Posted on 11/26/2010 5:19:16 PM PST by Sub-Driver
Liberals resort to conspiracy theories to explain Obama's problems
Following two years of poor economic performance and electoral repudiation, liberalism is casting around for narratives to explain its failure - narratives that don't involve the admission of inadequacies in liberalism itself.
For some, the solution is to lay the blame on President Obama. He hasn't been liberal enough. He can't communicate. "I cannot recall a president," Robert Kuttner says in the Huffington Post, "who generated so much excitement as a candidate but who turned out to be such a political dud as a chief executive." Obama is "fast becoming more albatross than ally."
This is an ideological movement at its most cynical, attempting to throw overboard its once-revered leader to avoid the taint of his problems.
But there is an alternative narrative, developed by those who can't shake their reverence for Obama. If a president of this quality and insight has failed, it must be because his opponents are uniquely evil, coordinated and effective. The problem is not Obama but the ruthless conspiracy against him.
So Matt Yglesias warns the White House to be prepared for "deliberate economic sabotage" from the GOP - as though Chamber of Commerce SWAT teams, no doubt funded by foreigners, are preparing attacks on the electrical grid. Paul Krugman contends that "Republicans want the economy to stay weak as long as there's a Democrat in the White House." Steve Benen explains, "We're talking about a major political party . . . possibly undermining the strength of the country - on purpose, in public, without apology or shame - for no other reason than to give themselves a campaign advantage in 2012." Benen's posting was titled "None Dare Call it Sabotage."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Soon they'll be talking about Richard Mellon Scaife.
I heard a caller saying the airport nudie scanners and gropes weren't Obama's fault because he didn't create the TSA.
Then again, maybe they are preparing a rationalization for a coup.
“We’re talking about a major political party . . . possibly undermining the strength of the country - on purpose, in public, without apology or shame - for no other reason than to give themselves a campaign advantage in 2012”
Liberals accuse republicans of which they are most guilty.
The Kenyan-Reid-Pelosi sabotaged the economy in 2007 to get the Kenyan elected. Not to mention the war effort.
bump
I was going to say the same thing
I even caught a DU thread once where they were trying to come up with a word for us that carried the same pejorative impact, but they just couldn’t do it.
LOL. And here I thought that liberalism was the home of creativity, artistry, and the clever turn of phrase. Guess not, huh?
I think you're right about the term, 'Moonbat'. It's without equal in the lexicon of political warfare. The reason it stuck in the first place, is that a certain degree of observed truth underlies the term. Libs have more wackos per capita, by FAR, than the right does, and they know it.
On the other hand, most of the pejoratives that liberals hurl against the right are about half right, so their impact is weak.
In fact, some of their creations are so ill-conceived, that conservatives have proudly adopted them as their own. The terms, 'Right-Wing Extremist' and 'Bitter Clinger' come to mind. And let's not forget the perennial favorites, 'Knuckle-Dragging Neanderthal' and 'Flag Waving Patriot'.
Liberals invented all of those terms to hurt us, but their intentions back-fired.
“Paul Krugman contends that “Republicans want the economy to stay weak as long as there’s a Democrat in the White House.” Steve Benen explains, “We’re talking about a major political party . . . possibly undermining the strength of the country - on purpose, in public, without apology or shame - for no other reason than to give themselves a campaign advantage in 2012.” Benen’s posting was titled “None Dare Call it Sabotage.”
Scary thing is, about 20% of the American people believe this rubbish.
Thank you for your blessing. I thought you pun was cute. ;) blessings to you also, FRiend.
Good thoughts, but except:
“On the other hand, most of the pejoratives that liberals hurl against the right are about half right, so their impact is weak”
I would only give them 3 to 5% credit vs. ‘about half right’...;)
You’re exactly right about the sting of the Moonbat moniker lying in the degree of its accuracy. In its original form, it was ‘barking moonbats’ - which is an even more apt and fun phrase to use.
I love your list of supposed pejoratives that conservatives have proudly appropriated. Don’t forget ‘pajamas media’. After the Dan Rather/fake but accurate expose, the lefties said bloggers were nothing more than people sitting around in their pajamas typing away on their keyboards. Conservatives were more than happy to adopt that characterization. ;)
FYI, Obama is the "Mombasa Moonbeam." It shows his kinship to Gov. Jerry Brown, while honoring the place of his birth. Respectful-like.
I hope they do. My problem is that the producers will wind up as usual rebuilding their self-created burned out ghettoes.
Still, bring it on you suck-ups. I hope you actually bring it outside of your shitty little "hoods" and get a real life lesson from those just waiting for your nonsense.
Remember the armed Koreans on the roofs of their stores during the Rodney King riots? You pr**ks didn't touch a one. You ain't seen nothing if you decide to go outside your little welfare, Colt 45 beer, drug-induced piece of real estate. I belong to a community watch and our plans for survival and protection WILL HAVE A BAD ENDING FOR YOU lowlifes. Frig Obama.
Like this?
2003 : (NIGERFLAP : ROCKEFELLER SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE MEMO : DEMOCRAT STAFF ATTACK MEMO OUTLINES THEIR PLANS TO UNDERMINE THE WAR EFFORT; DEMOCRATS USE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE TO CONDUCT OPPOSITION RESEARCH FOR UPCOMING PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION... EVEN AT THE EXPENSE OF THE COUNTRY'S NATIONAL SECURITY) Transcript of a memo written by a Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee staff suggesting how to make the greatest gain off of intelligence data leading to the war against Iraq.
We have carefully reviewed our options under the rules and believe we have identified the best approach. Our plan is as follows:100 posted on 07/16/2005 12:16:01 AM PDT by kcvl1) Pull the majority along as far as we can on issues that may lead to major new disclosures regarding improper or questionable conduct by administration officials. We are having some success in that regard. For example, in addition to the president's State of the Union speech, the chairman has agreed to look at the activities of the Office of the Secretary of Defense as well as Secretary Bolton's office at the State Department. The fact that the chairman supports our investigations into these offices and co-signs our requests for information is helpful and potentially crucial. We don't know what we will find but our prospects for getting the access we seek is far greater when we have the backing of the majority. (Note: we can verbally mention some of the intriguing leads we are pursuing.)
2) Assiduously prepare Democratic "additional views" to attach to any interim or final reports the committee may release. Committee rules provide this opportunity and we intend to take full advantage of it. In that regard, we have already compiled all the public statements on Iraq made by senior administration officials. We will identify the most exaggerated claims and contrast them with the intelligence estimates that have since been declassified. Our additional views will also, among other things, castigate the majority for seeking to limit the scope of the inquiry. The Democrats will then be in a strong position to reopen the question of establishing an independent commission (i.e. the Corzine amendment).
3) Prepare to launch an independent investigation when it becomes clear we have exhausted the opportunity to usefully collaborate with the majority. We can pull the trigger on an independent investigation at any time-- but we can only do so once. The best time to do so will probably be next year either:
A) After we have already released our additional views on an interim report -- thereby providing as many as three opportunities to make our case to the public: 1) additional views on the interim report; 2) announcement of our independent investigation; and 3) additional views on the final investigation; orIn the meantime, even without a specifically authorized independent investigation, we continue to act independently when we encounter foot-dragging on the part of the majority. For example, the FBI Niger investigation was done solely at the request of the vice chairman ; we have independently submitted written questions to DoD; and we are preparing further independent requests for information.B) Once we identify solid leads the majority does not want to pursue. We could attract more coverage and have greater credibility in that context than one in which we simply launch an independent investigation based on principled but vague notions regarding the "use" of intelligence.
Summary
Intelligence issues are clearly secondary to the public's concern regarding the insurgency in Iraq. Yet, we have an important role to play in the revealing the misleading -- if not flagrantly dishonest methods and motives -- of the senior administration officials who made the case for a unilateral, preemptive war. The approach outline above seems to offer the best prospect for exposing the administration's dubious motives and methods.
there, fixed it to apply to dems
It's the Tyrone Willingham Syndrome, just as I predicted way back in early 2008.
***Major Projection Alert***
***Major Projection Alert***
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.