They lost me at “death panels”

They lost me at “death panels”: Good to see the dangerously smug, publicity-seeking, CW-enforcing NPR prop Politifact getting it from the left as well as the right. Maybe it can be killed off in a pincer action. It has no place in an open, honest democratic debate! … P.S.: Of course, if you think the real divide is not left vs. right but rationers vs. treaters, Politifact and Obama and Ryan are on one side and Talking Points Memo and James Taranto are on the other. …  P.P.S.: As for the possible Democratic “Mediscare” strategy, my main worry is that after listening to Obama and Peter Orszag and Ezra Klein for two years, Dems have forgotten how to pull it off. …

  • tom kinney

    As the clip from the article didn’t appear, here’s the money shot after some paraphrasing:

    After Klein’s building up SEIU director, Stephen Lerner, as “one of the smartest organizers if not the smartest,” we hear a tape from a recent talk by Lerner that was supposed to be a closed session but ended up leaked to the internet.

    In it, Lerner says this: the labor movement has to “destabilize” the country. There needs to be a mass strike on paying mortgages, student loans…etc.

    Lerner goes on to express the hope that this would force banks into insolvency, causing them to renegotiate all their mortgages and loans. It would also “bring down the stock market,” depriving the rich of their wealth.

    And that ain’t the half of it, as Lerner finishes by endorsing the Cloward-Piven strategy, a theory cooked up by two leftist sociologists that urges forcing the government into a crisis so as to address “economic injustice.”

    In other words, wealth redistribution on a magnum force level. I’ve long argued with a conspiratorially inclined friend who claims Big Zero Obama is deliberately trying to sink our economy for the sake of oneworldism and mass wealth redistribution. My response is always, why would he do such purposeful damage to his own career?

    Now I have to wonder if he isn’t right.

    • truebearing

      The problem people in this country have had when it comes to understanding Obama, and his motives, comes down to two things: projection and denial.

      Time after time Obama has done things that anger people because they are clearly destructive to the economy and country. The typical interpretation of these “stupid” moves on Obama’s part is that he is incompetent, stupid, or inexperienced. The reason for that is that people are projecting their own positive hopes for the recovery of the economy and the success of the nation onto Obama, and can’t imagine a president who is our enemy. When inklings of his evil intentions stir up fear and doubt, denial kicks in.

      The facts don’t lie and the record is clear. Obama is a radical leftist and the great enabler of Cloward-Piven, Alinsky, Marx, and every other leftist revolutionary that inspired him to “fundamentally transform America”.

      It’s just hard to face the frailty of our democratic republic, where a dangerous ideologue like Obama can get elected by people too lazy to google his past, or too poorly educated to understand one ideology from another. Obama is the malignant projection of the moral turpitude and intellectual vacumm of the majority of this country’s citizen voters.

      When the majority of the citizens of a democratic republic become immoral and uneducated, the republic will fail. We are at that point right now, dancing on a razor’s edge, with a malignant changeling for a president who is forfeiting our national sovereignty to the UN as fast as he can.

      Soros threw his support to Obama during the campaign, in my opinion, because he saw in Obama someone who was narcissistic enough to sell the country out for power, but inexperienced enough to be controllable from behind the scenes. Hillary was too strong willed for Soros to play mariontte manipulator with. Now we have a dual presidency, or should I say parallel occult presidency, where Obama is the agreeable face, and Soros the ugly, rapacious, old megalomaniac pulling the strings and plotting the course to a global government. It has a Dorian Grey feel to it, with a James Bond plot, and Biblical consequences. Unfortunately, it’s all too real.

  • tom kinney

    A helpful corrective; I’ve ceased using PolitiFact, as it borrows the old NYT ruse of selective reporting that skews toward a liberal agenda…mostly by way of ommission, i.e., what they don’t cover. And it tends to feature a disproportionate number of gaffe statements made by conservatives vs. far fewer from the rabid left, whose drool is just as heavy if not more so.

    BTW, here’s an interesting bit from Weekly Standard that undresses Hapless Wunderkind Ezra Klein of WaPo, and looks straight at this WH and how it is pushing a seditious campaign of union promotion. Link to whole article is at the bottom.


  • Pingback: Instapundit » Blog Archive » MICKEY KAUS wants to kill off PolitiFact….

  • Dan Simon

    Mickey, there’s something about this entire entitlements debate that I don’t understand–perhaps you can explain it to me. There are these two items on my paystub, “Social Security tax” and “Medicare tax”. Everyone talks about the enormous and ever-expanding cost of Social Security and Medicare, and everybody seems to have a different opinion about what to do about this cost explosion. But nobody ever, ever even mentions these two items on my paystub–let alone suggests making (or, for that matter, explicitly rejects making) any changes to them.

    What on earth is going on? Is there some kind of tacit understanding among participants that directly connecting the cost of these entitlements to a distinct, recognizeable payroll deduction makes the whole issue far too understandable to voters? Is it that anybody liberal enough to want these entitlements protected with tax increases is too liberal to want to do it using the current flat-to-regressive payroll tax structure? Or that these taxes have been so inadequate for so long that everybody has forgotten that they’re supposed to be the sole source of funding for the entitlements in question? Or is there some simple explanation I haven’t thought of?

  • Pingback: Sharron Angle: the first Tea Party congressman? (Daily Caller) | Stock Market News - Business & Tech News