Hold The Presses, We’ve Found An Honest Democrat

Loading

In this modern time, no one expects a Democrat to be honest, not the public, not the media, not Democrats, and especially not the Progressives and Liberals. Lying is the accepted modus operandi, every bit of news or public announcement from the Obama administration and its mainstream media is considered propaganda at best and often just a bald-faced lie. It’s no big deal; the public has accepted the fact that Obama lies as a matter of course. He is a liar and they love him for his arrogant manner of pretending people believe his lies.

Pat Caddel, former advisor to President Carter, has put this culture of lies into proper perspective; he has called the main stream media, an “enemy of the people” during an Accuracy in Media conference on September 21st.

Every person who believes in the Constitution should watch these videos:

[youtube]http://youtu.be/brDZJA8j-8c[/youtube]

[youtube]http://youtu.be/tjN4t_gSEcY[/youtube]

From the Speech:

When they desert those ramparts and decide that they will now become active participants, that their job is not simply to tell you who you may vote for, and who you may not, but, worse—and this is the danger of the last two weeks—what truth that you may know, as an American, and what truth you are not allowed to know, they have, then, made themselves a fundamental threat to the democracy, and, in my opinion, made themselves the enemy of the American people.

Notice this ship’s guns are firing and will keep firing till it goes to the bottom, sinks the enemy, or runs out of ammo. That is the spirit of our military, despite Obama.

Without a doubt the media is threatening the concept of our freedom by being in the tank for Obama. For the first time in our history the media is threatening our freedom of speech with their flagrant disregard for the truth.

These are Obama’s friends, he borrows money from China to give to these savages and figures our grandchildren can worry about paying it back

Gone forever is the media’s lofty opinion of itself and self anointed title they bestowed on themselves during the 20th Century by declaring themselves, America’s Fourth Estate. There was a time when the media implied knowledge and judgement; now, no one, least of all the Obama administration, considers them more than lap dog sycophants ready, willing, and able to spread whatever fantasy the Obama administration decides to spin in order to win an election.

Freedom isn’t free
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
14 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Thanks Skook! Another timely and on-point post.

Awe, he’s found another term—instead of ‘useful idiots’—to rely on for his description of those he doesn’t like, “sycophants”.

Say there Lib, oh dense one, I’ve used a lot more descriptive terms for you and your innate stupidity. Referring to you as a sycophant would be a compliment. Useful Idiot implies value, a limited or temporary value, but you serve no useful purpose to anyone.

Sycophant has Greek roots.
Apparently a person made a sign of a fig when he made an accusation.
(Whatever a sign of a fig is.)
Over time the term evolved from accuser to flatterer.
Other terms include:
toady
lackey
apple polisher
bootlicker
fawner
groveler
adulator

But a useful idiot describes people perceived as propagandists for a cause whose goals they do not fully understand. Useful idiots are used cynically by leaders who hold them in contempt at the same time.
Useful idiots are always surprised when their beloved leader turns on them at the end.
They honestly and naively swallowed the idea that their cause was good, when it was really not.
Yes, some of the media are useful idiots.
And some of the media are sycophants.
Useful idiots are more useful to those they idolize than mere flatterers, however.
They will go beyond flattery to cover up and minimize shortcomings.

AIM (probably in the archives) ran some articles on Western Journalism and the professors at prestigious universtites who had actually ties to the old USSR, including the New York Times: names like ER Murrow (my mind escape me on others) time allowing I will get back here. But really worth the read. It may be in Cliff Kincaid’s USA Survival link off Accuracy In Media.

OT: but have to comment on the website here. It makes me hungry-like hot chocolate, fudge…..

@Liberal1 (Objectivity): So says the one who has never stood for anything. Liberalism is the cowards way out, stand for everything, stand for nothing, apply the rules to all, but not me. Useful idiot, not so much, at least for the useful part and prefer a more direct definition…Ass Hat….Yeah…That works…

@Sua Sponte: This is just Lib1 being Lib1. Lib1, like most Libs have nothing better to do than scan the web to spew their hatred (more than likely government handout recipient). Now that Internet addiction disorder (IAD), is considered a mental illness Lib1 can receive even more free cash from the government. So, don’t let this one get to you, it’s what Libs obsess to do (another disorder, more free money, go Lib1, go).

Skook,

Imagine if there were more Caddells. I like to compare him with the late Senator Moynihan. There was an honest Democrat and a good man. didn’t always agree with him, but a good man none the less. One hopes Pat’s is not the lone voice in the wilderness.

Nan G
psycho fan seems to fit also like a brother,
bye

Without going into the merits (or not) of Caddell’s arguments, let me only point out that rumors as to his being a “Democrat” (much less an honest one) are somewhat exaggerated, I think. From Wiki:

In 1988, Caddell left the Democratic Party after an acrimonious lawsuit with a Democratic consulting firm, Caddell, Doak and Shrum. Republicans would often cite Caddell’s tirades against the Democratic Party when they spoke on the floor of the House and the Senate.[3][4][5]

According to researchers, Caddell had wide influence in the Carter White House, and was the chief advocate of what later became known as Carter’s “malaise speech”.[6]

His analysis on polls and campaign issues often puts him at odds with the current leadership of the Democratic Party. He has been criticized for predicting the downfall of the Democratic party.[7][8] Critics point out that he has defended the Bush administration by arguing that Republicans did not exploit the issue of gay marriage in the presidential election of 2004.[citation needed] He also denounced Democrats in the House who voted against the Palm Sunday Compromise, which sought to reinstate Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube, as “cold blooded,”[citation needed] and called environmentalism “a conspiracy ‘to basically deconstruct capitalism.'”[1]

Caddell is a regular guest on the Fox News Channel, and he is listed as an official ‘Fox News Contributor’. This has earned him the label of a “Fox News Democrat” by critics such as liberal opinion magazine Salon.com[1] He has also frequently appeared on the conservative website Ricochet.com discussing politics.[9][10][11]

According to Slate, Caddell was involved in identifying people willing to participate in the anti-Obama documentary The Hope and the Change, produced by Citizens United. Currently Caddell takes almost exclusively pro-Republican positions, so in many political circles, he is now considered a Republican.

@openid.aol.com/runnswim:

To begin with, no one who wants to provide a reputable source would quote Wikipedia since articles are accepted without letting the reader know who the author is. Kind of like being able to bash someone without being subject to scrutiny yourself.

What Caddell is is a JFK Democrat. Ironic that the left will tell us how the right needs to move to the middle, but when a Democrat like Pat Caddell, and Zell Miller, move away from the far left and are the centrists that the Democrats make the false claim they are, they get bashed by their own.

As to being a “Fox News Democrat”, so is Bob Beckel, inspite of Beckel’s love for cocaine and hookers, along with a number of other “Fox News Democrats” like Gerald Rivera, Juan Williams, and someone who garners not just one hour on Fox, but two, Shepard Smith.

Your Wiki source also links to a couple of far left websites; Salon and Media Matters, both who will bash any Democrat who dares to wander off the plantation and think that the Democrat Party was stronger, better, and more honest during the days of FDR and JFK. Also, the article wrongly labels Ricochet as conservative; it is libertarian, not conservative.

Nice try, Larry, but no cigar.

Hi Retire, Thank you for your perspective on Caddell. On another thread (by now long since dead), you asked me a question. I missed this, because my F/A notification email address is routed through a web domain which I renewed for a period of 9 years on Sept 30, 2003 and which had, unbeknownst to me, been inactivated by Network Solutions on Sept 30, 2012, because they had the wrong email address to notify me of the impending expiration data. I just last night renewed for another ten years (takes me to 2022 — I should live that long), and about 47 emails from the F/A server downloaded at once and I caught yours.

Anyway, I just scribbled out an answer about an hour ago — here it is:

http://floppingaces.net/most_wanted/obamacare-is-pro-market-like-the-berlin-wall-was-pro-migrant/comment-page-1/#comment-389241

– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA

Larry, I’ve been working; consequently, I am late for my journalism duties, but a little more prepared to withstand the ravages of the Obama Economy.

The title implies that Caddell is a Democrat, as does the video subtitle and the fact that he was an advisor to former President Carter. In my perusal of Caddell’s career, I found no mention of a conversion.

Perhaps, there are many Democrats who are unimpressed with the direction of the party and are not going to vote for Obama, much like the Gore debacle. If you remember, Democrats claimed to have voted for Gore to the exit pollsters, but the vote tallies told a different story. The Democrats’ first reaction was to cry foul, but if you think about the reasons we have secret ballots, it is precisely to avoid the situation where people feel compelled to vote a certain way because of external pressures. Obviously Caddell doesn’t feel pressured, but he is not in the least intimidated by party pressure or official party lines. To feel intimidated by friends, neighbors, unions, party officials or anyone is wrong, and who can blame people for not wanting recriminations for voting against the Democrat Party.

My circumlocution is to state that Claddell may well be a true Democrat, but he is loyal to the Democrat Party of the past. If you are of the school that believes you can’t be a Democrat unless you follow without deviation, then you are far less of a man than I had judged you to be. I have met a few former Obama voters who are not only worried about the direction of the country, but they are worried if the country can survive another Obama presidency. Should they not be considered Democrats or do they have a greater grasp of reality and perhaps a greater conscience?