Orcinus on the "Osama for Kerry" spin machine

[JHB]

Still, while a clear case can be made (mostly for the sake of rebutting the Kerry smear) that Al Qaeda is far more likely to actually hope Bush, not Kerry, wins, it's worth noting that neither the Kerry camp nor any Democrat -- not even a pundit -- has not resorted to this argument, even by inference.

Both sides, of course, can argue all day over which side will be more effective in winning the war on terror. That's a legitimate debate. But when you begin arguing that the enemy supports your opponent, you've descended into the lowest sewers of politics.
---more---
http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2004_05_23_dneiwert_archive.html#108580939519052576

[bryant69]

1. There it is

Rush Limbaugh on Friday asked this provacitive question of liberals "If you were supporting the terrorists, would you really do anything differently than what you are doing?"

Do we have anybody on the left who comes close to being as nuts as Limbaugh (or Coulter or Savage).

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[rpannier]

2. If this were WW II

Limbaugh would be saying that the Democrats secretly support Hitler. He's the living definition of an "Ass Clown."

[wtmusic]

3. Start your own 'Osama for Bush' spin machine

Anyone can do it!

[NewJeffCT]

4. Spanish train bombers support Bush

And, they have links to Al Qaeda.

Heck, * is the poster boy for Al Qaeda recruitment with his invasion of Iraq, uniting the Arab world in hatred of us.

Osama must love him after * called off the dogs at Tora Bora and allowed him to escape.

[Canuckistanian]

5. No you can't

It takes money, lots and lots of money to run the Mighty Wurlitzer. Y

You think right wing shops like WorldNutDaily and SleazeMax are legitimate and profitable businesses? They would bankrupt themselves in a week if not for massive infusions of Scaife cash.

The left just doesn't have the bucks, the lack of ethics or the fake journalistic slime tactics necessary to create such a 'spin machine'.

It's too bad really. To fight them on their terms would mean soiling ourselves.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

6. Bush must be lying, Kerry said he will "crush" the terrorists

I think Bush is lying. ;)

[Warren DeMontague]

7. The thing that drives me nuts is...

(Okay, well, one of the many, many, many things)

This is obviously going to be a theme in this election: "The Terrorists want Kerry to win!"... Well, first of all, we all know that's a crock. The terrorists are being funded by Bush's Saudi Pals, his Uncle's Bank, and gas money from SUVs that the Republican party stubbornly refuses to make more fuel-efficient. Yeah, we know that. Asshats like Limbaugh and Savage make ridiculous statements about how secular western liberals are philisohical bedfellows with Islamic Fundamentalists who --like them-- hate women, sex and gays, and no one bats an eye... So how come we never seem to get the slightest bit of traction pointing out that the Taliban and the Islamic Extremists who are running rampant all over the middle east have a hell of a lot more in common with Pat Robertson and Tom DeLay than they do with John Kerry and the DNC? If the Democrats are the party of Islamic Extremism, how come the Bush Administration is voting with "the terrorists" in the UN, and against the European Secular democracies? And they can get away with these little insinuations (like the one on CNN yesterday) about how "Al Qaeda wants Kerry to win" but god forbid Tim Johnson should make the very valid comparison between the crazed fundamentalist zealots in the GOP and the crazed fundamentalists of the Taliban..

Yeah, like he needs to apologize... Did Dan Burton ever apologize for calling Bill Clinton a "scumbag" on the floor of the house?

Wanna bet there won't be one single apology for the numerous comparisons that I'm certain will be made between John Kerry and (take your pick) Saddam/Osama/etc.etc.

Ahhh. Sorry for the disjointed rant. Too much nonsense, too early in the morning.

edit: it's "fundamentalist" not "fubdamentalist"... Lest you think I have a cold.

[kentuck]

8. We must ask ourselves, not as Democrats or Republicans, but as Americans

To what extent do we personally support this war? Do we support it half-heartedly, say 50%? Or are we 100% behind it? We see no problems whatsoever. Or are we about 80-90% behind it? And if we are going to fight a war where our brothers and sisters die, wouldn't we want to feel that it is a justified war and wouldn't we want to support it 100%? If half the nation is against it, or a big proportion, shouldn't that send up some type of red flag?

Also, we must ask ourselves, what was the justification for going to war? If that justification has not been validated, shouldn't that cause even the mst simple-minded person to question the venture? If you have been lied to several times, about WMDs, about nuclear materials from Africa, about a grave threat to our nation, etc, should even a person with half their brain tied behind their back see at least a reason to question it?

Put all the propaganda and partisan crapola aside and look at the facts, no matter if you are a Republican or Democrat, no sane person can justify the invasion into Iraq or our continued presence there. The facts far outweigh any partisan propaganda from Limbaugh or his dittohead brethren.

[Zero Division]

9. Orcinus is great.

This is a blog that I highly recommend to DUers. I read it nearly every day. Neiwert's writing is excellent and he does a superb job of keeping tabs on the radical right and the threat of domestic terrorism.

And this passage from the same entry certainly deserves to be highlighted, as well:

"More significant, actually, was the recent manipulation of the nation's concern with terrorism by Attorney General John Ashcroft, when he made headlines with dire warnings of an imminent terrorist attack this summer."
.....
"Of course, it turns out that this isn't the half of it. NBC News is reporting that Ashcroft depended on threats from a group that no one believes is a serious terror threat:"
"{T}errorism experts tell NBC News there's no evidence a credible al-Qaida spokesman ever said that, and the claims actually were made by a largely discredited group, Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigades, known for putting propaganda on the Internet."

Also, make sure and read his essays "Rush, Newspeak and Fascism: An Exegesis" and "The Political and the Personal" if any of you have never done so.