a student at Harvard Law School fell flat, revealing little about the presidents radical past that wasnt already known, contends talk radio host Michael Savage.
Was there a screaming Obama railing at the top of his lungs about the evils of white oppression? No, Savage said on his Savage Nation show last night. Was there a beret-wearing Obama with an AK-47? No.
Savage said the video promised by Andrew Breitbart before he died last week shows basically the same Obama youd hear on the stump today.
The same monotonous cadence, the same haughty demeanor, Savage said. If this was supposed to be a blockbuster revelation, there wasnt much block to bust.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
anyone vetting Obama and shinning a light on it should be applauded.
prior to the tapes the MSM was talking about birth control, and how our side doesn't respect women's rights. ....deflect, deflect
Shapiro and Pollack said it shows Obama embracing this man. With Bill Ayers and Rev. Wright, they didn’t have footage of Obama talking about them before Obama was running for president.
I'm reminded here of the age old axiom of 'vanilla and chocolate'.
I haven’t liked Savage in years.
He’ll probably be ok once he starts selling those books.
It goes like this:
BB makes a minor charge, which draws a major denial from the left —they offer some explanation.
THEN BB rolls out additional evidence that makes plain the great lie contained in the initial denial.
This then triggers much teeth-gnashing, yelling, and rambling back-tracking. Then a back-up explanation/denial is issued.
THEN BB rolls out something really huge (something that wasn’t disclosed at first) that drags the entire group of lefty apoligists down the bar counter, pushing all manner of peanuts, beer, and sending drinks crashing onto the barroom floor.
Then the victim is pummeled, kicked into silence and finally pee’d upon.
THAT is how is goes.
It was just the first video. Wait until you see the rest to judge.
Thanks very much for the clarification on how BB works.
IN the micro, it was a dud. But when it is examined in the macro, it is huge. And I think that’s where Breitbart was going.
It builds on the narrative that Obama is nothing but an anti American radical - who was given a pass by the media.
His apologists look absolutely foolish now when they cry “guilt by association” - because the list is ever growing (Derrick Bell, Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn, Father Pfleger, Van Jones, Frank Marshall Davis, Raila Odinga, Louis Farrakhan, Alice Palmer, etc)
okay... we’ll see, I guess.
I forgot to post my *GIGGLE* with my thanks! Your imagery and analogy of the bar is marvelous!
LMAO!
It depends on how much you were expecting and how much it takes to shock or anger you.
Remember is will not make a difference with the Kool Aid drinkers. It will keep Barry’s friends in the spot light.
Savage noted that his upcoming book, Trickle Down Tyranny, shows Obama has a long history of his radicalism, a long history of associating with people like Derrick Bell, and theres no point in reiterating it.
If Savage knew of his relationship with Bell then why hasn't he spoken about it on his radio show? Or did he not know about that either? I guess we'll all see when his book comes out.
You're part of the problem Savage, not the solution to it.
That is a perfect description of the Breitbart (RIP) model.
Let me guess...your eyes are brown.
Savage was angry that Breitbart didn’t cover him being banned in England enough.
They say the opposite of what he is..transparent, job creator blah,blah.
People buy on emotion, these tapes are a hit to the brand marketing, especially if more of the same is coming. He cannot win if he is losing in the media.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.