Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

That is CLASSIC propaganda, music and subliminal messages too

Posted By: Mike W on 2008-10-26
In Reply to: Holy cow is all I can say - Kaydie

Wow, holy cow is right. How can you allow yourself to be fed this hateful propaganda. It's one thing to take something out of context, but to add in characters and newsflashes about the markets tumbling and to add the dreadful music and paint Barack as some kind of partner in Ayers activities is just anti American. This is anti American crap and you should get educated instead of being a patsy and letting your mind soak in these images. God help you if you ever watch a cult film, you will be drinking the Jonestown Kool-Aid.



Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

There were subliminal messages
encoded on those CDs Obama gave Brown.  He has now been assimilated and reprogrammed (not that he needed a he!! of a lot of rewiring to start with.) 
Obama's Subliminal Ad Campaign

Does anyone else find it kind of creepy that Obama is paying to imbed ads in video games? 


Or that Major League Baseball has agreed to postpost game 6 of the World Series so Obama can air a 30-minute informercial on all three major stations?  (He already wants to kill the American Dream.  Now he wants to postpone the American pasttime?)


Or that Obama is outspending McCain 8-to-1?  And we're supposed to buy that he's going to cut back spending and balance the budget?


It seems like O's answer to everything is to throw more money at the problem.  Tax, tax, tax.  Spend, spend, spend. 


It looks like we'll finally find out how much it costs to buy an election in America.


Classic repug cop-out.

Thanks for posting this. It is classic.
My favorites were #8 and #2.
Classic psychopath. nm
.
You are probably a little old for his music anyway.
nm
I'm not buying his music and never will
and will never listen to it.
JTP is now JT Country Music Singer! nm

xx


Universal Music Publishing is calling
xx
Heck, it'll be music to my ears just to not have to
.
How is listening to his music exposing her to his lifestyle? nm
x
Listening to his music won't expose her to his lifestyle; however,

purchasing his CDs directly or indirectly supports his lifestyle. 


I like Melissa Etheridge's music, but I have never purchased a CD.


the scorn of a fool is music to the ears of a wise man.
vive la Israel!
That's like saying because I LOVE Ray Charles' music, I must shoot up heroin, as he did???....
Do you guys really believe your own rhetoric in these postings, or is this just delusional, absurd thinking by otherwise intelligent people because Obama won, George is gone hallelujah, and McCain/Palin lost??? Don't get me wrong, I am sick of BOTH parties most of the time, like lying, spoiled children, I would love to see a truly Independent party take hold with a REAL candidate, but when you have to pick on Obama's musical tastes in order to make a point, that is showing DESPERATION.
I think one of his messages was GOP needs to
x
why do you keep replying to your own messages
and the messages are too bizzare. First you answer this post by saying no rest for the wicked, then you answer that post by saying take the day off, then you answer that by saying cough, snort???? None of this makes sense. Are you losing it? Maybe you do need a day or two off (your words).

To answer this original post, first his name is John McCain. It would be a good idea to stick to his name and not the childish words that keep getting posted. I have never seen an independent or conservative say any other name except Obama. So if you go there then expect some posters to call him Obrother, Oliar, OmyGodNo, Oflipflopper, etc, etc. Yes, Bush attacked McCain when he was running for president. Same as Obama attacked Biden, Biden attacked Obama, Clinton attacked Obama and Biden, etc, etc. Everyone attacks everyone during primaries. At least McCain didn't pick one of the other running mates from the primaries. Obama did. Obama promises change he gives us the same. Obama promised he was going to bring the troops home, now he's going to leave them there. I also read recently that Obama has stated he will support a draft and that everyone should fight, not just some. Obama keeps flip flopping everytime he turns around. I had great respect for him during the primaries, but now his lies and flip flops are so obvious. I know you would prefer that Obama can attack McCain anyway he sees fit (lies, misstatements, calling the oponents pigs, etc) and McCain is supposed to be kind to him because he didn't like it when it was done to him????? With all the attacks Obama and his camp is pulling on McCain & Palin for no good reason and not even sticking to the issues, I can see exactly what his character is like, so yes my friend, that does speak of his character. It is not a pretty sight.
Answers to messages below
I watched the film again. Yup, still am disgusted. I looked for those "subliminal" messages. Even backed it up and went through it clip by clip. Nope, nothing "subliminal". The film is telling you about Obama, Ayers, Weatermen, Acorn, etc. The films clips are of actual footage of the outcome from the horrendous crimes. While Obama will quickly dismiss these associatios as "coincidence" or "he just happened to be a person in my neighborhood" he is not being truthful. Read the history. He has had long-term associations with them and still does (maybe he stopped while campaigning, but no doubt he will pick back up once the election is over) - and if he happens to be elected? Well nothing subliminal there. You know what will happen. If you're in agreement with what Ayers did, what Acorn does, etc, then I'm sure you think it is fine, and if some people don't love America like a lot of us do then I can see why they would think this is the greatest man since the invention of sliced bread. But a lot of us do love America. A lot of us do want America to be free. A lot of us do want to own our own business and invest in America and not have our money "stolen" from us by government that we worked 60 or more hours a week for to make ends meet and now have to work more hours cos the people who aren't working but could are receiving their welfare check (i.e., my money that I had to put in an extra 20 hours a week of work to get it).

If you don't like the film fine. That is your opinion. But plenty of us want to know who Obama really is. Who are his ties? Who are his allegiences? And more importantly - why did they choose him? He didn't pick them, they sought him out. Who got him elevated to where he is at so fast? Who made it possible for him (without experience) to rise past Richardson (a governor with more experience), Biden (over 30 years experience), Edwards (over 10 years experience), Kucinich (close to 40 years experience), and others. And even Hillary (8 years experience and 8 years as first lady (16 if you think being a first lady is experience - I don't but its still more than Obama has).
Who is this Obama guy who so quickly was placed into the position when now (even though I voted for Obama over Hillary) we are finding out that Hillary actually did win. Has to make you wonder who put him where he is (hint - it is not the American citizens - not conspiracy - FACT). There are too many unanswered questions. It has nothing to do with propaganda - it has everything to do with learning who and what Obama is.

To the other poster who thinks poor Obama gets slammed 24/7. Looks like somebody googled a dictionary to find a whole bunch of words. Funny how it's okay to slam McCain/Palin 24/7. As would be described by others "we're just trying to get out the word about them". I'm not slamming any posters on the board. I simply am posting a link about a candidate that I feel very strongly is one of the worst choices for a candidate in history. I'm trying to get people to open their eyes and learn more about them. If you don't want to believe this fine. Google Obama put in everything you can. Even use other search engines like Dogpile and others, but for Petes sake, don't go by what's on Obama's website, or stop the smear or any of those other propaganda websites that pull the "poor Obama, everyone is picking on him, he's so innocent, don't beleive them, call them racists, etc, etc." That is propaganda. And if your going to be getting any "subliminal messages" it will be there. When you have 2 candidates you cannot honestly believe any of their info they put out. Candidates lie to get your vote. That's the ways it's always been done. The only thing the conservatives ask is that people educate themselves about each candidate (both of them). Who are they. Who did they associate with. How did they get where they are at. Who is financing them. What organizations did they belong to and what was the purpose of those organizations. Did they attend secret meetings and if so where and with whom and what is the purpose of those secret organizations. What have they done in their careers. What are there voting records like (i.e. if someone (any candidate past, present, or future) votes for the past 2, 3, 4 or more years to raise taxes but now all of a sudden during the campaign has changed their tune and they are promising you they won't raise your taxes or they'll lower your taxes) has to make you think. Also, and most important to me - Is the person we elect going to uphold the constitution or going to change it because it doesn't align itself with their ways of thinking. In knowing everything I know and in other people's feeling Obama is not. Obama associates with people who say "God D@m American" and people who say "American makes me want to throw up".

I posted the video link because it is one of many films (we won't even go into Obama's ties with Kenya) that is trying to put out the truth about Obama. He used video clips of CNN reporters asking questions and everyone KNOWS that CNN is one of the most liberal (MSNBC is the most liberal - CNN is 2nd) TV stations. Do you disagree with what Hillary Clinton was saying? Do you think anyone wanting to know the truth about Obama's affiliation with Ayers should be just shut up?

So until this election is over I will continue to try to get the word out about Obama life (the one he is hiding from Americans and covering up by instructing his followers to call people racists and insult them if they say anything negative about him).
sorry sam, got the messages mixed up
your right. I thought that gourdpainter was saying people on this board were going to be responsible for attacking Obama then I thought she was calling us skinheads. HA HA HA HA....definitely good thing I went and took a dinner break. Now I understand what she was saying and what your reply was. Thanks for clarifying. Sorry, didn't mean any offense to you. I just get irrited at being attacked all the time.
Mixed messages...(sm)
You basically just said we are all in this together but pi$$ on the poor people.  Unbelievable. 
Huh? Even the reference disappeared! (Twilight Zone music plays). 1984. nm
x
Read prior messages...
Messages seem to say prepared = gun ownership/usage
And if you read the previous messages
Nice try!
Not "bull". Read messages above to
nm
Then quit asking questions and posting messages
If people stopped posting then it wouldn't have come to this.
Stop complaining about where she gets her sources - see messages
Especially since you only post from MSNBC. Who cares that someone posts from Fox, MSNBC, CNN or whoever. You have nothing to complain about the content of the information, just where she posts from. Personally I trust Fox over MSNBC, CNN, Huffington post or any of the far left liberal rags. At least we get the truth from Fox. If all Fox did was praise the annointed one up and down and all over and was giving us lies 24 hours a day like MSNBC, CNN and others you'd be praising them. You just don't like to hear the reality of what is happening.

Here's a hint - Fox News, MSNBC, and CNN all report the same exact news. They just have different commentator shows.

P.S. - Louis Farrakan called Obama the Messiah. I'm sure he's not a conservative (could be wrong, but I don't think he is). Also, Obama NEVER came out to say I am NOT the Messiah. He let people think this with all the miracles he was professing he would do once he got in. The liberals are the one who have said "Obama is the new Messiah". So, everyone just picked up on what the liberals were taughting (sp?) throughout the campaign. Unfortunately too many ignorant people believed it.

So please, enough with whining that someone posts an article from Fox.
Words can come off sounding like an attack, because these messages lack..sm
facial expressions, demeanor, so it leaves the reader to interpret the mood.

I don't know if you were saying me or Sir Percy was a recovering Democrat, but either way I'm a registered Democrat and have never voted for a republican president because of where I stand on social and civil issues.

Speaking of frustrating democrats, and I never thought I would be going here because I have a lot of respect for her. I was even bidding for her to be the first woman president, but Hillary needs to take a stand and stand firm on it, and let us know what it is. Her centrist stance is frustrating because I think she is the one democratic model out there that could speak and be heard and respected. Yet she has been quiet, and too her lack of opposition to the war has taken my respect down for her a few notches.


I reported 'Ahem's' and 'Anon2's' messages to the moderators
I suppose it is the same person.
Does anybody else get error messages half the time they try to post on this board. ?
.
I have posted many many nice thought provoking messages here and have been called
s
Nah, propaganda?
They're just on a roll for stupid remarks. Check out the Repug from Iowa's dignified, intelligent line of thinking. What a jerk; obviously King prefers anemic blonde bimbos who spew out the same garbage he does.


http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002726435

Iowa Congressman Apologizes for Rude Helen Thomas Reference

By E&P Staff

Published: June 22, 2006 2:00 AM ET

NEW YORK Rep. Steve King, a Republican from Iowa, apologized to Helen Thomas on Wednesday for disparaging comments he made about the veteran White House correspondent.

Last Saturday, Rep. King, while discussing the death of terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi at the state Republican convention, said, What occurred to me that morning is something that I imagine a lot of you have thought about and he's probably figured it out by now. There probably are not 72 virgins in the hell he's at and if there are, they probably all look like Helen Thomas.

The remark drew wide laughter and applause.

A spokeswoman for the two-term congressman said King has apologized to Thomas, 85, now writing a column for Hearst newspapers.

King is running for re-election this fall.

Joyce Schulte, King's Democratic opponent in November, said
Mean-spirited remarks are beneath the dignity of any self respecting congressperson, and remarks about another person's appearance are even lower. I hesitate to even use Helen Thomas' name in the same document with so vile a wretch as al-Zarqawi. But I want her and the world to know that Iowans are not insensitive buffoons who make fun at someone else's expense.




because it is propaganda

due to the upcoming election.


 


Propaganda goes on. n/m
x
That is taken from the PROPAGANDA

link, which I already explained, and when you click on the red "require" link, it takes you directly to OBAMA'S PLAN, which does NOT SAY THAT.  The original link IS A LIE.


It was cleverly worded, intended to promote the propaganda that's attractive to predisposed Obama haters, who apparently are known to NOT click on the "supporting" link which, in this case, DOES NOT support their assertion.  I agree it worked with some, and that's sad.


Watch that propaganda now!
It's simply not true that Cindy Sheehan had "nothing but praise" for Bush and has now done a 360-degree turn. It's Drudge and Limbaugh nonsense with quotes taken out of context and spun to try and seem....what? It's nothing if not illogical. Aren't those intent on smearing her loudly proclaiming that she has been anti-Bush and anti-war since long before her son was killed? Then why would she fall all over herself praising him AFTER her son was killed? It makes no sense at all, but the attackers aren't really big on making sense apparently. They just throw all the garbage at the wall and see what might stick, that's how they operate.

What I really don't get is what the attackers are meaning to say. Even if it were true that Ms. Sheehan "did a 360" - point please? So what? So perhaps she was trying to make the best of a bad bad situation and least be respectful toward the president in consideration of his meeting with her and other family members - but since then, as she says herself, we have had the Downing Street proof, we have learned there were no WMDs at the time we invaded, we have learned all sorts of unbelievably horrible things - why SHOULDN'T anyone let those things change their views?

Now she just wants to know what this "noble" cause is that the President keeps referring to, and she wants to ask him to stop using the dead to justify making more unnecessary dead. But oh no, she must have an AGENDA! - well seems like that's it, isn't it? She wants to know and she wants him to look her in the eye and explain himself. And why shouldn't he? Or more precisely, why can't he seem to be able to do it? If he is sincere in his beliefs and committed to the cause, considering he's such a straight-talking nice guy, what's the problem? What is the big deal? It could all be over with in an hour. Why won't he just do it?
I agree. Probably over-the-top propaganda. sm
The more she hawks that film, the less interest I have in viewing it. I'm guessing it has more creative editing and special effects than a Hollywood movie, with plenty of lies and misinformation thrown in for good measure.

I like to find objective sources of information whenever possible, and that sure ain't gonna come from sam on this topic, IMO.
propaganda when convenient to you.
nm
Why do you say its racist propaganda
I just watched the video and there is nothing racist or of any propaganda. Whoever made the video took actual clips of Obama talking and talked about Obama's ideologies and mentors. Nothing racist involved. Is it your just upset because the truth about Obama is coming out and you dont want anyone to know what he is like?
That's pure propaganda

Right down to the music that is being played in the background.  Anyone can take bits and pieces of articles and flash them on the screen.  Those aren't facts. 


The democrates did not cause the financial crisis. Here are some real facts:


Since 1960 the nation's deficit has risen during every republican administration and dropped during every democratic administration. 


The standard of living and income has improved for everyone in the country during every democratic administration since 1960, EVEN for the top 1% of the country.  It has gotten worse for everyone in the country during every republican adminstration EXCEPT the top 1%. 


While Nixon and Ford were in office interest rates for mortgages had ballooned to 11%-13% and many people in this country could not afford to buy a home.  Carter brought those rates down so that more people in this country could afford to buy homes. 


What caused this mess is not the people who were extended credit.  Here is part of what caused it:  Banks issued subprime mortgages to people at a rate they could initially afford but which would increase to an inflated rate after a period of time.  Those banks then immediately sold those mortgages at the inflated rates to other banks. First-time home buyers were especially targeted.  A lot of them didn't understand what they were getting into because it was misrepresented to them.  They didn't know, for example, they could not refinance for a period of time without huge penalities.  Then the market started to decline and many of those homeowners found themselves upside down on their loans and they were unable to refinance.  Their interest rates had ballooned to rates they could no longer afford.  As homeowners lost their homes the banks who were sold the loans at inflated prices were no longer able to collect on those loans.  But the banks (and the CEOs) that initated those loans walked away with a great deal of money. 


It was because of greed.  And the deregulation that the republicans passed allowed it to happen. 


 


More Republican propaganda s/m

If you had been alive or old enough to remember, things like this were not that uncommon.  The hippie cult was rampant, especially in California and most of them were drug crazed, LSD I believe was the drug of choice, haven't heard of that in years..  The Viet Nam War was even more controversial than the Iraq War.  Soldiers came home from Viet Nam and were spit on by these kinds of radicals.  It was on the news daily.  Anyone else remember?  These people now have grandsons and granddaughters in Iraq and I can tell you first hand that at least some of them regret what they did and said in the 60s.


Now, considering this was back in the 60s and there is absolutely no proof that Obama was best buds with Ayers in the first place, why not let it go?  Apparently Ayers is a respected professor today.  How many of you who are of a ripe old age like myself would like to be judged on what you did when you were in your 20s?  I wouldn't.


 


Propaganda can be destructive to us ALL


by: Robert Parry, Consortium News


photo
Republican Whip Eric Cantor meets with his staffers. (Photo: Doug Mills / The New York Times)




    Today's Republicans are thumbing through Newt Gingrich's worn playbook of 1993 looking for tips on how to blunt President Barack Obama's political momentum and flip it to their advantage. In doing so, they also appear to have dug in to what might be called the secret appendix.

    The official history of what happened during Bill Clinton's difficult first two years - which ended in a sweeping Republican congressional victory in 1994 - focuses on the GOP's united resistance to his economic plan and Hillary Clinton's failed health care reform. But there was a darker side to the political damage inflicted on the early Clinton administration.


    Republicans and their right-wing allies disseminated what - in a covert operation - would be called "black propaganda." Some exaggerated minor scandals, like the Travel Office firings and Clinton's Whitewater real-estate deal, while other key figures on the Right, such as the Rev. Jerry Falwell, spread ugly conspiracy rumors linking Clinton to "mysterious deaths" and cocaine smuggling.


    Sometimes, these multiplying "Clinton scandals" built on themselves with the help of their constant repetition in both the right-wing and mainstream news media. For instance, overheated accusations about some personnel changes at the White House Travel Office pushed deputy White House counsel Vincent Foster into a deep depression.


    Then, on July 30, 1993, a distraught Foster went to Fort Marcy Park along the Potomac River and shot himself. The Right quickly transformed the tragedy into a new front in the anti-Clinton psychological warfare, with Foster's death giving rise to a cottage industry for conspiracy theorists and a new way to raise doubts about Clinton.


    Talk radio host Rush Limbaugh, among others, popularized the notion that Foster may have been killed elsewhere, with his body then transported to Fort Marcy Park. Repeated official investigations confirmed the obvious facts of Foster's suicide but could not quell the conspiracy rumors. [For the fullest account of the Foster case, see Dan Moldea's A Washington Tragedy.]


    The "mystery" around Foster's death also bolstered the "mysterious deaths" list, which mostly contained names of people who had only tangential connections to Clinton. The effectiveness of the list was the sheer volume of the names, creating the illusion that Clinton must be a murderer even though there was no real evidence implicating Clinton in any of the deaths.


    As the list was blast-faxed far and wide, one of my right-wing sources called me up about the list and said, "even if only a few of these are real, that's one helluva story." I responded that if the President of the United States had murdered just one person that would be "one helluva story," but that there was no evidence that Clinton was behind any of the deaths.


    Other dark Clinton "mysteries" were spread through videos, like "The Clinton Chronicles" that Falwell hawked on his "Old-Time Gospel Hour" television show. Plus, salacious tales about the personal lives of the Clintons were popularized via right-wing magazines, such as The American Spectator, and the rapidly expanding world of right-wing talk radio.


    The Right also generated broader conspiracy theories about "black helicopters" threatening patriotic Americans with a United Nations takeover. The paranoia fed the rise of a "militia movement" of angry white men who dressed up in fatigues and went into the woods for paramilitary training.


    By fall 1994, Clinton's stumbling performance in office and the public doubts created by the black propaganda opened the way for a stunning Republican victory. Recognizing the influence of talk radio in spreading the Clinton smears, House Republicans made Rush Limbaugh an honorary member of the GOP caucus.


    However, the forces that the anti-Clinton psy-war campaign set in motion had unintended consequences. In the months after the Republicans gained control of Congress, one pro-militia extremist, Timothy McVeigh, took the madness to the next step and blew up the Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995, killing 168 people. [See Consortiumnews.com's "The Clinton Coup d'Etat?"]


    Reprising the Smears


    Now, 16 years since the start of Clinton's presidency, the Republicans and their right-wing allies are again on the outside of Washington power and are back studying the lessons of 1993-94. Only a month into Obama's presidency, there are some striking similarities in the two historical moments.


    In both cases, the Democrats inherited recessions and huge budget deficits from Republican presidents named Bush. In both cases, congressional Republicans rallied against the economic package of the new President hoping to strangle the young Democratic administrations in their cradles.


    And, as congressional Republicans worked on a more overt political level, their media allies and other operatives were getting busy at subterranean depths, reviving attack lines from the campaigns to sow doubts about the two Democratic presidents - and trying to whip up the right-wing base into a near revolutionary fervor.


    So far at least, the Republicans are experiencing less success against Barack Obama than they did against Bill Clinton. According to opinion polls, Obama remains widely popular with an American public that favors his more activist agenda for reviving the American economy and confronting systemic problems like energy, health care and education.


    Though Republicans scored points inside the Beltway with their opposition to Obama's $787 billion stimulus bill - and their complaints that Obama "failed" in his bipartisan outreach to them - the GOP tactics appear to have backfired with the American people.


    Gauging public opinion one month into Obama's presidency, polls found that most Americans faulted the Republicans for rebuffing Obama's gestures of bipartisanship, and a New York Times/CBS News poll discovered that a majority said Obama "should pursue the priorities he campaigned on … rather than seek middle ground with Republicans." [NYT, Feb. 24, 2009]


    But the Republicans seem incapable of coming up with any other strategy than to seek Obama's destruction, much as they torpedoed Clinton. The three moderate Republican senators who supported the stimulus package - Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe and Arlen Specter - were widely denounced by the right-wing media as "traitors."


    Indeed, the Republican Party arguably has become captive to the angry right-wing media that the GOP conservatives did so much to help create in the late 1970s, after the Vietnam War defeat and Richard Nixon's Watergate debacle.


    This Right-Wing Machine proved useful in protecting Ronald Reagan during the Iran-Contra scandal; undermining Clinton in the 1990s; dirtying up AL Gore in 2000; and wrapping George W. Bush in the protective garb of a full-scale cult of personality after 9/11.


    But the machine wore down in its defense of Bush's multitude of disasters and ultimately could not generate enough suspicions about Obama to elect John McCain. Still, it remains a potent force in the country and particularly among the Republican "base."


    It is also a machine that can run only on the high-octane fuel of anger and hate. If it tried to down-shift to a more responsible approach to politics, it would stall out, losing its core audience of angry white men who feel deeply aggrieved by their loss of status.


    In turn, Republican leaders can't disown the right-wing media infrastructure that has advanced their interests for so long. In the first month of Obama's presidency, the congressional Republicans fell in line behind Rush Limbaugh's openly declared desire for Obama to fail.


    Now, the Republicans may see little choice but to bet on the ability of their Right-Wing Machine to continue spreading doubts and hysteria about Obama.


    More books and DVDs can be expected soon, recycling the 2008 campaign's rumor-mongering on Obama - that he wasn't born in the United States, that he's a secret Muslim, that he's in league with 1960s radical Bill Ayers, etc.


    Rumbling Insurrection


    Much like the Clinton-era militia movement's fear of "black helicopters," there already are rumblings about the need for an armed uprising to thwart Obama's alleged "communist" agenda.


    Ironically, right-wingers who defended George W. Bush when he mounted a radical assault on the Constitution - seeking to establish an imperial presidency while eliminating habeas corpus and other key freedoms - are suddenly seeing threats to the Constitution from Obama.


    Fox News, in particular, has been floating the idea of armed rebellion. On Feb. 20 - the one-month anniversary of Obama's inauguration - Glenn Beck hosted a special program called "War Room" that "war-gamed" various scenarios including the overthrow of an oppressive U.S. government when "bubba" militias rise up and gain the support of the American military.


    The segment featured former CIA officer Michael Scheuer, retired U.S. Army Sgt. Major Tim Strong, and Gerald Celente, a prognosticator who began pitching the idea of an armed rebellion on Fox News shortly after Obama's election last November.


    "This is going to be violent," said Celente, founder of Trends Research Institute. "People can't afford it [taxes] anymore. The cities are going to look like Dodge City. They're going to be uncontrollable. You're going to have gangs in control. Motorcycle marauders. You're not going to have enough police or federales - just like Mexico - to control the situation."


    Beck envisioned the uprising - theoretically set in 2014 - starting "because people have been so disenfranchised" leading to a "bubba effect" touched off by federal agents from the ATF or FBI arresting some rancher in Texas or Arizona who has taken the law into his own hands in defending his property.


    "That's totally possible," ex-Sgt. Strong said. "You've got people who are going to do the right thing to truly protect the interests of the United States, to include their own. … Your second and third orders of effect are going to be your bubbas hunkering down and being anti-government."


    Beck, who was a longtime fixture on CNN's Headline News before moving to Fox, then expanded on the justification for the bubba uprising against a federal government that was "coming in and disenfranchising people over and over and over again - and having the people say please listen to us."


    According to Beck, these oppressed Americans "know the Constitution. They know the writings of the Founders and they feel that the government - or they will in this scenario and I think we're on this road - the government has betrayed the Constitution. So they will see themselves as people who are standing up for the Constitution."


    Beck then turned to ex-CIA officer Scheuer and asked, "So how do you defuse this, Michael, or how long even do we have before this becomes a crazy real scenario?"


    "I don't think you'd want to defuse it, Glenn," Scheuer responded. "The Second Amendment is … at base not about hunting or about a militia, but about resisting tyranny. The Founders were very concerned about allowing individual citizens weaponry to defend themselves as a last resort against a tyrannical government."


    As the discussion edged toward advocacy of violent revolution, Beck sought to reel it back in a bit.


    "Don't get me wrong," the host said. "I am against the government. And I think they've just been horrible. I do think they are betraying the principles of our Founders every day they're in office. But I have to tell you this scenario scares the living daylights out of me because it is shaking nitroglycerine."


    Beck then got back to the point: "Do the soldiers come in and do they round up people or do they fight with the people for the Constitution? What does the Army, what does the military do?"


    Scheuer answered: "I don't think the military is ever going to shoot on the American people, sir. I think the military - of all people - read the Constitution every year, right through."


    Beck then suggested that Obama's stimulus package might lead to this back-door federal tyranny.


    "We just had in our stimulus package a way for if your governor says no to the money, the legislature can go around the governor and go right to the Feds," Beck said. "It's this kind of thing that would make the federal government say, ‘You know what? We can call up the National Guard. We don't need your governor to do it.'"


    Such insurrectionist musings on Fox News are not likely to be taken seriously by most people. Indeed, many Americans may find it amusing that Fox has developed a heartfelt concern about disenfranchising voters after its enthusiastic embrace of Bush's undemocratic "election" in 2000 or that Fox now feels a sudden reverence for the Constitution after eight years of defendin Bush as he trampled it.


    But this sort of Fox chatter runs the risk of feeding the well-nursed grievances of angry white "bubbas" and possibly inspiring a new Timothy McVeigh.


    More significantly, today's Republican leaders - finding themselves with little new to offer - appear to have turned to the well-worn pages of this earlier GOP playbook to choose the same game plan that set the nation on a dangerous and destructive course 16 years ago, a course that only now, finally, may be playing out.


    -------


    Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest book, Neck Deep: The Disastrous Presidency of George W. Bush, was written with two of his sons, Sam and Nat, and can be ordered at neckdeepbook.com. His two previous books, Secrecy & Privilege: The Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq and Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & 'Project Truth' are also available there. Or go to Amazon.com.


»


Propaganda - whatever spin they need
We also have socialized K-12 schools and libraries; how is it that big business missed that chance for profit?  Never turned me into a Bolshevik.  But somehow, if we had free health care, it would corrupt us completely.
NOT propaganda - FACT
But I rather doubt people like yourself are interested in distinguishing between the two..

As to independent thought? when is the last time (or the first!) that you ever tried to follow up on a concept that you initially REJECT?

You can't slam the other side if you never consider it's point of view.

Fortunately some of us stopped being robots a long time ago and do our own research...
propaganda - see message

Could those of you who label some posts as having a less than credible news source share your techniques for finding and recognizing purely factual unbiased news and also how you keep from adding your own perspective in order to relay such incredibly unalloyed information to us? 


Well, that's nasty propaganda at work...
...and they use it because it *does* work, unfortunately.

But hey - Jesus and his closest followers were never a majority of anything. They weren't the powerful, or those in control of the Temple, or those who lived in luxury in the lap of Rome. Those who were in control hated them and considered them pesky liberals. So I guess Democratic Christians stand in pretty good historical company.
This video is propaganda. Repeat...
nm
And the others are propaganda machines for libs...
to each his own, as you say.
Propaganda works well on dimwits but not well enough
su
Your Catholic propaganda belongs on the
*
I didn't take this as catholic propaganda
Yes, it's obvious it was created by catholics, but the overall message was vote your conscious (p.s. I'm Athiest so if anyone I would be offended). Yes, I could have done without putting catholic this or catholic that up there, but the message was clear to me - vote your conscious (and they didn't tell me who I should vote for - that's a plus in my book).
Racist Propaganda at its Worst! (nm)
:{
More right-wing propaganda...not buying it! (nm)
:p