SORRY, HATERS

by Malik Isasis





Remember when the Democratic Party was in the minority for over six years? Remember how the corporate media helped the neocons to portray the Democratic Party as obstructionists? Remember that? If not, dig.

Since the Democratic Party retook the majority in the Congress in the November 2006 mid-term elections, the partisan label of obstructionists, has not been used once to describe the Republican Party who’ve since the Democratic Party takeover, held their breaths, crossed their arms and stumped their feet like two year olds at every opportunity.

Recently, when the Senate Republicans twice blocked the Senate Democratic non-binding resolution against Bush’s Iraq escalation, the Associated Press subsequently reported:

A day after Republicans foiled a Democratic bid to repudiate Bush's deployment of 21,500 additional combat troops to Iraq, Senate Democrats declined to embrace measures, being advanced in the House, that would attach conditions to additional funding for troops.

State-run news outlet, Fox News, reported:

The Senate's Democratic majority failed Monday to shut off debate on a non-binding resolution that "disagrees" with President Bush's troop surge in Iraq, throwing debate on the policy into limbo and depriving Democrats of a bipartisan rebuke of the White House.

The corporate media is in cahoots with the right-wing hate machine, to create mass delusion among the American population the neocons so enjoyed following September 11, 2001. Even with the loss of Republican Congressional power, the media continues to treat the Democratic Party as a nuisance for challenging Bush's detructive foreign policy, again, see here.

Headless beast and the Catch-22

In last year’s November election, the American people voted the Republicans out in record numbers, expressing a clear mandate on the Iraq Occupation, which was to get out. Interestingly enough, the head of the beast was severed, but its body is still charging—like a samurai with a sword.

The punditry class--the water-boys for the right wing hate machine are the most dangerous at disseminating misinformation. Chris Matthews whose fetish with Hillary and Bill Clinton, is exceptionally vulgar see here, here, here, try here, what about here, whoa, look at this one. Matthews consistently book right wing conservatives on both his shows to spin right wing talking points to marginalize the Democratic Party—here’s an example: Matthews will state that the Democrats do not have a plan for Iraq; Democrats go public with a plan, Matthews then uses right wing talking points to criticize the plan, dig. This Catch-22 is the prism in which the Democratic Party is viewed—so no matter what they do, either they don’t have a plan, or the plan is just partisan politics--a damned if you do, damn if you don't scenerio.

One of the vilest of the bunch is Joe Klein, a frequent guest on Matthews two shows. Klein, who writes for Time Magazine, is often described as moderate (the new conservative) or liberal but he’s more of a Fox News liberal. The kind of liberal who takes a cheap shot at the Democratic Party at every opportunity. He’s a political whore willing to say anything just to get some face time on television. He believes whatever you want him to believe, his lies become amorphous—kind of like a virus.

Here is Arianna Huffington taking Klein to the woodshed:

While offering his Time blog take on the Sunday show appearances of John McCain, Chuck Hagel, and John Edwards, Joe Klein once again made the claim that he opposed the war in Iraq from the beginning. Speaking of McCain he said: "I disagreed with him about going to war in 2003..."
But here is Klein on Meet the Press in February 2003: "This is a really tough decision. War may well be the right decision at this point. In fact, I think it--it's--it-it probably is." When Tim Russert presses Klein on why he thinks Iraq is "the right war," Klein responds, "Because sooner or later, this guy has to be taken out. Saddam has -- Saddam Hussein has to be taken out... The message has to be sent because if it isn't sent now, if we don't do this now, it empowers every would-be Saddam out there and every would-be terrorist out there."

Does that sound like someone opposing the war?

Perception is reality

Some Democrats have come up with a creative strategy to blunt the Iraq Occupation by revoking the 2002 authorization, which gave Bush the authority to use force, citing that Saddam was successfully removed and eliminated, and the Iraqis have had elections. However, the Debbie Downers in the corporate media have shun the plan it seems without much consideration:

The one time Congress did withdraw war authorization, the results were unimpressive.

In June 1970 Congress repealed the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which had authorized the Vietnam war. The Senate seemed to speak emphatically. By an 81-10 vote, senators first added the Gulf of Tonkin repeal to another bill. Then, by a 57-5 vote several weeks later, the Senate passed a separate repeal resolution.

President Nixon signed the bill that included the Gulf of Tonkin repeal. He also kept the Vietnam war going, using what he called inherent presidential powers.

I do believe Nixon resigned before he got impeached for those ‘inherent presidential powers’ and I suppose the current state of Iraq is impressive, no?

The corporate media don’t challenge Bush, instead they speak around him as if he had nothing to do with sending troops to Iraq without proper intelligence, training, protective equipment, most importantly, a plan for the occupation of a sovereign country, yet it is the Democratic Party who receives the brunt of the criticism. By the time the next presidential election rolls around, the corporate press will have successfully linked the Democrats to the failures in Iraq, per right-wing guidance.

In the world of politics, perception is everything; the Bush Public Relations Administration has based its whole Administration on deceiving the public by pretending to be doing something, without really doing anything. The corporate media takes this nothing and turns into being tough on terror.

If it weren’t for Hurricane Katrina, most of the public would still have believed that this Administration was knowledgeable about how to respond to a crisis. The Katrina disaster was too big for the Bush Public Relations Administration to hide behind; the media had no choice but to expose the failure; I suppose there aren’t enough dead Iraqis in this occupation for the corporate press to declare it a miserable failure.

PIMP THIS |