+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 12 to 18 of 18
  1. #12
    C & P Queen Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    56,942
    Thanks
    2,613
    Thanked 4,766 Times in 2,886 Posts
    Here’s a similar video that’s slightly more comprehensive than the Emperor’s Naked News one.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZ-6ebku3_E

    ---


    Baskin Becomes 13th MSM Journalist to Spin Through Revolving Door for Obama

    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-b...ing-door-obama

    Independent

    press???


    I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care program. I see no reason why the United States of America, the wealthiest country in the history of the world, spending 14 percent of its Gross National Product on health care cannot provide basic health insurance to everybody. And that’s what Jim is talking about when he says everybody in, nobody out. A single payer health care plan, a universal health care plan. And that’s what I’d like to see. But as all of you know, we may not get there immediately. Because first we have to take back the White House, we have to take back the Senate, and we have to take back the House.”

    Barak Obama
    2003
    It was his voluntary statement made when he was running for the U.S. Senate. Everything in this bill points toward that as his objective.


    I’ve seen 2 vids where Obama states his preference for single payer, 2003 and 2007. There was no editing. If you read the bill, as it stands, you can keep your health plan that you like as long as the carrier makes the changes the government mandates.

    Of course it won’t be the plan you like after that.




    The phrase of the day, courtesy of blogger Shoebox, is “Out of context” :
    http://norunnyeggs.com/2009/08/liste...t-what-i-said/




    Quote Originally Posted by Obama
    “Here’s the guarantee I make. If you have insurance you like you will be allowed to keep it…”
    Just another decepetive twist of words, although not an outright lie. It’s doubtful anybody will have their plan forcibly terminated and made to join the pubilic option at the point of a gun. However, it will be made increasingly difficult for individuals to buy insurance and the mandate that fines them if they don’t will force them onto the public option. Furthermore, more govt. regulations that requires insurance companies to cover every conceivable condition not to mention pre-existing conditions at huge losses will send their premium through the roof, for which they will then be further demonized by the Dems.

    Yes, you will be allowed to keep your plan, but only if you or your employer is willing to pay 2 or 3 times what they are paying now. So I’d say this isn’t an outright lie like his promise to not raise taxes on anybody making less than $200,000, which he has already broken and will continue to do so.





    More reason for desperation:

    http://republicans.oversight.house.g...spx?NewsID=625
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  2. # ADS
    Circuit advertisement
    Join Date
    Always
    Location
    Advertising world
    Posts
    Many
     

  3. #13
    C & P Queen Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    56,942
    Thanks
    2,613
    Thanked 4,766 Times in 2,886 Posts
    White House alleged to have punished unfavorable press, again
    Published: 9:34 AM 05/18/2011 By Steven Nelson


    The White House Press Office received another dose of bad press Wednesday as the Boston Herald lashed out at the office after being denied full access to a third consecutive visit by President Obama to Boston.

    The Herald, the smaller and right-leaning counterpart to the Boston Globe, lashed out at the press office, printing correspondence that indicated that the paper’s front-page placement of an op-ed by Mitt Romney was the reason for its exclusion.

    Matt Lehrich of the White House Press Office wrote to the Herald, “I tend to consider the degree to which papers have demonstrated to covering the White House regularly and fairly in determining local pool reporters.”

    The Herald quoted Lehrich writing, “My point about the op-ed was not that you ran it but that it was the full front page, which excluded any coverage of the visit of a sitting US President to Boston. I think that raises a fair question about whether the paper is unbiased in its coverage of the President’s visits.”

    Lehrich wrote that the Boston Globe had previously been selected by the White House Correspondents Association to draft the press pool report for local papers, and that “we will continue to consider the Herald for local pool duty for future visits.” The Herald noted that it had been passed over during Obama’s past two visits.

    According to a report this month by the Boston Business Journal, the Globe’s weekday print circulation averages 219,214, while the Herald averages a circulation of 123,811. “Newspapers don’t have to be unbiased to get access,” Boston University journalism professor Fred Bayles told the Herald. “You can’t just let only the newspapers you want in.”

    The dispute is the latest in a series between the White House and the press. Less than one month ago, the San Francisco Chronicle took on the White House over a “pants-on-fire moment” after the press office punished a Chronicle reporter for publishing a video taken of a protest during an Obama visit.

    The Chronicle alleged that the White House banned the reporter from covering future White House press pools as retribution for filming during a print-only event, threatened Chronicle and Hearst reporters if they reported on the ban, and then falsely claimed they didn’t.

    A local California paper in Pleasanton, California was contacted in April by the White House and asked to remove a passage that presented an unflattering description of the first lady. The paper complied, then tipped off TheDC.

    Criticism of the administration’s handling of the press has transcended partisan divides.

    In 2009, former White House correspondent Helen Thomas shocked many with her critique of the administration’s tight control of the press. “I’m amazed, I’m amazed at you peole who called for openness and transparency,” Thomas told press secretary Robert Gibbs. “Calling reporters the night before, telling them they’re going to be called on — that’s shocking,” Thomas said of an indicident involving a Huffington Post reporter.

    In a follow-up interview, Thomas asked, “What the hell do they think we are, puppets? They’re supposed to stay out of our business. They are our public servants.” Thomas continued, “It’s blatant. They don’t give a damn if you know it or not. They ought to be hanging their heads in shame.”

    Earlier this year, Vice President Joe Biden’s staff stuffed a reporter from the Orlando Sentinel into a closet to keep him from speaking with guests at a fundraiser. After the incident, a Baltimore Sun reporter revealed that in March 2010 he also had been forced to remain in a closet during a different Biden event.

    http://dailycaller.com/2011/05/18/wh...#ixzz1MjGRg8Fu
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  4. #14
    C & P Queen Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    56,942
    Thanks
    2,613
    Thanked 4,766 Times in 2,886 Posts
    San Francisco Chronicle accuses White House of lying about banned pool reporter
    Mike Riggs - The Daily Caller – Mon May 2, 7:44 am ET


    The San Francisco Chronicle has accused the White House of lying about a recent spat with one of its reporters. Last week, the Chronicle reported that the White House had threatened to ban Chronicle reporter Carla Marinucci from participating in the White House pool after Marinucci, a member of the print pool, used her cell phone to record a group of Bradley Manning supporters heckling Pres. Obama at a recent San Francisco fundraiser.

    According to the Chronicle’s first write-up of the spat, the White House press office threatened to ban Marinucci from the print pool during San Francisco events for using her cell phone, and forbade the paper from discussing the incident. A day later, the White House told reporters that the Chronicle’s allegations were “not true.”

    Chronicle editor Ward Bushee wasted no time hitting back at the White House. “Sadly, we expected the White House to respond in this manner based on our experiences yesterday,” Bushee wrote on Saturday. “It is not a truthful response. It follows a day of off-the-record exchanges with key people in the White House communications office who told us they would remove our reporter, then threatened retaliation to Chronicle and Hearst reporters if we reported on the ban, and then recanted to say our reporter might not be removed after all.”

    Bushee added that the Chronicle is requesting an on-the-record confirmation that Marinucci is still eligible for pool duty during Obama’s trips to San Francisco. The fight with the Chronicle comes roughly a month after a reporter for the Orlando Sentinel was asked to wait in a closet during a Winter Park fundraiser for Vice Pres. Joe Biden.

    This isn’t the Obama White House’s first boondoggle with press access. In October 2009, just days after Robert Gibbs told ABC’s Jake Tapper that the White House would not pick and choose who could have access to administration officials, FOX News’ Major Garrett was denied permission to interview Obama Jobs Czar Kenneth Feinberg.

    In another incident, the White House conducted its own in-house interview with then-Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan to avoid questions about Kagan’s sexual orientation.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/dailycaller/...edpoolreporter


    comments

    Threats from this administration is more common than not......how else do they keep their minions in line and following their marching orders. Bribes & promises are part of their plan as well.

    --

    Anybody surprised this comes from the "open and transparent" Obama administration?

    Or, for that matter, the party that claimed it would "drain the swamp" of congressional corruption in 2006?

    Actions speak louder than words.

    ---

    A cult of personality arises when an individual uses mass media, propaganda, or other methods, to create an idealized and heroic public image, often through unquestioning flattery and praise.[1] Cults of personality are usually associated with dictatorships. The sociologist Max Weber developed a tripartite classification of authority; the cult of personality holds parallels with what Weber defined as 'charismatic authority'.

    A cult of personality is similar to hero worship, except that it is established by mass media and propaganda.

    While the cult of personality generally applies to the enhancement and promotion of a political or religious doctrine, it stands to reason that it is also asserted in everyday situations where popularity is used to advocate conformity to philosophies and lifestyles, even products and attitudes by way of peer pressure and herd mentality.

    Wiki

    --

    "In another incident, the White House conducted its own in-house interview with then-Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan to avoid questions about Kagan’s sexual orientation".
    If this is true, why didn't it get more run?
    How do you "out" a Supreme Court Justice?
    Answer: You don't.

    ---

    Kagan's sexual orientation is fair game. So is First Lady Michelle Obama, and so is heckling of the President. Anything even remotely resembling a threat to a reporter is an actional violation of the First Amendment and needs to be followed up by legal action by the newspaper and the reporter who was threatened, in a class action lawsuit as well as an individual action. Anything else is to allow repression of freedom of speech and assembly by this administration, and we all know where THAT leads!



    Reminder to the Press: Before Publishing an Article, Ask Yourselves ‘Does This Make FLOTUS Seem Snooty?’
    By Doug Powers • May 3, 2011 04:10 PM **Written by Doug Powers


    A small, local news outlet with a name like “Pleasanton Weekly” doesn’t sound very threatening, but according to an email sent to the Daily Caller, the publication has some journalistic teeth that the White House thought needed to be filed down — specifically, the choppers that made Michelle Obama come across as snooty: http://dailycaller.com/2011/05/03/wh...ut-first-lady/

    A small weekly paper in California claims that a White House official asked it to remove a sentence from a “benign” feature about Marine One because it reflected poorly on first lady Michelle Obama.
    [...]
    The story in question was a soft feature about Marine One titled, “Inside Marine One, President Obama’s helicopter,” that ran in the paper on April 20. Pleasanton staffer Amory Gutierrez “didn’t get to ride in ‘Marine One,’” she wrote in her story, “but I did get the VIP tour and took photographs of the otherwise unseen aircraft.”

    She also wrote a sentence that the White House thought made FLOTUS look snooty.

    “Basically the reporter said that the First Lady didn’t speak to the pilots but acknowledged them by making eye contact,” Allen wrote in her email.

    Allen says she “complied” with the White House’s request “because it was not worth making a fuss over.”
    This little band of California rabble-rousers might just be a small operation, but the White House can never be too careful in keeping them in check. One day it’s the Pleasanton Weekly, but the next thing they know it’s ballooned into the San Francisco Chronicle.

    ---

    UPDATE: Katie McCormick Lelyveld, FLOTUS’ press secretary, wrote the following in an email: “Our office has never interacted with the Pleasanton paper, and not knowing the story existed, we never asked for such a line to be removed.”

    Allen says she “complied” with the White House’s request “because it was not worth making a fuss over.”

    She added, “I thought it was interesting, though, that the [White House] was concerned enough about image to contact a little weekly paper in Pleasanton.”

    The White House communications office did not return requests for comment.

    Allen said she emailed TheDC after reading about the San Francisco Chronicle’s recent spat with the White House communications office.

    http://dailycaller.com/2011/05/03/wh...#ixzz1MjQ19kKq
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  5. #15
    C & P Queen Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    56,942
    Thanks
    2,613
    Thanked 4,766 Times in 2,886 Posts
    Obama launches another snitch police squad
    by Michelle Malkin on Tuesday, September 13, 2011 at 8:20pm


    They’re baaaaack. It’s another legion of Obama snitch police.

    The Obama 2012 campaign has rolled out “Attack Watch”. http://www.attackwatch.com “Get the facts. Fight the smears.” And report all dissidents and enemies here http://my.barackobama.com/page/signu...port-an-attack

    The announcement was made earlier today on the official BarackObama Twitter account. http://twitter.com/#!/BarackObama/st...12807014449152



    Twitter’s already having a ball with it: Just check out the #attackwatch hashtag.

    If this all sounds familiar, it should. Recall that during the Obamacare campaign in August 2009, the White House summoned Obama-bots to monitor blog postings and “casual conversations” of health care takeover opponents — and then report them to the president. The effort was led by health czar Nancy deParle and former ABC News correspondent Linda Douglass.

    Who was behind the Obamacare Internet Snitch Brigade? Obama campaign operatives and former Soros-tied Center for American Progress progs then on the federal payroll. Reminder:

    Czardom has its privileges. This week, President Obama’s health care overlord launched a taxpayer-funded initiative to recruit an Internet Snitch Brigade that will combat “disinformation about health insurance reform.” As the White House explained in a special online bulletin:

    “These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.”
    What will health care czar Nancy DeParle do with this information? Where will it be stored? Who has oversight of the czar’s powers, budget, and personnel? Concerned citizens, alas, will have a hard time tracking down the “Office of Health Care Reform” created by executive order in April. There is no central website for the office, no direct channel for transparency, and no congressional accountability.

    It least one member of Congress has started asking questions. Texas GOP Sen. John Cornyn sent a letter to President Obama demanding that he disband the Internet Snitch Brigade immediately: “By requesting citizens send ‘fishy’ emails to the White House, it is inevitable that the names, email, addresses, IP addresses and private speech of U.S. citizens will be reported to the White House,” Sen. Cornyn wrote. “You should not be surprised that these actions taken by your White House staff raise the specter of a data collection program.”

    Taxpayers have the right to know what government agencies and third parties the health care czar may share that data with – and why. Take note: The White House Office of Health Care Reform is working in close quarters with an entirely separate Office of Health Reform created under the Department of Health and Human Services. That office is staffed with several Obama campaign operatives and former employees of the Center for American Progress, including special HHS assistant Michael Halle and HHS director Jeanne Lambrew, a former senior fellow at the Center for American Progress who worked on health policy in the Clinton Administration.

    CAP is a lead organization in the Health Care Action Now coalition, the Astroturfed “grass-roots” lobbying group for Obama’s health care takeover legislation run out of 1825 K Street in Washington, D.C. with a $40 million budget. CAP is also the parent group of Think Progress, the far Left website leading the smear campaign against fiscal conservative activists protesting at congressional town halls.

    Lawmakers must also dig far beyond the health care czar’s flagging operation. Last month, a Washington, D.C. citizen watchdog group filed suit to force the White House to disclose which health care lobbyists and executives it had met with this year to discuss the government health care takeover legislation. White House counsel Greg Craig refused to disclose which administration officials attended the meetings. But at least two of the industry visitors have ties to health care czar DeParle. William C. Weldon is chairman of Johnson & Johnson, which paid DeParle $7,500 for a recent speech. Wayne Smith is chief executive of Community Health Systems, which merged with Triad Hospitals – where DeParle served on the board of directors. DeParle’s options were converted to cash payments worth $1.05 million.

    Despite Obama’s lip service to transparency, the public is in the dark about which assets DeParle has divested; how many times, if any, DeParle has recused herself from policy matters and meetings; and the exact nature of her conversations with health care executives. While White House press secretary Robert Gibbs lambastes the corporate health care ties of Republican opponents, he has shrugged off the corporate ties of the woman leading the Obamacare charge.

    Alert the Internet Snitch Brigade: The fishiest odor is emanating from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
    Also: During the 2008 campaign, Obama used the same “Fight the Smears” slogan and website domain to smear his critics. Remember?



    Fun fact: Among the liberal media tools at the time working as unpaid Fight the Smears operatives for the Obama campaign…then-Time correspondent Jay Carney, who is now the White House press secretary.

    Also note: AttackWatch is using cookies to track visitors and collect info.

    They are watching us. Be sure they know that you are watching them!


    ***

    One more goon squad flashback (h/t American Elephant):Remember the St. Louis lawyer goon squad from 2008 – and how “St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch and St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce, both Obama supporters, [threatened] to bring criminal libel charges against anyone who levels what turns out to be false criticisms of their chosen candidate for President.”











    See also : Help out the Internet snitch brigade ?
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  6. #16
    C & P Queen Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    56,942
    Thanks
    2,613
    Thanked 4,766 Times in 2,886 Posts
    #AttackWatch trending on Twitter, but not in a good way
    The Daily Caller – 8 hrs ago


    In an aggressive move against the 2012 election’s GOP talking points Wednesday, President Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign launched Attackwatch.com — a website for Obama supporters to submit rumors and attacks by any of his detractors, from GOP presidential candidates to next-door neighbors.

    But an early social-media backlash against the project may not have been the sort of online buzz the president’s campaign was hoping for.

    AttackWatch takes a decidedly different tack from the Obama campaign’s 2008 rumor-tracking site, fightthesmears.com. That earlier effort was dignified and lofty, emblazoned with eagles and a pledge from Obama to refrain from using religion and patriotism as “wedges” and “bludgeons,”

    By contrast, AttackWatch is stark and serious, reminiscent of an attack ad: bold, red and white text on a simple black background, and images of Glenn Beck and Rick Perry in static-filled black and white. And a side-bar menu keeps track of political attacks on the president, with an option to submit “rumors” for consideration and action.

    As with most social media efforts from the Obama campaign, the website came with a ready-made Twitter hashtag, #AttackWatch, which the Obama For America 2012 campaign began promoting via Twitter late on Tuesday. The project’s twin goals are to crowdsource opposition research and leverage social media to track unfair criticism of the president.

    #AttackWatch is now a Trending Topic in the Washington, D.C. area — but not for the reasons its creators had hoped.

    Tea partiers, or at least people who share sympathies with them, have used #attackwatch to joke — and at times, vent — about their dissatisfaction with the Obama administration.

    A separate group has turned #AttackWatch into a punchline for mundane observations and funny non-sequiturs, using it to “report” everything from rude neighbors to NFL teams. Few if any have actually used #AttackWatch so far in the way the Obama campaign intended.

    Right-wing pundits took a particular glee in appropriating the hashtag, with Jonah Goldberg, Michelle Malkin, and Tim Carney firing off sarcastic tweets by the minute. “Some RWNJ [Right Wing Nut Job] said Obama set up a website to track all criticism of him. But I know you’re not that creepy,” tweeted Carney.

    Even nonpartisan novelty accounts jumped on the bandwagon: @depresseddarth, a Twitter feed imagining the Star Wars villain Darth Vader on Xanax, tweeted that “Obama launched a program to track attack threats. We had a similar program on the Death Star, but that didn’t stop Luke.”

    The Obama team has been heralded for its revolutionary use of Twitter in conducting voter and constituent outreach. But by going on offense with #AttackWatch, Obama — carrying a 33 percent approval rating according to a Bloomberg poll released today — inadvertently gave the public a campaign-approved outlet to mock him in 140 characters or less.

    http://news.yahoo.com/attackwatch-tr...191205947.html

    comments

    I'm glad people are hammering this site. This is scary stuff. The government/president asking people who disagree with him to reported? What country does that sound like because it sure as heck isn't my country. This is a SLIPPERY slope they're going down. I can't believe this isn't getting more press.

    ...

    Not made by just tea partiers or "sympathizers"! Let's get down to basics though. If George Bush would have done this, how long would he have been able to get away with it before blood shot from the eyes of the DNC? This is BEYOND ridiculous. As someone tweeted #attackwatch, 1984 was supposed to be a warning, not an instruction manual.

    ...

    Oh stop with the Tea Party sympathizer crap! Anyone that doesn't support a totalitarian government should be offended by this!

    ...

    We may not have any jobs, and a loser for a President #attackwatch, but the humor of the American social media is unparalleled.
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  7. #17
    go ahead....I dare ya pepperpot has a reputation beyond repute pepperpot has a reputation beyond repute pepperpot has a reputation beyond repute pepperpot has a reputation beyond repute pepperpot has a reputation beyond repute pepperpot has a reputation beyond repute pepperpot has a reputation beyond repute pepperpot has a reputation beyond repute pepperpot has a reputation beyond repute pepperpot has a reputation beyond repute pepperpot has a reputation beyond repute
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    exactly where I should be...
    Posts
    9,434
    Thanks
    4,644
    Thanked 4,078 Times in 2,264 Posts
    Mrs Pepperpot is a lady who always copes with the tricky situations that she finds herself in....

  8. #18
    C & P Queen Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute Jolie Rouge has a reputation beyond repute
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    56,942
    Thanks
    2,613
    Thanked 4,766 Times in 2,886 Posts
    WashPost Muffles Its Own Scoop: Top Obama Aide Plouffe Paid $100,000 for Two Speeches to Group With Iran Ties
    By Tim Graham | August 06, 2012 | 08:54

    The Washington Post has an investigative piece below the fold on the front page Monday: “Obama Associate Got $100,000 Fee From Affiliate Of Firm Doing Business With Iran.” Actually, that’s the online headline. The newspaper headline is more boring, without a dollar figure: “Firm with ties to Iran paid Obama associate for talks.” There's also no photograph.

    The “associate” is David Plouffe, Obama’s campaign manager in 2008 and now a “Senior Advisor” at the White House. Couldn’t the Post have put the words “top aide” in that letter space? It’s shorter than “associate.” Would Karl Rove be an "associate" if this had been a Bush story? Here’s how the story by Tom Hamburger and Peter Wallsten began:

    David Plouffe, a senior White House adviser who was President Obama’s 2008 campaign manager, accepted a $100,000 speaking fee in 2010 from an affiliate of a company doing business with Iran’s government.

    A subsidiary of MTN Group, a South Africa-based telecommunications company, paid Plouffe for two speeches he made in Nigeria in December 2010, about a month before he joined the White House staff.

    Since Plouffe’s speeches, MTN Group has come under intensified scrutiny from U.S. authorities because of its activities in Iran and Syria, which are under international sanctions intended to limit the countries’ access to sensitive technology. At the time of Plouffe’s speeches, MTN had been in a widely reported partnership for five years with a state-
    owned Iranian telecommunications firm.

    There were no legal or ethical restrictions on Plouffe being paid to speak to the MTN subsidiary as a private citizen. But for a close Obama aide to have accepted payment from a company involved in Iran could prove troublesome for the president as the White House toughens its stance toward the Islamic republic. In recent weeks, Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney has accused the administration of being soft on Iran.
    How will Plouffe’s six-figure speeches play? Older pundits can easily remember the way the liberal media trashed Ronald Reagan for accepting $2 million for speeches in Japan just after he left the White House, which is different than a campaign manager rejoining the Obama team to help make policy in the White House.

    It also ought to put a bite in the rich-Rafalca-Bain-Richie-Rich narrative, since "working class" Americans don’t earn $100,000 for two speeches in Africa. Obama's speeches about favoring people who "play by the rules" starts to sound tinny. Even NBC asked Plouffe if the Obama team was too aggressive with the "politics of envy." That sort of balanced out NBC's David Gregory repeating Plouffe's charge that Romney "has no core" -- as if Plouffe looks deeply principled now?

    It’s also interesting that it could reinforce the narrative that Obama was very soft in siding with pro-democracy dissidents in Iran as they were shot in the streets. There are charges Plouffe’s enrichers aided in squashing dissent:

    In 2005, MTN Group entered the Iranian market by forming a joint venture, Irancell, with an Iranian government-backed consortium. Headquartered in Johannesburg, MTN Group has rapidly expanded its businesses in Iran, Nigeria and other developing economies.

    In 2006, Stuart Levey, then undersecretary of the Treasury and the point man on Iran sanction enforcement in the Bush administration — a job he also held for two years under Obama — told Turkish officials that Irancell was “fully owned” by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, according to a State Department cable made public by the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks.

    The corps led a crackdown on protesters after the June 2009 presidential election in Iran and has long been accused of playing a central role in the country’s nuclear program. Some of its officers and business interests have been targeted by U.S. and U.N. sanctions intended to curb Iran’s nuclear program dating back to 2006.

    Since Plouffe’s speeches, the U.S. government has become increasingly concerned that the Iranian government has used MTN operations or technology to help monitor dissidents. Company representatives and South Africa’s ambassador to the United States have met with senior executive branch officials in efforts to stress the firm’s compliance with U.S. sanctions, according to U.S. officials familiar with the talks who spoke on the condition of anonymity because no decisions have been reached....

    MTN Group’s chief executive, Sifiso Dabengwa, said in a past statement that suggestions that the company has been involved in human rights violations in Iran are “false and offensive.”

    Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), a leading critic of technology firms operating in Iran, told The Post in a statement late last week that MTN should be “blacklisted” because of evidence that it “provided technology to Iran used to repress the Iranian people.”

    On Wednesday, Congress passed new sanctions on Iran with provisions that could apply to technology companies such as MTN. The bill awaits the president’s signature.

    Senior U.S. officials have expressed concern that cellular technology is being used in Iran and Syria to track dissidents. Obama signed an executive order in April allowing U.S. officials for the first time to impose sanctions on foreign nationals found to have used new technologies, including cellphone tracking, to commit human rights abuses.
    Will the rest of the media pick this story up? After all, Hamburger's June 22 story on Romney's Bain Capital allegedly aiding outsourcing was completely exploited by the Obama campaign and their media allies.

    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-gra...#ixzz235xaYCCM

    comments

    I'm trying to figure out the difference between Jack Abramoff and Plouffe. Perhaps the Washington Post can tell us? Abramoff was used as a battering ram by the Post and Democrats to get at Karl Rove. Why the kid gloves for Plouffe?

    ..


    Abramoff was convicted of conspiracy, fraud, and tax evasion. Although he admitted bribery, he was not actually convicted of bribery. The key point was that this corrupt man was used as an excuse to investigate an innocent man, Karl Rove.

    Plouffe has not been the subject of an investigation yet, nor are there any calls for one. Will Plouffe get a pass?
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?


 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts