18 thoughts on “Fondly Remembering Obama – 4/25/2017”
A new study from the American Action Forum found that Trump has imposed new regulations costing $28 million in his first 100 days, compared to the $4 billion erected by Obama.
Add in the cost savings of slashing Obama-era regulations, and AAF said that Trump has a “negative $3.6 billion” record, a total difference of $7.6 billion between Trump and Obama.
The numbers show the difference in approaches and what each president faced, with Obama up against a crumbling economy and crooked mortgage and finance system and Trump eager to slash regulations he felt are strangling the U.S. economy.
Got a link to the article you cut and pasted this from? I’d love to learn more. Especially how this affects cupcakes and Helen Thomas’s estate.
Google the source quoted. You do know how to use google?
Barack Obama has agreed to a $400,000 fee for speaking to a prominent Wall Street firm, according to Charlie Gasparino of the Fox Business Network. Former president Obama will speak to a health care conference sponsored by Cantor Fitzgerald in September, Gasparino reports. (Tweet/Video) The huge fee puts Obama at the top of the list of speaking fees for former government officials. Former Fed chair Ben Bernanke charges between $200,000 and $400,000, former Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner charges $200,000, and former President George Bush charges around $150,000, according to a person familiar with the matter. Hillary Clinton received over $200,000.
Ah yes, the community organizer back racking in the cash.
Actually, google has limitations on the size of the search entry. So only a snippet may be used. That means a search will sometimes bring up dozens or hundreds of near matches, often with major variations.
My suggestion, should you want to be taken seriously, is to provide a link, rather than simply plagiarizing a source, pretending the words are yours.
Alternately, you may want to go through the trouble of formulating your own thoughts.
By the way, was the link on payroll taxes at all helpful in resolving your confusion on the term? I gave it to you a while back.
You also never got back on whether the link on voluntary unemployment that I provided helped you understand that issue. Remarkably, you seemed never to have heard of the term before.
You’re not very good at this are you, Majormajor? You post something. I find interest in it, ask where you found it, and you tell me to look for it myself? You’re not here for discussion and knowledge exchange are you?
You are already cut and pasting these things from a website… why not also provide the link?
And since you’ve already derailed; What’s wrong with Capitalism, Majormajor? If that quote is accurate and those people are getting paid that amount for speaking engagements, what’s wrong with that? They are clearly being paid exactly what the market is willing to bear for their services.
Who said “at some point you’ve made enough money”?
Who in April 2017 signed a $60 million dollar book deal?
You were quoting a part of a sentence spoken by President Obama. You may want to include the “but” that followed, as well as the entire paragraph that put the sentence into context. An old saying: A text without context is a pretext.
If the omission was not deliberate on your part, you may want to reconsider your source, whatever it was. You can find the more complete quote here. It was a clear defense of the free market system, an important part of the traditional conservative view.
Where would we be without these simplistic “gotcha” attempts from minds limited to bumper sticker slogans? If it can’t fit on a ball cap, it’s too complex an issue for Trumpists.
Deflection and distraction in the interests of the anti-democracy efforts of the aristocratic economic elites are more desired and easier than rational discourse. This represents conservative values more than communication, compromise and cooperation in pursuit of the democratic representation and general welfare required in our Constitution.
By their acts and words conservatives love wealth, and the wealthy, more than America. And to top it off, they had Putin working for their side.
This difference clearly illustrates who the truly patriotic Americans are.
Helen Thomas was a nasty anti-Semite. Her love of Israel was, shall we say, non-existent.
I guess, based on many of the damning policies of President Obama towards Israel and his particular disdain and attempted influence of Israeli elections against Benjamin Netanyahu, he and good old Helen would be fellow travelers.
Screw the Jews! Have a cupcake!
Yeah, that is one area in particular where not only am I less than impressed but was sorely ashamed of my president.
Thank you, T. Paine.
I dug out an old article by Jeffrey Goldberg. He provides context that supports your view of Helen Thomas, although not of President Obama.
In fact, Goldberg seems to appreciate the tributes to her as a pioneer journalist, adding “But I don’t think her anti-Semitism should be treated as an afterthought…” Good article based on her writings and the author’s personal interactions with her.
I think you will agree with most of it.
I do agree with the article. Thanks for posting that piece, Mr. Deming.
I always found Helen Thomas to be largely disagreeable and ornery. Her anti-Semitism only strengthened my opinion.
That said, why the White House and President Obama would support Thomas, despite her being a “pioneer” in her field, escapes me. I find it unlikely that President Obama would deem to “impress” me by posing for a birthday picture with a hypothetically notorious anti-Muslim reporter. Wouldn’t you agree, sir?
As I recall, her most objectionable remarks happened pretty late in life, just before she resigned. President Obama condemned those remarks on television.
You or I might look up whether that was before or after the pictured birthday celebration. That would be an important bit of information, would it not?
The remarks, I assume these are the ones in question, happened in May 2010.
The late “nasty” Helen was Arab-American. How could she love the Israeli Right?
I would hope her statement about Jews’ influence on the Wall Street/DC power grid was hyperbolic more than anti-Semitic. Let’s give her a tenth of the leeway Trump gets. In view of the number of Bush’s neo-con’s with dual citizenship, and their horrible Iraq debacle, and AIPAC’s power to make or break a candidate, she had a point. Nixon said worse about Jews, but IOKIYAR.
It is unfortunate Mr. Paine chose to present a falsehood that I previously offered to correct for him. Alas, to no avail.
damning policies of President Obama towards Israel and his particular disdain and attempted influence of Israeli elections against Benjamin Netanyahu
Damning Obama is one thing, but to do so wrapped in a lie reflects on the accuser more than the accused. This illustrates the eagerness of conservatives to believe any and all accusations against those they dislike. (Aint that the truth, though? Really.)
The rejection of contrary fact and evidence represents the other side of their coin.
True to form, Mr. Paine offered no evidence to support his accusation. But I’ve seen this one before. The Obama State Department donated some money to groups in Israel working on a two-state solution. NOT PC anymore for the Israeli Right.
The facts behind the conservative lie.
Affiliates OneVoice Israel got $233,500 from the State Department to spend in Israel and OneVoice Palestine got another $115,776 to spend in the Palestinian Territories. That adds up to a little more than $349,000.
Given that residents of the Palestinian Territories can’t vote in national Israeli elections, it’s hard to see how money spent there would influence voters in Israel. That leave us to account for $233,500.
=
The State Department said in a briefing that “no payment was made to OneVoice after November 2014.” (BEFORE the election was scheduled.)
Netanyahu’s Likud party sought a court injunction against V15, saying it had violated Israeli election law by accepting foreign donations, but it was never able to prove its allegations…
Such has been my endless exchanges with the conservative viewpoint…
Conservatives readily accuse without evidence. They judge from “alternative facts” and uncritically pass on any and all groundless accusations. This suits the authoritarians’ preferred method of politics. Authoritarian leaders need their true believer followers.
It’s what they do. Perhaps that makes them feel righteous, or morally superior. Beliefs and confirmation bias must offer them comfort. At any rate it is something quite apart from being intellectually curious, compassionate, and enlightened.
Present company excepted, of course.
For the curious thinker who hasn’t decided Obama the Marxist hates Israel.
By all means let’s give anti-Semites, if they agree with the Left’s policies, lots of leeway. And by the way, I have been very critical and quite condemning of Trump on many issues. (Most issues, actually.) I don’t see the left giving him ANY leeway whatsoever. Indeed many insisted on any means possible to overturn the “archaic” electoral college results and even have called for impeachment of Trump in his first months in office.
It’s is interesting to note that when someone on the left says hateful things it, it is characterized as “hyperbole” by Mr. Dubya, but when the right does it, it is hate speech and demonization.
As for Mr. Dubya so politely correcting my falsehoods, one may not be surprised to note that I disagree with his characterization there too. I have disagreed with his “facts” and the often left wing sources he cites to back up his assertions and have presented him with my cited viewpoints instead in the past. Of course my facts are always characterized as being from right wing sources and therefore invalid.
I suppose I could respond to Mr. Dubya’s constant haranguing about George W. Bush lying to get us into a war with Iraq as a blatant falsehood. I even went so far as to write what I thought was a thoughtful and evenhanded post specifically for his benefit explaining that reasonable people could certainly disagree with us going to war, but that it was not lies that got us there. Of course, Mr. Dubya “ignored the fact and continues to cite his falsehood.” http://savingcommonsense.blogspot.com/2015/08/re-fighting-iraq-war.html
Damning conservatives is one thing, but to do so wrapped in a lie reflects on the accuser more than the accused. This illustrates the eagerness of some progressives to believe any and all accusations against those they dislike. (Aint that the truth, though? Really.)
Next, to correct Mr. Dubya’s lie, since we are using that word so generously these days, I give you this article as a response to the left’s talking points on the Israeli interference issue.
Of particular note in the article supporting my “lie” are these snippets:
“The State Department paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxpayers grants to an Israeli group that used the money to build a campaign to oust Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in last year’s Israeli parliamentary elections, a congressional investigation concluded Tuesday.
Some $350,000 was sent to OneVoice, ostensibly to support the group’s efforts to back Israeli-Palestinian peace settlement negotiations. But OneVoice used the money to build a voter database, train activists and hire a political consulting firm with ties to President Obama’s campaign — all of which set the stage for an anti-Netanyahu campaign, the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations said in a bipartisan staff report.
In one stunning finding, the subcommittee said OneVoice even told the State Department’s top diplomat in Jerusalem of its plans in an email, but the official, Consul General Michael Ratney, claims never to have seen them.”
So, according to the Washington Times reporting, the Obama administration gave money to OneVoice who even told his State Department that they planned to use the money to help oust Netanyahu, but the diplomat deleted that pertinent attachment. Sounds pretty damning towards the Obama administration influencing foreign elections. Perhaps Obama was working with Putin after Obama won re-election and had “more flexibility” in helping to shape the Middle East as Russia wants it.
SOME liberals readily accuse without evidence. They judge from “alternative facts” and uncritically pass on any and all groundless accusations. This suits the authoritarians’ preferred method of politics. Authoritarian leaders need their true believer followers.
It’s what they do. Perhaps that makes them feel righteous, or morally superior. Beliefs and confirmation bias must offer them comfort. At any rate it is something quite apart from being intellectually curious, compassionate, and enlightened.
Present company not excepted any more.
I know Mr. Dubya will respond with more heated rhetoric. Frankly I could not care less. I stopped frequenting his blog because of his demonization of anyone not in agreement with him. I hardly wish to start debating him on Fair and Unbalanced instead. It never comes down to debate with him. It always devolves to accusations and demonization. I tried for years to discuss issues and was rewarded with brands of being racist and authoritarian for doing so. Dave has the right to his free speech, as do I. I simply intend to exercise mine in forums that are more open to the exchange of ideas rather than simply putting forth talking points from which no commenter is ever allowed to sway from without facing the author’s wrath. That said, don’t count on me to respond to Mr. Dubya in the future, as it likely will not happen. Cheers!
Righties HATE being called out for their falsehoods, blame and hate. They’re not used to it at all.
Mr. Paine needn’t go back to his bizarre notion that Bush didn’t lie before invading Iraq. The record is clear. No “nukular” aluminum tubes. No Saddam/al-Qaeda allegiance. Period. All “good debt”.
I have disagreed with his “facts” and the often left wing sources he cites to back up his assertions This is true. His disagreements were never backed by evidence though. And we all know what he means by “left wing sources”. That would be journalism and the public record.
I expected a flurry of accusations to be directed at me for my attempt to present facts that counter Mr. Paine’s accusation. The healthy dose of mockery was a bonus. If a liberal speaks the truth he is attacked by the Right. It is their way.
Mr. Paine’s false belief is clear.
Once again the accusation in question: Obama’s “attempted influence of Israeli elections against Benjamin Netanyahu”. Only TP’s conspiracy theory and far Right spin “knows” of Obama’s motive and intentions. All dark and evil of course. And pure BS. He passionately hates Obama and exhibits a clear case of Obama Derangement Syndrome.
This was recently reflected in this interesting tactic at another blog of blaming the secretive black guy for having a “playbook” on Trump’s racist birtherism:
“Perhaps he (Trump) is taking a page out of Obama’s playbook with the whole birther fiasco. Obama could have come out and proved beyond all doubt that he was a U.S. citizen, but seemingly preferred to have the issue for the kooks on the right to gnaw over.”
Amazing. Not racist at all. Just amazing. Now those kooks are in power. Well done, conservatives. Our nation owes you.
Once again. No proof of this “attempt to influence the election” was offered. None. Damn the facts and quote the Moonie Times. And damn Dave Dubya while we’re at it.
The Republican Washington Times article concludes with this sentence: “ Investigators also said OneVoice didn’t turn explicitly political until days after the grant period ended.”
Pretty stupid way to “influence an election” is it not? Of course it is. But far Right hate always finds its excuses to blame and accuse.
Mr. Paine must ignore further reporting, since it is not from a Republican/conservative source. (Proof of the great success of the Right’s War on Truth.)
==
“OneVoice NGO did not use US funds in bid to topple Netanyahu, Senate inquiry finds”
WASHINGTON (JTA) — The NGO OneVoice did not use U.S. funds in its campaign to unseat Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a Senate inquiry found, and the State Department did not violate policies by funding the group.
However, the report issued Tuesday suggested the State Department did not adequately assess the risks of funding OneVoice, considering the nongovernmental organization had been involved previously in Israeli electoral politics.
The report by the bipartisan Senate subcommittee on investigations was prompted by revelations that OneVoice, a nonpartisan group that advocates for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, partnered with a partisan group called V15 ahead of the 2015 Israeli election in a bid to replace Netanyahu with a leader more amenable to a two-state outcome.
“OneVoice Israel fully complied with the terms of its State Department grants,” the report said. “OneVoice designed and executed a grassroots and media campaign to promote public support for Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations for the Department, as it said it would.”
The subcommittee also “found no evidence that OneVoice spent grant funds to influence the 2015 Israeli elections.”
==
What does it take to penetrate their cult bubble? This is why true believers can be dangerous.
TP’s false accusation would never stand in a court of 8th grade debaters. But it fits the far Right’s hate and demonization of Obama doesn’t it? And that’s what counts. That is their prime directive.
I respect TP’s reluctance to debate me. Cons are not used to liberals resisting their propaganda and calling out their falsehoods.
I will persist.
I am fighting for the soul of our country. Their lies and willful ignorance are toxic to freedom, democracy, equality, justice, and the truth.
Apart from Mr. Paine’s delusional condition, he’s a very nice guy.
A new study from the American Action Forum found that Trump has imposed new regulations costing $28 million in his first 100 days, compared to the $4 billion erected by Obama.
Add in the cost savings of slashing Obama-era regulations, and AAF said that Trump has a “negative $3.6 billion” record, a total difference of $7.6 billion between Trump and Obama.
The numbers show the difference in approaches and what each president faced, with Obama up against a crumbling economy and crooked mortgage and finance system and Trump eager to slash regulations he felt are strangling the U.S. economy.
Got a link to the article you cut and pasted this from? I’d love to learn more. Especially how this affects cupcakes and Helen Thomas’s estate.
Google the source quoted. You do know how to use google?
Barack Obama has agreed to a $400,000 fee for speaking to a prominent Wall Street firm, according to Charlie Gasparino of the Fox Business Network. Former president Obama will speak to a health care conference sponsored by Cantor Fitzgerald in September, Gasparino reports. (Tweet/Video) The huge fee puts Obama at the top of the list of speaking fees for former government officials. Former Fed chair Ben Bernanke charges between $200,000 and $400,000, former Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner charges $200,000, and former President George Bush charges around $150,000, according to a person familiar with the matter. Hillary Clinton received over $200,000.
Ah yes, the community organizer back racking in the cash.
Actually, google has limitations on the size of the search entry. So only a snippet may be used. That means a search will sometimes bring up dozens or hundreds of near matches, often with major variations.
My suggestion, should you want to be taken seriously, is to provide a link, rather than simply plagiarizing a source, pretending the words are yours.
Alternately, you may want to go through the trouble of formulating your own thoughts.
By the way, was the link on payroll taxes at all helpful in resolving your confusion on the term? I gave it to you a while back.
You also never got back on whether the link on voluntary unemployment that I provided helped you understand that issue. Remarkably, you seemed never to have heard of the term before.
You’re not very good at this are you, Majormajor? You post something. I find interest in it, ask where you found it, and you tell me to look for it myself? You’re not here for discussion and knowledge exchange are you?
You are already cut and pasting these things from a website… why not also provide the link?
And since you’ve already derailed; What’s wrong with Capitalism, Majormajor? If that quote is accurate and those people are getting paid that amount for speaking engagements, what’s wrong with that? They are clearly being paid exactly what the market is willing to bear for their services.
Who said “at some point you’ve made enough money”?
Who in April 2017 signed a $60 million dollar book deal?
You were quoting a part of a sentence spoken by President Obama. You may want to include the “but” that followed, as well as the entire paragraph that put the sentence into context. An old saying: A text without context is a pretext.
If the omission was not deliberate on your part, you may want to reconsider your source, whatever it was. You can find the more complete quote here. It was a clear defense of the free market system, an important part of the traditional conservative view.
Where would we be without these simplistic “gotcha” attempts from minds limited to bumper sticker slogans? If it can’t fit on a ball cap, it’s too complex an issue for Trumpists.
Deflection and distraction in the interests of the anti-democracy efforts of the aristocratic economic elites are more desired and easier than rational discourse. This represents conservative values more than communication, compromise and cooperation in pursuit of the democratic representation and general welfare required in our Constitution.
By their acts and words conservatives love wealth, and the wealthy, more than America. And to top it off, they had Putin working for their side.
This difference clearly illustrates who the truly patriotic Americans are.
Helen Thomas was a nasty anti-Semite. Her love of Israel was, shall we say, non-existent.
I guess, based on many of the damning policies of President Obama towards Israel and his particular disdain and attempted influence of Israeli elections against Benjamin Netanyahu, he and good old Helen would be fellow travelers.
Screw the Jews! Have a cupcake!
Yeah, that is one area in particular where not only am I less than impressed but was sorely ashamed of my president.
Thank you, T. Paine.
I dug out an old article by Jeffrey Goldberg. He provides context that supports your view of Helen Thomas, although not of President Obama.
In fact, Goldberg seems to appreciate the tributes to her as a pioneer journalist, adding “But I don’t think her anti-Semitism should be treated as an afterthought…” Good article based on her writings and the author’s personal interactions with her.
I think you will agree with most of it.
I do agree with the article. Thanks for posting that piece, Mr. Deming.
I always found Helen Thomas to be largely disagreeable and ornery. Her anti-Semitism only strengthened my opinion.
That said, why the White House and President Obama would support Thomas, despite her being a “pioneer” in her field, escapes me. I find it unlikely that President Obama would deem to “impress” me by posing for a birthday picture with a hypothetically notorious anti-Muslim reporter. Wouldn’t you agree, sir?
As I recall, her most objectionable remarks happened pretty late in life, just before she resigned. President Obama condemned those remarks on television.
You or I might look up whether that was before or after the pictured birthday celebration. That would be an important bit of information, would it not?
The remarks, I assume these are the ones in question, happened in May 2010.
http://www.jta.org/2010/06/07/news-opinion/united-states/helen-thomas-quits
The late “nasty” Helen was Arab-American. How could she love the Israeli Right?
I would hope her statement about Jews’ influence on the Wall Street/DC power grid was hyperbolic more than anti-Semitic. Let’s give her a tenth of the leeway Trump gets. In view of the number of Bush’s neo-con’s with dual citizenship, and their horrible Iraq debacle, and AIPAC’s power to make or break a candidate, she had a point. Nixon said worse about Jews, but IOKIYAR.
It is unfortunate Mr. Paine chose to present a falsehood that I previously offered to correct for him. Alas, to no avail.
damning policies of President Obama towards Israel and his particular disdain and attempted influence of Israeli elections against Benjamin Netanyahu
Damning Obama is one thing, but to do so wrapped in a lie reflects on the accuser more than the accused. This illustrates the eagerness of conservatives to believe any and all accusations against those they dislike. (Aint that the truth, though? Really.)
The rejection of contrary fact and evidence represents the other side of their coin.
True to form, Mr. Paine offered no evidence to support his accusation. But I’ve seen this one before. The Obama State Department donated some money to groups in Israel working on a two-state solution. NOT PC anymore for the Israeli Right.
The facts behind the conservative lie.
Affiliates OneVoice Israel got $233,500 from the State Department to spend in Israel and OneVoice Palestine got another $115,776 to spend in the Palestinian Territories. That adds up to a little more than $349,000.
Given that residents of the Palestinian Territories can’t vote in national Israeli elections, it’s hard to see how money spent there would influence voters in Israel. That leave us to account for $233,500.
=
The State Department said in a briefing that “no payment was made to OneVoice after November 2014.” (BEFORE the election was scheduled.)
Netanyahu’s Likud party sought a court injunction against V15, saying it had violated Israeli election law by accepting foreign donations, but it was never able to prove its allegations…
Sources:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/03/26/rubios-claim-that-obama-sent-his-political-machine-to-israel-to-defeat-netanyahu/?utm_term=.d32f8d98f648
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/mar/25/blog-posting/blog-claims-us-funded-anti-netanyahu-election-effo/
Such has been my endless exchanges with the conservative viewpoint…
Conservatives readily accuse without evidence. They judge from “alternative facts” and uncritically pass on any and all groundless accusations. This suits the authoritarians’ preferred method of politics. Authoritarian leaders need their true believer followers.
It’s what they do. Perhaps that makes them feel righteous, or morally superior. Beliefs and confirmation bias must offer them comfort. At any rate it is something quite apart from being intellectually curious, compassionate, and enlightened.
Present company excepted, of course.
For the curious thinker who hasn’t decided Obama the Marxist hates Israel.
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2014-11-06/is-barack-obama-anti-israel
“Is Barack Obama Anti-Israel?”
From author linked above.
By all means let’s give anti-Semites, if they agree with the Left’s policies, lots of leeway. And by the way, I have been very critical and quite condemning of Trump on many issues. (Most issues, actually.) I don’t see the left giving him ANY leeway whatsoever. Indeed many insisted on any means possible to overturn the “archaic” electoral college results and even have called for impeachment of Trump in his first months in office.
It’s is interesting to note that when someone on the left says hateful things it, it is characterized as “hyperbole” by Mr. Dubya, but when the right does it, it is hate speech and demonization.
As for Mr. Dubya so politely correcting my falsehoods, one may not be surprised to note that I disagree with his characterization there too. I have disagreed with his “facts” and the often left wing sources he cites to back up his assertions and have presented him with my cited viewpoints instead in the past. Of course my facts are always characterized as being from right wing sources and therefore invalid.
I suppose I could respond to Mr. Dubya’s constant haranguing about George W. Bush lying to get us into a war with Iraq as a blatant falsehood. I even went so far as to write what I thought was a thoughtful and evenhanded post specifically for his benefit explaining that reasonable people could certainly disagree with us going to war, but that it was not lies that got us there. Of course, Mr. Dubya “ignored the fact and continues to cite his falsehood.” http://savingcommonsense.blogspot.com/2015/08/re-fighting-iraq-war.html
Damning conservatives is one thing, but to do so wrapped in a lie reflects on the accuser more than the accused. This illustrates the eagerness of some progressives to believe any and all accusations against those they dislike. (Aint that the truth, though? Really.)
Next, to correct Mr. Dubya’s lie, since we are using that word so generously these days, I give you this article as a response to the left’s talking points on the Israeli interference issue.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/12/obama-admin-sent-taxpayer-money-oust-netanyahu/
Of particular note in the article supporting my “lie” are these snippets:
“The State Department paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxpayers grants to an Israeli group that used the money to build a campaign to oust Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in last year’s Israeli parliamentary elections, a congressional investigation concluded Tuesday.
Some $350,000 was sent to OneVoice, ostensibly to support the group’s efforts to back Israeli-Palestinian peace settlement negotiations. But OneVoice used the money to build a voter database, train activists and hire a political consulting firm with ties to President Obama’s campaign — all of which set the stage for an anti-Netanyahu campaign, the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations said in a bipartisan staff report.
In one stunning finding, the subcommittee said OneVoice even told the State Department’s top diplomat in Jerusalem of its plans in an email, but the official, Consul General Michael Ratney, claims never to have seen them.”
So, according to the Washington Times reporting, the Obama administration gave money to OneVoice who even told his State Department that they planned to use the money to help oust Netanyahu, but the diplomat deleted that pertinent attachment. Sounds pretty damning towards the Obama administration influencing foreign elections. Perhaps Obama was working with Putin after Obama won re-election and had “more flexibility” in helping to shape the Middle East as Russia wants it.
SOME liberals readily accuse without evidence. They judge from “alternative facts” and uncritically pass on any and all groundless accusations. This suits the authoritarians’ preferred method of politics. Authoritarian leaders need their true believer followers.
It’s what they do. Perhaps that makes them feel righteous, or morally superior. Beliefs and confirmation bias must offer them comfort. At any rate it is something quite apart from being intellectually curious, compassionate, and enlightened.
Present company not excepted any more.
I know Mr. Dubya will respond with more heated rhetoric. Frankly I could not care less. I stopped frequenting his blog because of his demonization of anyone not in agreement with him. I hardly wish to start debating him on Fair and Unbalanced instead. It never comes down to debate with him. It always devolves to accusations and demonization. I tried for years to discuss issues and was rewarded with brands of being racist and authoritarian for doing so. Dave has the right to his free speech, as do I. I simply intend to exercise mine in forums that are more open to the exchange of ideas rather than simply putting forth talking points from which no commenter is ever allowed to sway from without facing the author’s wrath. That said, don’t count on me to respond to Mr. Dubya in the future, as it likely will not happen. Cheers!
Righties HATE being called out for their falsehoods, blame and hate. They’re not used to it at all.
Mr. Paine needn’t go back to his bizarre notion that Bush didn’t lie before invading Iraq. The record is clear. No “nukular” aluminum tubes. No Saddam/al-Qaeda allegiance. Period. All “good debt”.
I have disagreed with his “facts” and the often left wing sources he cites to back up his assertions This is true. His disagreements were never backed by evidence though. And we all know what he means by “left wing sources”. That would be journalism and the public record.
I expected a flurry of accusations to be directed at me for my attempt to present facts that counter Mr. Paine’s accusation. The healthy dose of mockery was a bonus. If a liberal speaks the truth he is attacked by the Right. It is their way.
Mr. Paine’s false belief is clear.
Once again the accusation in question: Obama’s “attempted influence of Israeli elections against Benjamin Netanyahu”. Only TP’s conspiracy theory and far Right spin “knows” of Obama’s motive and intentions. All dark and evil of course. And pure BS. He passionately hates Obama and exhibits a clear case of Obama Derangement Syndrome.
This was recently reflected in this interesting tactic at another blog of blaming the secretive black guy for having a “playbook” on Trump’s racist birtherism:
“Perhaps he (Trump) is taking a page out of Obama’s playbook with the whole birther fiasco. Obama could have come out and proved beyond all doubt that he was a U.S. citizen, but seemingly preferred to have the issue for the kooks on the right to gnaw over.”
Amazing. Not racist at all. Just amazing. Now those kooks are in power. Well done, conservatives. Our nation owes you.
Once again. No proof of this “attempt to influence the election” was offered. None. Damn the facts and quote the Moonie Times. And damn Dave Dubya while we’re at it.
The Republican Washington Times article concludes with this sentence: “ Investigators also said OneVoice didn’t turn explicitly political until days after the grant period ended.”
Pretty stupid way to “influence an election” is it not? Of course it is. But far Right hate always finds its excuses to blame and accuse.
Mr. Paine must ignore further reporting, since it is not from a Republican/conservative source. (Proof of the great success of the Right’s War on Truth.)
==
http://www.jta.org/2016/07/13/news-opinion/politics/onevoice-ngo-did-not-use-us-funds-in-bid-to-topple-netanyahu-senate-inquiry-finds
Jewish Telegraphic Agency:
“OneVoice NGO did not use US funds in bid to topple Netanyahu, Senate inquiry finds”
WASHINGTON (JTA) — The NGO OneVoice did not use U.S. funds in its campaign to unseat Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a Senate inquiry found, and the State Department did not violate policies by funding the group.
However, the report issued Tuesday suggested the State Department did not adequately assess the risks of funding OneVoice, considering the nongovernmental organization had been involved previously in Israeli electoral politics.
The report by the bipartisan Senate subcommittee on investigations was prompted by revelations that OneVoice, a nonpartisan group that advocates for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, partnered with a partisan group called V15 ahead of the 2015 Israeli election in a bid to replace Netanyahu with a leader more amenable to a two-state outcome.
“OneVoice Israel fully complied with the terms of its State Department grants,” the report said. “OneVoice designed and executed a grassroots and media campaign to promote public support for Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations for the Department, as it said it would.”
The subcommittee also “found no evidence that OneVoice spent grant funds to influence the 2015 Israeli elections.”
==
What does it take to penetrate their cult bubble? This is why true believers can be dangerous.
TP’s false accusation would never stand in a court of 8th grade debaters. But it fits the far Right’s hate and demonization of Obama doesn’t it? And that’s what counts. That is their prime directive.
I respect TP’s reluctance to debate me. Cons are not used to liberals resisting their propaganda and calling out their falsehoods.
I will persist.
I am fighting for the soul of our country. Their lies and willful ignorance are toxic to freedom, democracy, equality, justice, and the truth.
Apart from Mr. Paine’s delusional condition, he’s a very nice guy.