Crush Liberalism

Liberalism: Why think when you can “feel”?

Obama’s jackbooted administration, the precursor

The One has mighty thin skin these days.  First, he threatens TV stations and networks with criminal investigations if they dare to run truthful ads that link him to domestic terrorist Bill Ayers.  Then, he goes after GOP donors who haven’t swigged his Kool-Aid.  Now, there’s this:

Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign organized its supporters Wednesday night to confront Tribune-owned WGN-AM in Chicago for having a critic of the Illinois Democrat on its air.

“WGN radio is giving right-wing hatchet man Stanley Kurtz a forum to air his baseless, fear-mongering terrorist smears,” Obama’s campaign wrote in an e-mail to supporters. “He’s currently scheduled to spend a solid two-hour block from 9:00 to 11:00 p.m. pushing lies, distortions, and manipulations about Barack and University of Illinois professor William Ayers.”

Kurtz, a conservative writer, recently wrote an article for the National Review that looked at Obama’s ties to Ayers, a former 1960s radical who later emerged as a school reform advocate in Chicago.

The magazine had been blocked in its initial attempts to obtain records from the University of Illinois at Chicago regarding a school reform initiative called the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which Obama chaired and Ayers co-founded.

Obama critics were quick to suggest that political clout could be involved in seeking to protect Obama from embarrassment. The school later reserved its position and made the records available Tuesday.

On Wednesday evening, Obama’s campaign urged supporters to call the radio station to complain.

“Tell WGN that by providing Kurtz with airtime, they are legitimizing baseless attacks from a smear-merchant and lowering the standards of political discourse,” the note said.  (Apparently, calling someone a “smear-merchant” does not “lower the standards of political discourse”, does it? – Ed.

“It is absolutely unacceptable that WGN would give a slimy character assassin (Here’s guessing the irony of that expression is lost on the morons running O’s campaign. – Ed.) like Kurtz time for his divisive, destructive ranting on our public airwaves,” the note continued. “At the very least, they should offer sane, honest rebuttal to every one of Kurtz’s lies.”

OK, good point.  The radio show could have at least allowed O’s side some rebuttal time.  Well…

Christenson said the Obama campaign was asked to have someone appear on the show and declined the request.

“He got into the files just yesterday, so we wanted to have him on to find out what he found. And, if at all possible, we wanted to get the Obama campaign, to get their side of the story,” Christenson said. “That’s why the uproar is kind of amazing, because we wanted the Obama campaign’s take as well.”
…
Obama’s campaign has launched similar offensives against stations that have run campaign ads that it did not like.

Interesting that the Obamessiah accuses the president of using heavy-handed tactics to squash dissent (with little evidence that this has happened), yet O as a candidate is trying to get the DOJ and their other thugs to do the same thing they accuse Bu$hitler McCheneyburton of doing.  It makes you wonder how a (God help us) President Obama would use the DOJ in his administration, with the full power of the federal government at his disposal.

August 28, 2008 - Posted by crushliberalism | Obama, corruption, media bias, shameful | | 10 Comments

10 Comments »

  1. This cheap African dictator offers nothing but misery.

    Comment by harddriller | August 28, 2008

  2. The concept of an Obama tyranny truly frightens me, especially with fellow totalitarians like Pelosi in power. I’m sure they’ll extend their “fairness” doctrine to limit all media speech. Oh, did I say “limit”? I meant, “make correct.”

    Comment by JsinGood | August 28, 2008

  3. Pack your bags, you’re heading to an O-gulag for daring speak out against Chairman Obama.

    Comment by Reverse_Vampyr | August 28, 2008

  4. I’m scared Obama is gonna take away more of our liberties as if they aren’t already under assault.

    Comment by Chilerkle | August 28, 2008

  5. “the Obama campaign was asked to have someone appear on the show and declined the request.”

    Willing to meet unconditionally with leaders of rogue nations with aspirations of world domination and destruction of United States? Check.

    Willing to appear on local radio show in Chicago to rebut facts of his relationship with a domestic terrorist? Not a chance, pal.

    Of Kurtz:

    “right-wing hatchet man”
    “fear-mongering”
    “smear-merchant”
    “slimy character assassin”
    “divisive”
    “destructive”

    All for what? Discussing documented facts? Where were all of these colorful metaphors when Obama drudged up Jack Ryan’s divorce records in his 2004 Senate bid? Smear-merchant indeed.

    Comment by TheBad | August 28, 2008

  6. so the mod of this board doesn’t have the balls to keep my post up calling you a racist. pathetic weener.

    Comment by elfranko | August 29, 2008

  7. Actually, “Franko”, I don’t usually allow pointless, mindless verbal diarrhea likes yours to come through because it doesn’t contribute to the conversation.

    It takes no functional brain cells to spew a “racist/sexist/homophobic/(insert baseless slur du jour here)” with no basis to your claim. For you barking, tinfoil moonbats, normal Americans who oppose your Obamessiah on his policies aren’t doing so based on genuine disagreement, but on “racism”. Your intellectual laziness does not impress me.

    BTW, your bosses at [company name here] may not appreciate you using the company computers to engage in political activity like this. And with the sheer eloquence with which you speak, can the general public expect a similar display from your company’s [company's services here] professionals? Get back to work, loser.

    You guys wanted a moonbat to play with? Have at him. Consider it an early Christmas present.

    Comment by crushliberalism | August 29, 2008

  8. so other than divulging ways to attacking me personally and possibly causing me to lose my job and threatening my family’s security is your version of “contributing to the conversation? don’t you have any shame?

    Comment by elfranko | August 29, 2008

  9. so other than divulging ways to attacking me personally

    Good point. I mean, after all, “racist” and “pathetic weener” aren’t personal attacks, are they?

    don’t you have any shame?

    See the aforementioned “racist” and “pathetic weener” comments you left. I should be asking you that question, you hypocritical jerk. Now p#ss off.

    If you want to engage in a substantive argument of policy differences, fine by me. Heck, most of here would love to hear why you think it’s OK for The One to be engaging in Nazi-like stormtrooper “1984″-esque tactics. But your drivel gives the impression that you’re just an emotional b#tch incapable of informed dialogue.

    BTW, if it makes you feel any better, I edited out your employer’s name above. Next time, pick your words and your fights more carefully.

    Comment by crushliberalism | August 29, 2008

  10. “and possibly causing me to lose my job”

    Typical liberal. Is it Jon’s fault that you are doing something at your job that you should not? It’s called accountability, sir. Take responsibility for your actions.

    Comment by TheBad | August 30, 2008


Leave a comment

« Previous | Next »