Republicans I know get flummoxed when I mention the subject of this political ad to them

I shared this to facebook, for all of my repug, former high school classmates to enjoy! (And it looks like they're about 80% repug).

Just have your camera ready though.

Don

our "October suprise"... release of a major motion picture depicting the Bin Laden raid.. you know it's entirely possible the Obama presidency will be defined by this event, much the same way JFK was defined by PT109

that only Democratic Presidents have declared war. Must have been a Repub talking point at one time. When I told him that Vietnam was an Eisenhower initiative he said it wasn't a declared war.

I wonder if he would have wiggled under GWBII? Wouldn't know since I stopped attending family events about the same time.

If Republicans had their way we would never have been involved in WWII at least in Europe. When we were bombed at Pearl Harbor and declared War on Japan it took the Nazi's to declare war on the U. S..

Oddly enough in the last fifty years they sought to emulate Truman who despised all Republicans and who was criticized by Republicans for intervention at the time. They used this line in some measure even in the days of the red scare.

Claiming that Republicans are better at national security, when it's obvious they're not.

They did this all over Central and South America.

These have been getting toppled without nearly the press the Middle East ones have been getting.

In Uruguay the new Liberal Government even prosecuted the old order for their brutality.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/12/17/us-uruguay-rights-idUSN1741228420071217

Oh, wait. There was that whole Christian Right movement that seemed right, before it was proven to be all wrong.

Wasn't that on Fox News? Oh, the dissonance. It hurts.

I was still working back when the Fox Network came into being. They picked some really splashy, edgy, attention-grabbing shows like "21 Jump Street" that showcased a fledgling Johnny Depp and with his looks and brooding James Dean-ishness, he got a LOT of attention. And yes, they slotted "Married... with Children" among their prime-time shows. And it was mucho-controversial. The overall thrust always seemed to be a little louder, a little cruder, a little edgier, a little racier, a little more in-yer-face, a little more pushing the envelope. Which way? Hell, who cares? ANY way. Whichever way! Who cares? Just as long as we push that envelope.

Oh, the dissonance, indeed! The irony is just gobsmacking!

Henry Ford, Charles Lindburgh, Father Coughlin ... all were great fans of Hitler. The GOP is now totally submerged in that same kind of thinking ... fascists ... Mussolini, Franco, etc.

In the 20's Charles would fly into small mid Mo town for a chicken dinner. I have a picture of several Jenny's he took but it impossible to tell which was Lindbergh's plane. My Grandfather would pick him up in his Model T and take him to his cousins house and told the story of delivering a wheel from the train station when one fell off his plane.

From here the story gets weird. Lindbergh flew the Spirit of St. Louis over this small town to show his plane. After he became famous few in the town ever heard from him again. During World War 2 Lindbergh shuttled my Uncle to England who introduced himself to Charles when they landed.

My Uncle ended up doing 2 tours in bombers almost unheard of was shot down twice and bailed out as a message courier at least one time. He ended up with 3 clusters on his DFC. He was also in Jimmy Stewart's (who played Charles Lindbergh's) squadron and is pictured with Jimmy getting his DFC on the same day. My Uncle got quite a bit of press at the time. My Grandfather told me the story how German relatives complained to him on the street because my Uncle "was bombing the Fatherland". Where I come from the Bundt and Republicans were the same thing. My Grandfather was defiantly not a Republican and was a friend of both Clarance Cannon and Harry Truman.

Hitler and Germany. After Pearl Harbor was bombed he was deemed a traitor but rehabilitated his reputation by doing some bombing runs in Germany. But his reputation was tarnished at that point.

The GOP is busily eliding any such references from all our history books and diligently accusing the American Left of being "Nazis" and "fascists" ... in the inimitable GOP projection style. Crippled minds actually buy that shit, and can't seem to connect the rabid, foamy-lipped hatred of 'Communists' with the identical attitude possessed by all fascists throughout history.

Be sure to hold onto your family history and make sure it's well-understood by all the family members that will listen. Such things willl necessarily be relegated to "oral histories" as the Reich Wing succeeds in scrubbing the texts.

The left right division does not work you need to consider libertarian and authoritarian dimensions. There is a fascinating test that has evolved over the years that illustrates these dimensions. I used it in the years I taught and also used it on self styled Republicans. One warning this test seems to infuriate Republicans. Modern day Republicans fall much further on the right (economic planning) than fascists such as Hitler who was basically a moderate Keynesian (made trains run on time). On the authoritarian scale he was off the chart along with the likes of Stalin who moved to the left on a planned economy. I think we are seeing something new with modern day Republicans. Never before such lack of governmental planning and self entitlement. The ravings of the Tea Party such as Bachman, removal of voting rights is moving them much higher on the authoritarian scale just below the murders of the twentieth century. When the unhinged libertarians such as Ron Paul sound reasonable it is because some part of them rejects authoritarian dogma yet they reject any economic regulation which allows authoritarians to dictate.

Try it out for yourself I am a left of center libertarian. See link: http//www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2/:

Economic Left/Right: -6.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.41

While it's been tweaked slightly, I'm still in the lower left quadrant of the lower left quadrant ... more 'liberal' than Gandhi. (Then again, Gandhi was a lawyer, so that's understandable.) Several years ago I polled the DU community and the overwhelming majority (of a few hundred respondents) were, like me, in the lower left quadrant of the lower left quadrant.

I agree that the PC is far, far more meaningful than the linear 'model' and the worldwide lemming stampede to the upper right is more than disturbing. It's a harbinger of rampant corporatism, in a way even scarier than fascism.

Our current predicament has many analogies. Corporatist like the Monarchist of his time played havoc with Banks, Louis like our modern Republicans seem hell bent on foreign intrigue for profit and the masses went along with the current scam of the day electing authoritarian Louis. Needless to say the banks did not do well, Louis picked one fight too many, the Monarchist lost their money, and religious bigotry backfired. Neo Con (Neo Liberals in Europe) indeed. Maybe Santorum is right history of Western Civilization needs to be taught which would hopefully provide future caution.


I am really glad to run into someone who understands the depth of our problems worse than run of the mill fascism.


I consistently used to fall close to Mandela and Gandhi on the lower left quadrant the last time I took the test moved slightly left. My MMPI has similar results.

I agree with TahitiNut, you have insight many of us don't have.

Of course since the late 1950's, the parties have changed places. The Dems and the Repugs were different before the Southern Strategy.


And Bush started the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq...our longest wars!

He was the hatchet man and that was what he came up with.



http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Dole#section_4

That's the first usage of it that I'm familiar with.

while giving every appearance you're talking in broad terms. Then, when challenged on the broad issue, resort to the, "I didn't say that, you're misquoting me" defense by pointing out how narrowly you had defined the issue, never admitting that your narrowing of the issue had the effect of your not actually addressing the issue at hand in the first place.

That "Declaring War" is a function of Congress, passed as a standing law, and as such becomes the REQUIREMENT of a President to execute to the best of his ability. The only reason that REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTS never declare war, when they go to "war" is because Congress has not ordered them to, and as such, they are most most of the time acting outside the boundaries of Constitutional Law.
Bush I carried out the declaration of war against Iraq, (limited to removing the Iraqi land army from Kuwait), after the Government in Baghdad declared war on the United States. If I remember correctly. That limitation on combat action was why the American Army didn't invade Iraq, sack Baghdad, and topple the sitting government there in 1991, because it was a limit on Presidential prerogative that Bush the First actually had the good sense to respect, even if he disagreed with it (which he didn't). Even then-Sec.of Defense Dick Cheney gave cogent reasons for why the United States didn't want the government in Baghdad destroyed, and they were the same reasons that were later IGNORED by the same team of advisors to Bush the Lesser, and what happened was EXACTLY WHAT CHENEY SAID WOULD HAPPEN in 1991.

Democratic Presidents don't destroy standing Foreign Governments unless Congress MAKES them. That's the difference. THAT'S what your Republican friend was trying to say to you.

If my memory is incorrect, will someone fix that for me please?

K&R

... frequently here in Alabama (not sure why they're spending money here...), its the one that ends with "its ok to make a change". It is basically an attack on Obama's inexperience in economic matters,

What struck me is a segment that says "He tried. You tried". What is obviously missing is the phrase "We tried". They didn't try. Asshats.

channels I think. that is why I am seeing it in Texas too. The message is don't feel bad, you gave the black guy a chance. its OK to fire him now and put a responsible white guy im there. Like it is supposed to be.

campaign will not be spending advertising $$$$ here in California. I see that ad while watching Rachel or 'The Rev'.

... I think I saw it on Morning Joe at least twice this morning.

Like they were going to lose Alabama. Less money to spend in states that are in play.

I'm so happy to see the Democratic party improve their ad-making capabilities. This one in particular is stunningly well done. The message sure beats what this clown said:

For the most part, Obama has done what I've expected. He's done some good things which have surprised me. Political assassination and the abandonment of due process is not one of those things. This may be something that Republicans like, but I don't want to be in a competition to beat Republicans at their own game.

You really think keeping bin Laden at Gitmo was the thing to do? Seriously? There's no way in hell he was ever going to be tried in lower Manhattan. Shit, the Obama Administration got crucified from trying to do that with lesser al Qaeda operatives. Yeah, you might be the only one to find taking out bin Laden :sickening."



Diane
Anishinaabe in MI & mom to Taz, Nigel, and new baby brother Sammy, members of Dogs Against Romney, Cat Division
"Dogs Aren’t Luggage--HISS!”

There are many courts across the world where Bin Laden could have been tried. Assassination/murder is never the answer. We've let fear drag us down. Is the assassination/murder of Bin Laden a victory for the US? I don't think so. I think it's a victory for terror-tactics, and that's not something I want my government to be involved with.

Realistically, you think bin Laden could have been held on Rikers Island? I understand your concerns and the world sucks, but would you really have preferred bin Laden to be free? I think that's the only realistic choice there was. This isn't Utopia.

Diane
Anishinaabe in MI & mom to Taz, Nigel, and new baby brother Sammy, members of Dogs Against Romney, Cat Division
"Dogs Aren’t Luggage--HISS!”

Many criminals have been tried throughout history. Perhaps it's a fantasy world, but in my world, we still have due process and "innocent until proven guilty." The beautiful thing is that I don't have to come up with a solution - people have been working on these problems and putting systems in place to handle them for hundreds of years.

You honestly think it would have been better to bring him into this country, to be made a bigger martyr to his base of crazed loons. He was shone the way he was, a broken, retched, porn watching assbag that got what he helped do to 3000 of your and my family, friends.
Bin Ladens death WAS a win for this country, for our president and for all the military who passed and have been wounded in these illegal wars we got into. It was a win for every kid that lost a father or mother on 9/11, it was a win for every husband/wife who lost their spouse, and it was a win to the American perception that we are a weak nation. If you believe your government is involved in terror tactics because they capture or kill the enemy that attempts to destroy us, then back up and drive up the coast, because Canada is waiting for ya, maybe Mexico.....good luck

I guess you'll have to have a little cry when come back to the US next week to foul up the country that you think I don't belong in.

The fact that you embrace illegal tactics and want a homogenous society where dissenting views are not welcome is all the proof I need that Bin Laden's assassination was a victory for terror-tactics.

My response is reasoned. Yours seems to come from emotion, created and fueled largely by propaganda.

gets plenty of airtime here in Pennsyltucky. I want my right-wing neighbors to chew on it a little before November.
Very effective ad.

It really does get the right wingers. Suddenly they think OBL had a right to jury trial. Whereas while Shrub was in office, no one had any rights, as what good were they if we were all dead?

Proud of both President Obama and former President Clinton!

Guns and butter. Carrots and sticks.

Republicans have never really been about anything more than guns and threats of violence but the MSM has always given them undue credit for being "strong."

"Do what we want you to do or we'll bomb you!" is just international thuggery.

But I can tell by responses that it's good.

So here's a kick.

And a rec, too.

Republicans want no mention of Obama's record on fighting terrorists. Nevermind W's inclusion of 9-11, 9-11, 9-11 in every speech. Mention of Obama's escalated campaign against Al Qaeda is verboten. Maybe it's a Republican version of political correctness.

danger of Osama bin Laden!!!!!
After 8 years of fighting terra and raising the terror alert to ree every election cycle, Jr. Shrub could only say: referring to bin Laden "..I don't really think about him that much."

Obama didn't runoff at the mouth talking tough. He went to an awards dinner, kicked Donald Trump in the nuts on national tv as our troops were taking out the man responsible for 9-11 which occurred on REPUBLICAN WATCH!

Suck on it GOP.

Willard Romney -- if he ever got the job -- would probably just get a cabal of his Mormon buds together to 'retroactively' baptize bin Laden, and then seize control of all his assets for their particular peculiar profit-driven religion.

You'd have thought that just might have been a clue to Repukes.

I told him that I wound never vote for a republican because we would probably get attacked again. He just changed the subject. lol

I'd use it, except everyone I know is aware of who I'm going to vote for in November, so I'm unlikely to get the chance!

I will spread that far and wide

Keep 'em on the defensive. With TRUTH.

They make him instantly recognizable, which, though they also are targetable, is a desirable, human trait. One the opposition lacks.

I'll be sharing this ad. It's perfectly to the point.

It was the perfect use of the Big Dawg by the Obama campaign. They hit just the right note. It is stunning...

and leave the negative ones about Romney in the bin. This is amazing, teared up when I saw the NY Firemen picture in front of the announcement of Bin Laden's death.

The so-called "Jimmy Carter Syndrome", died an unlamented death on May 1, 2011.

Gotta funny feeling this is one reason W ain't showing up for the GOP convention.

romney says it's not worth moving heaven and earth just to get one man. Everything with him is a cost-benefit analysis. If you're in the business world, you're all in with the bean counters. For you, that's it. That's all it is. That's all there is. That's another reason why you DON'T run government like a business.

If we'd have worried solely about the cost, we'd never have gone to the moon. If we'd worried about the cost, we'd never have interconnected the highway system from coast-to-coast. It would have been this limited, parochial, one-dimensional thinking that reduces everything down to "can I make any money off it?" Or "is there any money in it?" Some things need to be done not JUST for money. Like the interstate highway system. Like NASA. Like the Hoover Dam. Like the Panama Canal. Like any entity that pushes us farther and higher as a people. That provides for the over-arching good. And yeah, it always can get around to "can I make any money off it?" because there are many ways one can generate profits. Any company that moves goods on the interstate highway system, or uses tools and straps and securing components like velcro will benefit financially from these over-arching projects launched and enabled by a public entity that isn't in it just for profit. Okay, if you want to go there, that's what national defense is all about. With the exception of a few private-industry pirates on the contractor front, that's a public enterprise - that government takes charge of and is responsible for.

Removing bin Laden removed more than just one man. He wasn't just some guy. This was the leader, either past or still at that time. He wasn't just a leader, he was a symbol! He'd been shrewd enough to size up the American psyche and had an idea of what he might be able to provoke among American public with an attack like 9/11. He obviously understood what makes people tick. Maybe he was a student of psychology or he just had instincts. He sure sussed us out. And he had the admiration of all those who hate "the Great Satan." He struck and drew blood as none of them have had the nerve to do. Taking him out was a decapitation strike. It destabilized the enemy like no other injury, especially as they clearly had become complacent. After all, this guy evaded capture for how many years? He'd outlasted the big bad blustering bush/cheney machine forcryingoutloud. He was surely invincible. What a body blow to the al Qaeda body politic when that towering, near mythical figure at the top of their zigurrat, that had done something to drive the "Great Satan" completely out of its collective gourd like no other had, was abruptly and decisively taken out. Executed like some common street thug. What a come-down! That kind of strike delivers a lethal blow to the morale of the enemy and really throws them off their game. To take out a leader of THAT stature, that golden, that legendary (even while some had begun to see him as irrelevant and obsolete, even a joke), was a staggering blow. I read, regrettably I forget where, that Barack Obama literally has been the deadliest US President EVER - to al Qaeda and other operatives. Sure sounds like it to me.

There are some things it's undeniably good to have a federal government for. Especially with someone in charge who represents those who believe government is necessary and beneficial, even essential, for various things, rather than the guy who comes from the camp of those who hate government and see little need for it.

The business mindset, the CEO mentality, has NO BUSINESS in the Oval Office, except as a passing visitor.

The facts are that, when Dems are in the majority and in the WH, the country does better on ALL fronts - security, personal finances, employment, benefits, government finances, infrastructure, and on and on. They are ignorant sociopaths

nt

In business, as the CEO, you get to make up the rules for how the game will be played.

A President does not have such freedom, it is a job that is as much servant as leader.

My take on the bottom line of this analysis:

Leaving Osama alive and pulling out the troops was simply not possible. Sooner or later terrorists will pull off an attack somewhere, no defense is perfect. If Osama was still alive at the time he would take credit, even if he had nothing to do with it. At that moment, any policy that pulled the troops without killing him would be instantly deemed a failure of epic proportions. In short there was nothing but assured downside to leaving him alive. The only thing that might work is leaving the troops in place and continuing the hunt, and even that would not work all that well. Until Osama was dead, the war would be endless.

Of course there was little but upside to killing him. With him dead, ending the war becomes tenable, because with him dead, true or not, most will think we did all we could do, regardless of what the future holds.

In 2007 Romney was a Musharaf fan, as was McCain, Bush*, the rest of the repugs, most of the dems and even Hillary. Obama, to his credit was not.

They should be running that everywhere. And it can be just as powerful edited down.

Well done indeed.

The reason your RepubEnron friends are so flummoxed is because Obama's policy used to be their policy, but, as with most everything else, what used to be fundamental conservative policy is now "liberal"?) Democratic policy. Yep, Obama showed that he was a true Rambo by taking out Bin Laden. the only other casualty was the rule of law.

It's called business and it evolves, that is IF it is good functional business that is, and international security evolves in response to it. It is any President's responsibility to EMPIRICALLY (i.e. not ideologically as has been the operating principle in the past adopted by American Exceptionalists) that is . . . to empirically adapt to those LIVING relationships, business:security, in ways that authentically enhance both.

That's an important difference between Republicans and Democrats, Republicans live in abstractions enabled by their wealth and cooked in the pressure cooker of the lowest common denominators amongst us, and Democrats live in the real world with real people and real problems and real solutions.

Rec