Posted by
rycK on Monday, May 26, 2008 9:06:19 AM
The New York Times Turns on the Worm: Hillary:get OUT [but save your votes for Obama]!
The New York Times, the Walter Duranty Memorial Paper[1], has again chosen to unch0ose their Anointed One. In a sophomoric screed entitled [2] “Divided They Stand “ by their famous non-economist we read of treachery:
“…the final days of the struggle for the Democratic nomination have been marked by yet another fake Clinton scandal — the latest in a long line that goes all the way back to Whitewater.” [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]
We are always stand refreshed and enlightened by the beauty and awe of the propagandistic sleight of hand granted b y the busy little Fellow Travelers at the Times, the Old Gray Lady, for lessons in rudimentary politics and its spin tactics. The first utterance in this rant instructs the mentally disnimble to learn, or to reinforce that indoctrinative point, that Clinton scandals are somehow faked. This is a political apology that is used to defend persons with slimy histories that the new attacks are b0gus. We can wonder how Bill faked his DNA specimen on Lewinski’s blue dress. Bill faked his perjury?
“This one, in case you missed it, involved an interview Hillary Clinton gave the editorial board of South Dakota’s Argus Leader, in which she tried to make a case for her continuing campaign by pointing out that nomination fights have often gone on into the summer. As one of her illustrations, she mentioned that Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June.”
Some of this is actual history, which must not be cited unless the appropriate caveats are introduced and there is the scattering of rose petals and song. This is fluff and the zingers come later in this piece.
“It wasn’t the best example to use, but it’s absurd to suggest, as some Obama supporters immediately did, that Mrs. Clinton was making some kind of dark hint about Barack Obama’s future.”
Probably true. But, the spin doctors picked up on this quickly and they can turn any statement into some form of nasty plot to gain power for their masters. We would be foolish indeed to attempt to show that when political figures suddenly exit stage left, for any reason, that the power vacuum is not instantly grabbed by some body else thus muddling the fact that this is one of the many ways in which power is transferred. Who benefited by the JFK assignation? LBJ? Fidel Castro? Cui bono? [Wasn’t she one of Che’s girlfriends?]
“Why does all this matter? Not for the nomination: Mr. Obama will be the Democratic nominee. But he has a problem: many grass-roots Clinton supporters feel that she has received unfair, even grotesque treatment. And the lingering bitterness from the primary campaign could cost Mr. Obama the White House.”
This prompts us to rewatch Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid and study that fascinating scene where the bad guy wonders about ‘rules’ in a knife fight.[3] We can also wonder who wrote the rules for politics. The NYT thinks they do. Notice that Hillary is not quitting. Why should she?
Now, the conclusion is slipped in as an obvious outcome of the facts!
“To the extent that the general election is about the issues, Mr. Obama should have no trouble winning over former Clinton supporters, especially the white working-class voters he lost in the primaries.”
Here the krugmaniacal one has just performed a leap of illogic and ignored the race and tax issues that both Clintons and Obama’s supporters have been depending on. We can thank the NYT for a slick piece of misdirection. Obama will win with no troubles except for the massive troubles he and his racist allies created for himself. Krugman wants us to forgive and forget such as this:
“You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not."[4] –Barack Obama
"And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."[5]-- Barack Obama
This is a parental belittling of the ignorant and unenlightened voters who can, after being shown that they are stupid, unwashed bigots, be instructed to thrown down their guns, renounce God and vote for Obama any way. To do otherwise would be an act of racism as defined by the New York Times. Well, that problem is solved. These dumb bigots need some supervision by blacks like Maxine Waters.[6] She will fix their cowboy capitalism, confiscate their guns and solve many of their other problems. She knows how to handle whites.
And, now another misdirection by omission!! Such a great piece of propaganda!!
“Indeed, John McCain has shed whatever maverick tendencies he may once have had, and become almost a caricature conservative — an advocate of lower taxes for the rich and corporations, a privatize and shredder of the safety net.”
Such poetic language! Of course, he fails, purposely, to mention that McCain was a drooling stooge for Ted Kennedy’s Amnesty Bill, voted against Reagan Tax Cuts, worked this McCain -Feingold bill[7] so that the left would be able to spend more money in political campaigns and abrogate the First Amendment and has other disturbing qualities that render him something of a loose cannon the wormy decks of the sinking Republican barge. The NYT wouldn’t want any Democrats or independents, following Lou Dobbs[8], to vote for McCain on the immigration issue.
“The point is that Mr. Obama may need those disgruntled Clinton supporters, lest he manage to lose in what ought to be a banner Democratic year.”
Only those with at least one half inch of encrusted drool on their shoes would miss this salient point. The word may here is ominous.
The Solution!! There are no cases in point where the Times leaves a problem without a favorable scenario for the far left.
“Mrs. Clinton needs to do her part: she needs to be careful not to act as a spoiler during what’s left of the primary, she needs to bow out gracefully if, as seems almost certain,…”
Translated: Hit the road b*tch.[9] The NYT already forgot they endorsed you.
The bottom line for the Times:
“Here’s the point: the nightmare Mr. Obama and his supporters should fear is that in an election year in which everything favors the Democrats, he will nonetheless manage to lose. He needs to do everything he can to make sure that doesn’t happen.”
And, that is the point of this propaganda piece. We have to wait all the way to the end of this latrine to get to the good stuff.
The NYT always picks the most expensive and extensive and far left way and the one that maximizes taxes. But, reality for the times is Obama is a racist and awash in black racism and hate and futile attempts to direct some of this onto Hillary are futile. They have a lot of damage control to do so watch them heighten their attacks on McCain, also endorsed by the Times.
rycK
Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com
[1] In honor of that celebrated Communist stooge and liar and winner of the Pulitzer Prize for the NYT. The color RED is used in my essays in honor of Walter Duranty, a saint, if there could be one, in the Marxist Archives of Honor.