Bullshit like this makes me almost feel sympathetic to Obama -- and I say that as someone who thinks that President O is one of the worst things ever to happen to the Democratic party.
Bottom line: This interview is an obvious hoax. This thing is pure Republican propaganda, a fake so thuddingly unsubtle that even Karl Rove would be ashamed to claim it as his own.
Ulsterman: But wouldn’t you say this particular administration has been more aggressive against Wall Street? Much more aggressive?Oh right. Surrrre. We're supposed to believe not only that this President has used Wall Street as a punching bag, but that every President does likewise to those poor, poor bankers. As opposed to, you know, coddling the investment bankers in order to garner campaign contributions.
Wall Street: (pause) Yes. Yes they have.
Ulsterman: Why is that? Why has the Obama administration been so tough on Wall Street? Banks? Investment institutions?
Wall Street: Politics. Same old game. Nothing new really – just the…intensity of it.
On General Motors:
The bond holders were pushed aside – illegally mind you, totally without legal basis… and the keys to that company handed over to the labor union. I am going to remain calm…trying to remain – respectful…but what happened at that time was…it should have never happened. Never. Not in this country. Venezuela perhaps – but not here.Well, need I go on? These are not the actual ramblings of an actual Wall Street guy. The whole thing is as bogus as the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion or Silent Weapons for Secret Wars.
The same can be said for the site as a whole. Although the people running the joint claim to be huge fans of Hillary Clinton, all of the links in their blogroll go to conservative sites.
Another story pushed by God Bless America features this absurd title: "Obama will threaten Race Riots to Win… Big F-You to White America..." The "proof" comes in the form of yet another fake interview with yet another fake insider. And still another fake interview plumps for Jerome Corsi and Birtherism. (If you read the piece, you'll see that the writer who engineered this fake probably does not himself buy into that Birther crap -- but he doesn't mind if gullible, low-IQ readers get hooked into that nonsense.)
We've seen this kind of deception operation before. There was one fake "pro-Hillary" site that even accused Cannonfire of taking payments from the dreaded George Soros. (I'm also reminded of the "Voice of the White House" fakery published by TBR "News.")
If you opposed Obama in 2008, if you yearn for a Democratic challenger in 2012 -- be careful. Be ultra-careful. Republican operatives are out to play you for suckers.
By the way: The real PUMA sites no longer use that term. (For the most part.) See, for example, The Confluence, where the label was born. Riverdaughter has a good article up right now about the possibility that Hillary might primary Obama. There is increasing talk along those lines. But...no. She won't do it.
Another former PUMA is Dakinikat, who has an excellent compendium piece up called "The Awakening." I take the liberty of stealing the cartoon she published. (If you can't read it, click to enlarge it.) Y'know, not too long ago, this cartoon would have been denounced as "racist" by Kos writers with a talent for abstruse reasoning and ersatz outrage. Things have changed...
7 comments:
That cartoon assumes that Obama is a spineless, coddled wimp and not acting on orders from his corporate paymasters. Either way, the result is the same, Joe and Jane Sixpack are boned.
Coincidentally I stumbled across a post about "Ulsterman" a couple of days ago after reading a piece by (I think) blogger Steve at No Quarter. Steve was pondering on how much Ulsterman can be believed.
Here's a site with much of Ulsterman's "stuff"
http://www.triond.com/users/Ulsterman
The "White House Insider" is very suspect, IMO, but as some commenters pointed out, the core of his "reports" could be a congomeration of bits of gossip coming from somebody who knows somebody who know somebody - etc.
Or, as you seem to think, Joseph, it could all be Republican anti-Obama propadanda.
I don't know.
"Be ultra-careful. Republican operatives are out to play you for suckers."
Word. But there have always been operatives using the PUMA label. Mostly male. There's an AA living out in Hollywood who actually claims to have invented the movement, but at least he's amusing. Less so are some Libertarian log cabin types who've been running a predator site forever. I always get the blog names mixed up so I'm not sure if it's the one you're quoting or not...but they're forever linking to an Ayn Rand site whose name I also forget.
Another caveat...the LaRouchies are coming out in force, too. They actually called me from DC recently. I'm sure he'll be mounting a "primary challenge" to Zero as a "Democrat" --- and as tempting as it is to discount those lunatics, for real they have local candidates, often women, running in various primary challenges so we need to be vigilant to protect what's left of the Dem brand.
That 'Wall Street insider' could be Lynn Forester de Rothschild. In a recent interview she criticized Obama for demonizing business. If you recall, back in the 08 election she accused Obama of being an elitist. Coming from a Rothschild (even if only by marriage), you might conclude that she is a bit touched.
>>Republican operatives are out to play you for suckers.
I'm still convinced that it was Republican operatives who suckered so many people into supporting Obama in 2008.
http://makethemaccountable.com/index.php/2008/02/26/who-knows-what-evil-lurks/
Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com
Your cautions about all the recent: Go Hillary articles is the reason I'm not heartened by the sudden support.
It does seem that a good portion is coming from conservative quarters. And, of course, it's not because conservatives love HRC [quite the contrary] but because they desire to split as many Dems as possible from the Obama vote in 2012.
That being said, I would love to believe the sudden 'awakening.' I always thought Hillary Clinton was the superior candidate. Still do. Doesn't mean I agree with every policy decision. But . . . I'm convinced that domestically we would be far better off than we are now.
But the truth is I believe her announcement that she's not interested in running. And there's no way I see her challenging Obama. If he were to step down then it's a different ballgame [I'm not holding my breath].
There's nothing the Obama can do now that would change my mind. I did not vote for the man in 2008. And there's no way he would get my vote now.
I'll go 3rd party. Or not vote at all. A first for me. I consider it a small, single vote of conscience.
BTW, that last Ulsterman interview is the biggest bunch of horseshit I've read--and that's saying a lot. If anyone takes this series for truth? They deserve what they get.
Peggy Sue
Joseph: While following your link to Daily Puma I noticed the blog HillBuzz, which is a former PUMA blog turned total Neo-Conservative Bullshit blog. Little doubt they were never anything but Astroturfers to begin with. It didn't take long for me to see that many of the so called PUMA's were either Republicans for Hillary (which almost classifies as an oxymoron) or totally ratfucking in an effort to upend the outcome of the Dem primaries of 2008.
My disagreement with people who I've called out over their claims to be PUMA while supporting people like Bachmann, Perry. Palin other Republican/Teaparty members etc, is that in order to be or have been a PUMA (PARTY Unity my ASS) you must also have been a member of the Democratic Party either through direct affiliation and/or voting affiliation. Fighting against something you never supported or believed in to begin with, under the pretext that you once supported it, is duplicitous ratfucking.
As for Ulsterman, ugh!!! Total batshit crazy stuff.
Post a Comment