Search Ratttler

Wednesday, September 06, 2006


Keith Olbermann again excoriates Bush and his cronies for their disgusting propaganda. Sometimes the deluge of wingnut lies and spin is so dense that hearing undeniable truths simply stated is like sunlight spearing through cloud cover. What was it Harry Truman said? "I never give them hell. I just tell the truth and they think it's hell."



AnonymousPoster said...


As I, and others told you, in 2 Way Politics this morning when you tried to pass this off as PROOF THAT BUSH LIED, this is nothing more than propaganda on Olberman's part. In no way is it proof of anything but Olberman's manipulation of media to make you believe agenda based propaganda. Your fellow cronies might blindly believe this stuff but smart people dont. Its just like you and other liberals to buy into this stuff. I bet subliminal advertising works great on you dummies!

Jesus Claus said...

In order for you to have an argument, you need to actually present facts. Nothing Olbermann says is untrue, but I welcome you to actually do some real work to debunk it. I don't know where you were this morning, but I never passed off this video as proof of anything. I told you that the Congressional Research Service report on prewar intel proved that. And that is only the most easily explained example of his lies. The lies that Bush and his team have told would fill miles of pages. It's a shame you don't get it. As a conservative, you've been trained to believe that any criticism of conservative wrongdoing is axiomatically untrue. Which is why, no matter how many times we present Bush lies about terrorism, Iraq, 9/11, the economy, health care, SS, the deficit, KAtrina, etc etc, it is ultimately a wasted effort. Hence, the Truman quote. Olbermann is telling the truth, and you think it's hell.

AnonymousPoster said...

Yeah, Yeah, Yeah, Claus...

Tell someone who believes anything you say. Olberman used creative manipulation of the truth. Nice try, but its not proof of anything.

vacreeper2003 said...

Anonymousposter must be in a state of toxic shock - you can smack him in the face with the truth and there is no response other than "you didn't smack me in the face." But you can't blame the imposter - the sheer number of Bush cronies under indictment, facing prosecution and going to prison for any number of crimes is enough to send anyone into a state of denial.

And that's all anonymous can do - deny, deny, deny. But that changes absolutely nothing about Bush being a lowlife, common thug criminal. Case and point: Anonymousposter is one of the neocon nitwits who denied and denied that Bush had secret CIA torture bases overseas - "it's all liberal propaganda" he shilled - but today, Dim Son let Anonymous down and fessed up to what we liberals have been right about all along - leaving the minions of believers like anonymousposter dragging their penises in the dirt. Of course anonymous will deny ever denying covert CIA bases, but that's to be expected of someone in the throes of woes.

AnonymousPoster said...


What are you smoking? LOL
First of all I am a she, not a he.

Second, I never discussed CIA anything with anyone. I dont know who you thought you were talking to, but it wasnt me.

Third, Olberman's piece did not prove anything other than his producers are good at manipulating film to get stupid people to believe what they want them to believe. Neither you or Claus can prove what the video claims. Again, I think subliminal advertising works well on you too.

You enjoy making things up just like your other little buddies, I see. You never did really care about truth though.

Jesus Claus said...

AP, you're not making any sense. That commentary did not contain any disputable facts. Olbermann correctly notes that Bush/Cheney et al, have consistently made public statements conflating disagreement with the president's policies with disloyalty to the country itself. The is the worst kind of demagoguery, and if someone had told you during the Clinton presidency that your criticisms of his policies were acts of treason, you would rightly be disgusted, outraged, and angry, as we are now when you and your ilk accuse us of being in league with terrorists and of hating our country.

When Rumsfeld compares war critics to nazi appeasers, when Bush says that his opponents help embolden the enemy, or when Ashcroft says that fighting for our constituionally guaranteed liberties is akin to treason, there is something fundamentally wrong with that administration. I'm assuming that you're not questioning that the above statements were made, as you and I both know those and many others have been.

That is the message Olbermann is sending, and it is a timely and necessary one. In no sense is anything he said untrue, you just don't like the accuracy of the accusation.

vacreeper2003 said...


And you can't prove George Washington even existed - that story could all be a lie perpetrated by King George III to mislead the stupid people living in the Colonies.

A she - well - glad you know the difference - anonymous somehow obfuscates that fact;however, the gist of my comments does not change. You're on the ropes, anonymous, and you are in the precarious position of having to deny the truth no matter how public and how cogent the truth is.

It's kind of like this - how much credence do you think a jury will give a witness who has several perjury convictions? I would say not much. Bush has perjured himself time and again, and the American people are sick of him and his penchant for lying - he's a lying liar and nobody likes a goddamn liar. Anonymous has a penchant for equivocating Bush's lies - and anonymous - all the denial on the planet condensed into a teaspoon won't make the truth any less potent.

Face it anonymous - the truth will bring the Repukes down in November - so you go right on ahead and believe what you want to believe - contraindicating the truth only makes it that much more volitile to Bush and his ilk.

Eff25 said...

I wish all sides had the decency to not directly or indirectly use Hitler to demonize their opponents. Some uses may be worse than others, but non are acceptable. Even if such comparisons are logically defensible, they offend more than persuade, unless the audience is blinded by hate, and imply things that might not be provable.

As for Olbermann, I don't know if all he said is accurate, but it's his opinion, based on how he perceives the statements and behavior of the Bush administration, and he has a right to it. Calling him a propagandist or liar needs better evidence. I know I have no basis for thinking he doesn't at least believe what he says and bases it on good evidence. Besides, he's correct in principle. I think that' important. Unless proof of this "manipulation" is shown, asserting it isn't a good counter argument.

Jay156 said...

A simple but effective litmus test...IF CLAUS AND/OR CREEPER BACK IT, YOU CAN REST ASSURED THAT IT IS 100% GRADE A BULLSHIT...Both of them exist merely to cackle the loudest and spew shit the furthest.