Obama: Bush is using “subliminal messages”
posted at 10:47 am on May 12, 2006 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
I knew something wasn’t quite right when he turned out on May Day to gladhand “the undocumented”. Now we get this:
“This idea,” Obama said, “that somehow if you say the words ‘plan for victory’ and ’stay the course’ over and over and over and over again and you put these subliminal messages behind you that say ‘victory’ and ‘victory’ and ‘victory,’ that somehow people are not going to notice the 2,400 flag-draped coffins that have arrived at the Dover Air Force Base.”
The first-term lawmaker asked the audience: “People, have we flipped? It’s time to say we notice it. It is time to say that we care, and we are not going to settle anymore.”
Here’s an example. See if you can spot the “subliminal” message:
Did you see it? No? That’s because it’s subliminal.
As for his point about people “not noticing” the number of KIA in Iraq, it’s the same feeble garbage the left pulled during the supposed media blackout of Colbert. No matter how much coverage there actually is/was, they knew they could squeeze a little more out by accusing the press — horrors! — of being in Bush’s pocket. Never mind that Nightline has devoted entire shows to reading the names of the dead; that the Washington Post, not to mention the Pentagon itself, keeps a running tally on its website; that Bush regularly reminds the public of the human cost by visiting injured soldiers; that the poll numbers on Iraq indicate quite clearly that people have noticed.
Never mind all of it. Obama figures, rightly, that as defeatist as the media is, it can always be a little more defeatist, and what better way to encourage that than by accusing people of being poorly informed about how badly things are going? It’s the same strategy seen in leftist whining about the “Democratic boogeyman” Rove’s going to conjure up to frighten people into voting GOP this November. It’s a way of de-legitimizing any criticism of Democrats, no matter how nutty they might be: if at any point the media asks the question of whether the left is too extreme to govern, liberals can simply point back to their warnings about the Democratic boogeyman and accuse the press of “playing into Rove’s hands.” Lapdogs for the administration, you see. Like Richard Cohen.
Anyway. VDH lampoons media defeatism this morning by trying his hand at an old staple of the warblogs, the “how would today’s press cover WWII?” piece. The comparison’s a bit unfair — for one thing, there’s no advance towards an enemy capital to point to in Iraq as concrete proof of military progress — but the larger point is well taken. RTWT.
Update: Geraghty on the Democratic boogeyman. Doesn’t he know he’s playing into Rove’s hands???
Update: Pelosi just lost her posting privileges at dKos.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
This from the guy who thinks Lincoln wasn’t a great man.
Vincenzo on May 12, 2006 at 10:55 AM
Americans are losing the victory in Europe”
Ropera on May 12, 2006 at 11:11 AM
This is great… the more these Democrat morons sound like their supporter moonbats at DU and Daily Kos, the more I’m convinced 2006 and 2008 will change nothing. I can’t imagine that “normal” liberals… if there are any left, can warm up to this silly rhetoric… it’s pretty scary if I’m wrong!
When 60% plus think the NSA is doing things right, it gives me hope, that the majority of Americans are smart enough to see through the Democratic strategy.
Bob Mileti on May 12, 2006 at 11:13 AM
The VDH thing was great.
Great White, you are out of line.
moc23 on May 12, 2006 at 11:18 AM
Great White’s comment has been deleted, and if I see something like that again, he’s gone.
Allahpundit on May 12, 2006 at 11:19 AM
It only makes sense. Living in Illinois, being the junior Senator to the “Great Doofus” Dick Durbin. It was bound to rub off.
kem on May 12, 2006 at 11:52 AM
Dang! Came here too late. I’ve been booted from many a blog. Good to see where the line is drawn so you know the level of the owner. Oh well, maybe next time. I tend to get pretty passionate and matter-of-fact too, surprised some of my comments stand. I’m sure I’ll get a reminder if needed.
IMO, Sen. obama is a fake phony fool, and the fact that he is here just shows the level of guilt and self loathing in his supporters. Remember why Rush was booted from MNF? This is the same bull. We heard it last election: **gushing profusely** “obama! wonderful, courageous, brilliant, dynamic, awesome, godlike, superstar nova of the Dim party!” ad nauseum. Crap. He’s a lousy actor, reminds me of that Chomsky idiot or a bad SNL part read by a third grade stuart smally.
That being said, I’d still pick obama over dick turbin. Fellas, everyone knows you’re a couple anti-American plastic liars, but you could at least try to look sincere. Bah! Il lawmakers are a sour joke.
ecamorg on May 12, 2006 at 1:06 PM
Senator Obama continues to prove that there is no end to the depths of silly, lunatic MoonBat Paranoia the Democrats will obliginly, futily plumb.
Jack.
Jack Deth on May 12, 2006 at 2:45 PM
Osama Obama is a militant racist. I don’t like this phony guy and don’t think he’s all that smart. He impressed with his own importance and elevates himself as the dems new prophet. I’ve got my own subliminal message for him and it ain’t nice (nor printable).
doingwhatican on May 13, 2006 at 11:10 AM
Ah shucks, now I’m curious. What did “GreatWhite” say that was so offensive? Gee, perhaps Allahpundit, Bryan, and MM herself, need to have a top secret stash of offensive comments so that we all may see what is offensive, the antonym of which would be, by definition, acceptable stuff!
Actually, what’s offensive, in my humble opinion, is censorship itself. LGF does it, the DNC does it, foreign devils in China do it, the Great Mullahs of Iran do it, Saddam did it, so why am I complaining so much? I guess it comes down to the fact that the First Amendment only applies to governmental censorship and us individuals, including corporate individuals can do what we wish regarding our own spaces!
Still, I must yearn for that top secret stash of offensive sayings and/or quotes to be available. Of course, I would promise, without crossing my fingers or toes, to wash my mouth out with soap after viewing those offensive words, phrases, or pictures(?)!
Ps: I’ve been warned, I guess, by “Greatwhite’s” example!
DougW on May 13, 2006 at 6:46 PM
Dear Allahpundit,
If the guys above who missed my post want me to repost it, then me know and I will repost. It was a one liner said in jest which clearly was not read as such and so the next blogger/s and Allahpundit ‘DECIDED’ that it was not acceptable.
I find it unacceptable that Allahpundit would remove a post as it was an OPINION I had made and it was not for him to like or dislike what I had to say.
Let me see if I understand the concept of ‘blogs’.
We are told blogs have ’sprung’ up ‘everywhere’ in response to the need for ordinary folk to speak their minds whereas in the dark days, they could only have hoped to send a letter to a MSM and if your letter sat outside the ideology of the paper, you could forget about it being heard.
So the mighty blogsphere arose to fill that gap where people could say what was on their minds. Postings on this blog and others should be about the first amendment right i.e. freedom of speech and the freedom to speak your mind freely. Voltaire wrote: I may not like what you are saying but I will defend with my life your right to say it.
If I or anyone else has posted something on this blog which the administrator ‘Allahpundit’ decides is not appropriate (to whom??!) then this is not a truly free blog is is? I won’t participate in a blog that censors viewpoints.
Of course, postings that are vulgar, crude or discuss matters not related to the blog’s heading can be edited out.
Allahpundit that is your sole missive. Accusing someone of being a rat, is acceptable, is seems to you. Calling another a liar, a cheat, a leftist, apologist, leftist Marxist is also acceptable to you. The kind of statements that to me are far worse than the statement I made which did not involve me calling either of the abovementioned.
To deny my freedom to state a view which you may or may agree with is not your call. I made an opinion, albeit in jest but you are free to interpret it as you see fit. You don’t have to like it but I was on the subject and made a slight offline comment in jest and YOU decided no, no.
Well, you certainly do not have to like my opinions, just as I do not have to like the constant daily ramblings by you and Michelle over the immigrant issue and Bush – bashing.
But I read it anyway, shaking my head on those points I disagree with and approving others where they makes sense. The same principle applies I presume, that just as you can ‘kick’ me out, I will kick this blog out because I disagree with way you are raising some of the issues?
The bottom line is this, and it goes to all the bloggers reading this, (at least until Allahpundit removes it) if this blog-site is going to censor what people post, then it is going to find it will become stale with the same few usual suspects bothering to post and comments will be repeated.
This blog needs to stand out, ala Howard Stern, shake some people, rattle some cages, get on the map. Just plodding along playing it safe means you’ve created just another mediocre blog that will meander along completely unnoticed.
So, today, Allahpundit, in view of my statements above, I require that you DE-REGISTER ME FORTHWITH from this blog.
Do not bother to reply as I will be deleting your bookmark as soon as I have posted this comment and I shall not return. You have my email if you wish to discuss this.
Great White on May 13, 2006 at 6:53 PM
As Maha-Raji Rushie would say, you don’t like Microsoft, start your own.
Wade on May 13, 2006 at 7:09 PM
This discussion shall continue here and on other blogs in spite of my wishes, AP’s, or Greatwhite’s either. I think I know what AP is trying to prevent and that’s admirable of itself. God knows that none of us should give the trolls or other Socialist types any ammunition in our fight of words against their forces of darkness and that their many ad hominid attacks are full of savage such attacks on us good guys of the world!
Still, the subject sticks in my craw and will remain there even after my fullest understanding passes all.
VDH’s article was masterful and he and Zell Miller shall go down in history as masters of the journalistic put down! For those not familiar with Zell Miller’s Iwo Jima satire, it also torched the souls of today’s PC journalists, especially the airhead, ignorant ones and those of the perky bouncy types!
DougW on May 13, 2006 at 7:20 PM
One can never understate the loss of even a single soldier, but the “2,400″ number should be placed in context. There is an excellent table at http://www.cwc.lsu.edu/other/stats/warcost.htm (Table II, Casualties) that should receive more widespread attention. I’ll leave it to you all to draw your own conclusions, but let me just point out one interesting figure: in WWII, the number of KIA _per_month_ was 6,639 (!)
ixi on May 14, 2006 at 3:07 PM
Comment pages: