From Occupy Washington DC
“Clearly this is precisely
what’s at play for the 99% Spring effort led by MoveOn.org, Van Jones and other
trusted Democratic Party collaborators. 99% Spring’s activities will surely be
carefully and quietly coordinated behind the scenes to have a maximum positive
impact in defeating Republicans and re-electing President Obama,” he continued.
“These groups will claim independence
from the 2012 Democratic campaign agenda, but the fact is that funding will
flow to them simply to create buzz and the appearance of a movement that
dovetails perfectly with Obama’s campaign rhetoric. For months we have seen
Democratic advertising money flowing to loyal media collaborators such as onAlterNet, The Nation, Mother Jones, and others.”
Editors notes: the impact of this organizational strategy is to make it appear as if the Progressive, One World, justice movement is multifaceted and broad based; that Obama's campaign is fully representative of the desires of a very large population. That is the strategy; that is the scheme.
Look, these people use the term "democracy" all the time, as if they know what that word actually means. While they use a term ("democracy") that touts the rule of the majority, they remain very much in the minority when it comes to political opinions that go beyond giving away money. They cannot survive on commercial radio because the majority does not want to listen to them and their message. Their newspapers are losing readership by the thousands. And they have really done themselves in with the unpopular ObamaCare legislation and their collective disdain for making money.
So they resort to political trickery, trying to capitalize on buzz words and phrases such as "fairness," "for the greater good," "social justice," "wealth is a national treasure" and "equality."
They want to take away the secret ballot with a bill they call, The "Employee Free Choice Act." Understand that there is nothing free as regards to voting when someone is standing over you with a club (i.e. union thugs).
They want to silence conservative talk on commercial radio, so they come up with a bill that requires equal time for all demographics, and prefer silence if all local ethic groups cannot or will not participate. The name of the legislation? "The Fairness Doctrine."
In fact, Obama has so overworked the notion of fairness, that he no longer cares if raising taxes will help or hurt the economy. In an ABC debate with Hillary, moderated by Charles Gibson (April 16, 2008), Obama made it clear that financial workability was not the point in raising corporate dividend taxes. Rather, he made this ridiculous statement:
Summary and conclusion: Obama actually thinks the theme of "fairness" in all its many applications, is a rhetorical game changer. He used the concept during the 2008 campaign and won. But four years later, "fairness" is not the issue. So, why does he continue to make it the center of his re-election campaign? Because he cannot say, "I lowered taxes and cut spending and the nation is now in full recovery." He has nothing to push forward but small ball complaints (Mitt's money or Mitt's family or Mitt's stay-at-home wife) and "fairness" issues. Geeeesh.
So they resort to political trickery, trying to capitalize on buzz words and phrases such as "fairness," "for the greater good," "social justice," "wealth is a national treasure" and "equality."
They want to take away the secret ballot with a bill they call, The "Employee Free Choice Act." Understand that there is nothing free as regards to voting when someone is standing over you with a club (i.e. union thugs).
They want to silence conservative talk on commercial radio, so they come up with a bill that requires equal time for all demographics, and prefer silence if all local ethic groups cannot or will not participate. The name of the legislation? "The Fairness Doctrine."
In fact, Obama has so overworked the notion of fairness, that he no longer cares if raising taxes will help or hurt the economy. In an ABC debate with Hillary, moderated by Charles Gibson (April 16, 2008), Obama made it clear that financial workability was not the point in raising corporate dividend taxes. Rather, he made this ridiculous statement:
"I would look to raising the capital gains tax for the purpose of fairness."
Summary and conclusion: Obama actually thinks the theme of "fairness" in all its many applications, is a rhetorical game changer. He used the concept during the 2008 campaign and won. But four years later, "fairness" is not the issue. So, why does he continue to make it the center of his re-election campaign? Because he cannot say, "I lowered taxes and cut spending and the nation is now in full recovery." He has nothing to push forward but small ball complaints (Mitt's money or Mitt's family or Mitt's stay-at-home wife) and "fairness" issues. Geeeesh.
No comments:
Post a Comment