Aug 29, 2009

Newspaper promotes anti-Obama Astroturf farce


The Livingston County Daily Press & Argus finally got around to promoting the Anti-Obama partisan “Tea Party Express” bus tour that will be in Brighton next month, but they only give a passing mention of who is really behind this Astroturf farce.

This latest spontaneous uprising is sponsored by something called the “Our Country Deserves Better PAC (OCDB).” The PAC was formed in August 2008 by veteran Republican California political consultant Sal Russo and former GOP California Assemblyman Howard Kaloogian. The PAC’s mission is to oppose Obama and the "Democratic Congress." It boasts on its web site that "we must stand up to Barack Obama and the Democrat-controlled Congress." The PAC also solicits contributions by stating, "Help us fight the Democratic Congress!"

So much for this nonpartisan crap; which makes the quotes by Livingston County’s Michigan Republican legislative delegation that much more disingenuous. Here’s one: “it’s time for those upset with state and national taxation to speak up, regardless of political affiliation.” Here another ridiculous one: “There's a lot of people concerned. It's a grassroots effort, not something that is led by any elected official.”

There was no balance in the article either, and if it’s really nonpartisan or people speaking out “regardless of political affiliation” then why was not a single Democrat quoted in the article? If you see a Democrats engaging in this fake, Astroturf “tea party” next month throw a net over them.

I can’t wait to see the signs from that Republican event.

14 comments:

kevins said...

While you are waiting for the signs, the rest of us are waiting for Michigan Democrats to present a balanced budget.

You lied (or didn't know what you were talking about ... either could be true) when you said the House had passed a budget bill.

The Free Press reported extensively today that while the Bishop-led Republican senate has passed a draconian budget, at least they had passed a budget. The Freep strongly criticized the Democratic House for failing to do the same. They all but called Granholm gutless for failing to present a public plan.

Once again, guru is wrong and lied about it. That's about the most predictable thing you can count on in today's world...that, and the fact that guru hates free expression and the First Amendment. It horrifies him that people might have an idea that he disagrees with.

ka_Dargo_Hussein said...

Once again, guru is wrong and lied about it. That's about the most predictable thing you can count on in today's world...that, and the fact that guru hates free expression and the First Amendment. It horrifies him that people might have an idea that he disagrees with.

Yes, that's it.

*eye roll*

Communications guru said...

No, brett, the most predictable thing is you floating another lie about me lying with nothing to back it up.

The House Democrats have passed a budget, but their budget bills use the stimulus funds to help balance the budget, which was one of the functions of the stimulus funds. See, here’s how it works brett: for any bill to become a law, including bills that appropriate money like the many budget bills for each government function, both the Senate and the House have to approve the exact same bill. In this case, each body has approved separate budget bills, and a conference committee has to work out a compromise. That will occur as soon as the Governor, Bishop and the Speaker of the House agree on targets to send to the conference committees.

I have no idea where you get this crap about me hating free expression. The fact is this bus farce is costing lots and lots of lobbyist money, and it’s far from free.

liberalshateusa said...

I plan on being at the Tea Party, is that astroturfing.

On Astroturfing is it not odd that the past darling of the Demacommies Cindy Sheehan is @ Martha's Vineyard protesting the WAR with just a hand full of supporters. A war is a war, why is it OK now that its Barrys war.
Could it have been all the hundreds of protesters were astroturfing???

No the Demacommies would not do that. Ya right

And on your Header(It will also focus on the absurd 30-plus year Nixonesque political strategy of the “liberal media” lie.) Why is the MSM not reporting poor old Cindy.

ka_Dargo_Hussein said...

I plan on being at the Tea Party, is that astroturfing.
No. The astroturfing is what inspired you to attend.

And, to answer your question regarding "poor old Cindy"...she's irrelevant, which is why the SCLM is not reporting on her.

Communications guru said...

I know you’re not the sharpest knife in the drawer, hate the USA, but you can’t really be that dumb, can you? Astroturf is the false claim that these “tea parties” are grassroots protests when the fact is they are highly organized by rightwing, Washington, D.C. lobbying groups.

I have no idea what a (sic) “Demacommie” is, hate the USA. But George Bush refused to meet with Cindy Sheehan after she lost her son in Iraq in an illegal invasion that should never had been fought.

I also don’t know who “Barrys” is, hate the USA, but I’ll assume you mean President Obama. Here’s the difference: the people in Afghanistan we are fighting are responsible for attacking the U.S. on Sept. 11, 2001. The Iraqis were not. Bush stared the Afghan war, and if he hadn’t moved troops from Afghanistan to Iraq, we would not be there now.

“Could it have been all the hundreds of protesters were astroturfing???” The answer is no.

Why is the conservative, corporate “not reporting poor old Cindy?” That’s as easy one: because you’re lying, and they are reporting it. Even if they weren’t, the reason would be because she has no support.
Here’s just one of the 67 stories about her protest on Google:
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/08/28/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5272036.shtml

Not Anonymous said...

Once again, you're caught in another lie. President Bush did meet Cindy Sheehan on June 18, 2004 at Fort Lewis.

Communications guru said...

I stand by what I wrote. I said, “But George Bush refused to meet with Cindy Sheehan after she lost her son in Iraq in an illegal invasion that should never have been fought.” That is a true statement.

“Sheehan attracted international attention in early August 2005, when she traveled to President Bush's ‘ranch,’ just outside Crawford, Texas, demanding a second meeting with the President,“ saying “I want him to tell me is 'just what was the noble cause Casey died for?'

Not Anonymous said...

Casey died April 4, 2004. She met Bush June 18, 2004.

He didn't meet with her a second time, but he did meet with her after her son died. I don't care if she traveled to Crawford. She had her meeting at Fort Lewis.

If she didn't like the first meeting, that's too bad, although in her interview, she didn't complain about her meeting with him.

You may stand by your statement, but your statement was a lie.

kevins said...

The biggest sign that a lie has been told is when guru says: I stand by my statement. He reserves that line for his biggest whoppers.

He says that even when the thread shows just the opposite. As in this case when he said Bush refused to mean with Cindy Sheehan, even though he had met with her. Guru pulled the same in a health care discussion when he repeatedly said that no Canadian ever comes to America for health care. When it was shown how ridiculous that statement was, he tried to weasel out of it by saying he said something different from what he actually did say. But his "explanation" was still false.

It's not just that he can't handle the truth; he's spun around so much that he can no longer recognize it.

But what can you expect from a guy who can't tell the different between 50,000 and 50 million?

kevins said...

Oops...bad typo on my part.

Should have said, Bush refused to meet.

Communications guru said...

Correct, I stand by my statement because it’s true. He refused to meet with her a second time. I said, “But George Bush refused to meet with Cindy Sheehan after she lost her son in Iraq in an illegal invasion that should never have been fought.” That is a true statement. As the truth began to slowly come out, people began to realize there were no WMD and the “smoking gun” would not be a “mushroom cloud.” That’s when she wanted an answer on my Bush wasted her son’s life for no good reason.

Johnny C said...

I would hate to visit hate USA blog if he or she has one I'm willingly to bet hate's blog would make Free Republic look like the Daily Kos due the sheer volume of blind right wing hate and venom. Hate, Not and Kevins just admit you hate having one of those Negros as a president.

Granted you'll be outing yourselves as racist but at least you're being honest about why you don't like President Obama. The idea the right is taking a stand against government spending after eight years of having a president not vetoing one piece of spending legislation his Republican majority handed him is a sick joke.


I didn't hear one Republican or right winger go against Bush's tax cuts that turn a surplus to record debt, I didn't hear one right winger or Republican go against Bush war of choice that added to the debt and I'm for damn sure I didn't see Fox News or any right wing corporate special interest group urging any protest regarding the numerous spending bill the Republicans passed.

As for bringing up Cindy Sheehan hate why do you care what she thinks now? When you guys didn't care what she thought back then.

Communications guru said...

Hate the USA doesn’t have a blog, Johnny, but I’m sure you will find him at the sewer known as “free republic.” No, he just swoops in every once in a while, and spreads some lies and venom and swoops out.