Sam Donaldson says things are going 'smoothly' for Bush*

[Q]

- On the Chris Mathews show...Sam goes on to say that Bush* can only lose if the war in Iraq goes badly, the economy tanks and another attack happens that's perceived as preventable.

- Did Sam have a lobotomy? Or does he work for Bush* like the rest of the American media?

- The Iraq war is not only 'going badly'...Bush* lied about the reasons for invading and occupying that country.

- The economy is beyond 'tanked'. We'll never pay off the Bushie debt and jobs are being lost at record numbers. The only ones prospering from Bush's* economy are those connected to the energy/war industries.

- Sam didn't mention that the GOP chair of the 9-11 commission called 9-11 'preventable'. Is he giving Bush* a second chance at preventing an attack?

- The American media wants Bush* to win and will do everything they can to make sure that happens. They will continue to hide the truth from the American people and participate in turning America into an autocracy. They've already proclaimed that Bush* is unbeatable.

- Democracy and representative government is impossible without a free press.

[Mikimouse]

1. I suspect that there is a great deal of money

changing hands, as well as thinly veiled threats from GOP operatives. Since no one seems to be able to predict the lengths to which the * people will go to keep power, the 'journalists' who should be informing the 'murkin people' remain silent.

[Cocoa]

4. no, this stuff is Donaldson's profesion

he's not doing it unwillingly.

Check this out from the Daily Howler, he blames Clinton for the Republicans' crimes, just like he's now praising Bush for nonexistent sucesses.

http://www.dailyhowler.com/h122198_1.shtml

Here was Sam, waxing el on This Week, lamenting the reach of Vile Clinton:

DONALDSON: I’m fond of quoting my friend Joe Klein...He likens Bill Clinton to the central character in The Great Gatsby. He walks along and behind him he leaves wrecked lives, ruined lives, not just his enemies, but his friends. And if you think about the people, both his enemies and his friends, Speakers and Webster Hubbell, you see that wherever President Clinton walks, carnage is left behind, and it’s amazing.

And it really is amazing, now that you mention it, the things one hears said by a lynch mob. Hubbell went to prison, after all, for misappropriating money from Mrs. Clinton’s law firm--for stealing from the Clintons! The ability to blame Vile Clinton for that--well, it’s all a part of the logic one get to see inside a celebrity lynch mob. Meanwhile, it’s somehow Vile’s fault that Speakers have fallen? We search for the logic there, also. Rep. Livingston, like Dimmesdale, sat silent for seven years, while his party attacked Clinton for sexual conduct. When Livingston’s similar conduct (and hypocrisy) is revealed, somehow that’s Clinton’s fault too.

[Mikimouse]

8. As far as Donaldson goes, I agree...

but there are many others whose behaviors I would attribute to the reasons I gave above. I think that many of them are scared to broadcast the 'real' information.

[Q]

11. Yes...Dan Rather admitted the fear among journalists...

...to tell the whole truth. Those coming even near the truth are intimidated, threatened or their careers ended.

[The Zanti Regent]

35. Donaldson has ALWAYS whored for the GOP

Hmmm, wonder why nobody brings up his John Birch Society membership?

[emanymton]

2. You Miss the Point

The national election in November 2004 will be about, "Why should I change my government and its leader?"

Many people in America really don't care what happens in Washington D.C. If the economy picks up (what ever that means), the war in Iraq is over and there is no terror attack to blame on "the shrub" then the people will stick with what they have. The people will not begin to hear about the election until October 2004!


Why should the people vote for the Democrat Nominee (DN)? Are his lies any different from "the shrub's?"

[Cocoa]

3. Bush should be impeached by now

the only reason he hasn't been is because the GOP controls the Congress.

We'll have to do it in Nov. 2004.

[Q]

5. Well...one of us is missing the point...

- The point being that Donaldson and other so-called journalists are giving Bush* good 'grades' without taking into consideration any of his 'mistakes' or criminal acts.

- Would they do this for a Democratic candidate?

[xchrom]

6. the poster is not missing the point

he/she's on a different point.
wait for it -- they'll make themselves clearer.

[gristy]

9. You tell me.

Please list the Dem Nominee's lies (pick a potential nominee, any one). I'll list the shrub's lies. Then I'll let you tell me if they are "different".

[mikehiggins]

16. Thank you.

I thought I was the only person arguing that point around here.

Why should I change my government and its leader?

We have to convince them we would be "trading up" to something better, not more of the same old models they didn't buy in the first place.

[leesa]

20. Well ANYBODY would be a trade up. I don't understand this line of

thinking. Bush is the worst leader we have ever had and yet people pretend he is doing a good job. Don't play that game and don't let anyone play it for you. Sam Donaldson is a corporate whore. What these idiots don't realize, is that they will not be on the gravy train any longer after their Fuhrer takes over our country....he will not have any use for the vast majority of his cheerleaders.

[leesa]

19. Well beating bush should be a breeze then. The undeclared

illegal war is going VERY badly, the economy will not get better because we have pissed on all our trading partners and since we are a debtor nation, they only have to call in our debts to crash our economy, and we are constantly under the stress of their manufactured "terrorist" threats. If Americans are foolish enough to believe that Bush has done anything positive for this country despite the sunami waves of evidence to the contrary, then they will re-elect this criminal to office and our golden age is finally over.

[are_we_united_yet]

22. "Why should I change my government and its leader?"

To that I might legitimately ask, "Where the f#ck have you been for the last three years"

[pinkpops]

7. I'd like him to

take his toupee off and repeat what he said, just for comedic effect.

[gulliver]

10. The media won't turn on Bush until the people do.

At least that is what I think. Right now, the people are a little bit nuts and a little bit stupid as a whole. Thanks to 9/11, Bush is getting unprecedented leeway for bungles and lying. He is taking full advantage of that.

WRT Iraq, Bush is trying to play the role of the "good cop who breaks the rules for justice."

Bush sold America on attacking Iraq by hyping weak and fraudulent evidence. He said the reason was to disarm Saddam, who was (per Bush) a gathering threat to the United States. Of course, it turned out that Saddam was not that much of a threat. Bush even presented false evidence in a sneaky way right in the State of the Union. Bush screwed the pooch, right?

Nope.

People are misinterpreting Bush as Andy Sipowicz from NYPD Blue. In that fantasy, Bush bent a few rules to take out a "scumbag." In dumbass world Bush took matters into his own hands and did what was right for America -- damn the courts and Miranda warnings and review boards. "Andy Sipowicz" whipped up on that punk Saddam who had it coming.

People can be really stupid when it comes to how they feel about events. They think with their emotions, and that makes them extremely vulnerable to lying sacks of sh*t like Bush. Attacking Iraq was a half-baked adventure that has made America less safe and at a tremendous cost. But that hasn't sunk in yet.

The media suspects it but are giving Bush wide latitude. Bush is hanging by a thread though.

[Desperadoe]

17. Gulliver, you nailed it!

The Andy Sipowicz thing is exactly what this sleazeball is doing. That's why the good ol' white boys love him.

I have long suspected that this is the rationale that appeals so much to the TV addicted white male. There's a little cowboy in all of us that the makes the Dirty Harry and the Andy Sipowicz mentality appeal so much.

[suegeo]

39. Nitpicking

YOU SAID:
Bush sold America on attacking Iraq by hyping weak and fraudulent evidence. He said the reason was to disarm Saddam, who was (per Bush) a gathering threat to the United States.

END QUOTE

Before the unjustified blitzkrieg, the fake president said that the WMDs that Saddam had were a GRAVE DANGER, not a gathering threat. The fake administration claimed that the WMDs that Saddam certainly had (remember that our fake secretary of state Colin Powell said that the WMDs were hidden, at one point, in large groves of palm trees) were a grave danger and that these WMDS could strike the fatherland at any time.

The fake free press in the USSA is now trying to brainwash the people by repeating the "gathering threat" slogan. It's bullshit, like most everything else being spewed by the fake free press and the fake admisintration these days.

Otherwise, I agree with your post, Gulliver.

[kskiska]

12. Donaldson also stood on the White House lawn

and predicted that Clinton's presidency was "now numbered in days" when the Monica story broke.

[CatWoman]

13. Yeah -- I remember that

:hi: Kathy

[kskiska]

25. And to think I used to like him

before he jumped on the bash Clinton bandwagon. Now he's a bad joke.

:hi: Hi Cat!!! How are ya?

[CatWoman]

27. Freezing and Sneezing

:hi:

I used to like him too.

But you know, a lot of those guys were made to look foolish when they kept reassuring us that Clinton was going to resign.

They all had egg on their faces.

Guess that's why they bash him so much -- they just can't let it go.

[0007]

14. I forgot about that one!

[Cocoa]

23. even Cokie rolled her eyes at that

I remember him saying it in the ABC studio, and she said "Oh, Sam."

[John_H]

15. The 2004 story line taking shape folks!!

1) Help Rove make the election into a referendum on our national security by first declaring the capture of Saddam as the "end of the war" and dismissing the economy as "recovering."

2)Help Howard Dean win the nomination with soft coverage (This is also happening on every network as I write this, which will allow creates the election storyline they really covet:

3) "Liberal" vs. Conservative. Dove vs. fearless leader. Hot-head vs. "patient man". Elitist vs. common good ol' boy. Easy to write, no thought required. Easy enough for any 'mercun to understand.

4) Declare 4 years of media cheerleading as validated by public mandate.

[Q]

18. Right now the media is pondering: Is Bush* Unstoppable?

- This is the question ABC This Week will ask later today.

- Is Bush* 'unstoppable'? Only if the media refuses to report the truth about him and his corruption administration.

[CatWoman]

28. They were doing that all last week on CNN

Especially on "Inside Politics".

Judy was absolutely giddy.

I notice that they keep pushing his poll numbers, and their polls have him in the low 60's.

[Terwilliger]

21. maybe he simply sees no effective opposition

either now or on the horizon

[Cocoa]

24. you crack me up, Terwilliger

do all Greens put as much stock in Sam Donaldson? :-)

[Terwilliger]

31. I'm not a Green, so I wouldn't know

I was just on the hunt for effective opposition

[Cocoa]

40. and you're projecting that onto Sam Donaldson?

Sam Freaking Donaldson is likely to share your interest in a strong challenger against Bush?

Come on, isn't there a more plausible explanation for what Sam is saying here? Come on, I know you know there is. :-)

[Terwilliger]

41. again, like I said originally

maybe he's simply flowing with the winds, and the political winds are blowing towards Bush

Like it or not, there's a serious possibility that Bush will win next year. Donaldson, an old Reagan-era kink-in-their-sides who says that things are looking good for Bush is a person who sees that the Democrats are not doing well.

Cocoa, I appreciate your optimism, but there's optimism and then there are rose-colored glasses. Take the glasses off!

[otohara]

26. Media Ignores Bush Failures, Embraces Them

most of all Sam, Cokie, Tweety, Billy, Bobby, Tucker, all enjoy their tax cuts.

[Selwynn]

29. True, but that's not the way the "public" sees it...

For the public, the war in Iraq is coming along and the reasons we went to war don't matter anymore. American has a short attention span.

For the public, the economy is improving - no arguments of rhetoric will change that perception, only harsh reality if people who are right now anticipating to find jobs again don't find them in the next little while.

For the public, the chair the 9-11 commission so quickly clarified his statements to emphasize that no senior official was implicated or did anything wrong that no one even caught his first statements.

[RBHam]

32. It's the Orwell-Rove Administration...

With the people played like fools.

What did Barnum say?

You can fool some of the people all of the time, you can fool all of the people some of the time, , but you can never fool all of the people all of the time..."

You'd think there's going to be a breaking point, eventually...

[buycitgo]

37. I knew I'd read about them somewhere

[Q]

34. Iraq 'coming along' and the reasons we went to war...

...are stories being manipulated by the American media to keep people ignorant of the facts and maintain support for the Bush* administration.

- Even CSPAN has become a Bush* supporter...pushing stories that help coverup the truth about 9-11 and Iraq...while intimating that Democrats are 'angry' partisans yelling at poor little Bush*.

- Is it that Americans have 'short attention spans'...or are they simply being lied to by a 'state-controlled' media?

[Selwynn]

38. No one is ignorant as much as they just don't care.

Its not so much that people don't know that bush lied as it is that people don't care that Bush lied, and don't even think much about the reasons we went to war anymore.

It is that Americans have short attention spans. Americans have always been lied to by state controlled media in some form or another - but the more damaging problem today is that Americans don't care about knowing the truth anyway. They just want their next big mac.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

30. Sam Donaldson was the chief nemisis of the Reagn administration.

I opposed Reagan but thought he was a hell of a lot more charming than the current White House resident. What happened to cause Donaldson to attached his lips to Bush's buttocks?

[Q]

33. When you think about it..'charming' shouldn't have anything...

...to do with running the country. Donaldson...like so many other talking heads in the mainstream media...have chosen to go with the side with the most guns and money.

- Many have become 'infortainment specialists' instead of journalists...which sooths their conscience when they have to lie for the sake of 'national security'.

- But beyond all the patriotism and fear is the real problem of MOST of the American media being owned by a small group of individuals who also happen to be far-right conservatives with an AGENDA. That agenda isn't much more complicated than gettng rid of the last remnants of 'liberalism' and the social state.

[LeahMira]

36. But where is the outrage?

Did Sam have a lobotomy?

Sam seems to be right. Involved Democrats and progressives are concerned and outspoken, but I don't see any activism coming from the average working man on the street. Partly, that's probably because dissent is now "unpatriotic" and partly I think some voters are quietly looking forward to November when they hope to make a change in the voting booth.

Our Declaration of Independence even says that people are reluctant to overthrow a ruler even when the list of grievances is pretty long. They are more inclined to bear their sufferings patiently until the "straw that breaks the camel's back." Bush is counting on that fact.

We also have to understand that a good 30% of the population is happy as pigs in mud about the way Bush is leading the nation. In fact, it seems they've been waiting for someone just like Bush to get over the Vietnam experience and bring the country back to the Second World War frame of mind when things were either black or white and Americans were the ones on the white horses, so to speak.

If Bush loses, these folks are going to be very unhappy and they aren't going to accept defeat easily. I hope that the rest of us are just as determined now to take back the progress we've made over the years, to take it back quickly and decisively, and to press on from there.

I realize that Dean, Clark, and the other candidates have enthusiastic and committed supporters, but I don't see the majority of Americans all that politically involved. Maybe they are interested, quietly, but most folks seem to think that all politicians are bums that are just out to take their money and that one politician is about the same as another. Bush says he is moral and Christian, and he is doing the one thing that people pay attention to, namely cut taxes. Unless, as you say, we are attacked by the "infidels" who aren't impressed or cowed by his "morality," or the economy tanks seriously, all is going well for Bush.