PROPAGANDA at work? You decide: Selling Obama

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
“THE POPULIST IN CHIEF” 

The American media, whose sheer numerosity fools many into thinking they offer diversity, presents each day multiple examples of gross misreporting (or blatant omissions) to suit the global political agenda controlled by the capitalist cliques. Past masters of deception, they use many techniques to simulate veracity. In this case, there’s non-too-subtle praise for Obama and by implication, the Dems. This is the kind of item that makes the nutcakes on the right think the media is a liberal conspiracy.  

What flaws do you find in this segment? Incidentally, note how Florida congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, eloquently details a bunch of stuff, that, beginning with the American establishment’s abject subservience to Israel, and when examined through the prism of OWS’ values, quickly escalates to a case of self-incrimination.
________
SOURCE: Jansing & Co. MSNBC, 12.7.11 

 ADVERT PRO NOBIS
________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

IF YOU THINK THE LAMESTREAM MEDIA ARE A DISGRACE AND A HUGE OBSTACLE
to real change in America why haven’t you sent at least a few dollars to The Greanville Post (or a similar anti-corporate citizen’s media?). Think about it.  Without educating and organizing our ranks our cause is DOA. That’s why our new citizens’ media need your support. Send your badly needed check to “TGP, P.O. Box 1028, Brewster, NY 10509-1028.” Make checks out to “P. Greanville/ TGP”.  (A contribution of any amount can also be made via Paypal and MC or VISA.)

THANK YOU.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________

 




Obama plays the populist card

JERRY WHITE, WSWS.ORG
[ANNOTATED] 
 

In what was billed by the White House as a major speech on the economy, President Barack Obama on Tuesday combined a potted review of American history with half-truths and lies in an attempt to present himself as a fighter for social equality and critic of Wall Street.

Obama, who has spent nearly three years in the White House single-mindedly defending the interests of the financial elite, has in recent weeks adopted this populist persona with the aim of derailing the emergence of social protest, in the form of the Occupy Wall Street protests, and seeking to channel it behind his reelection campaign.

Typical of such carefully staged events, the site of Obama’s remarks—Osawatomie, Kansas, where Theodore Roosevelt gave his 1910 “New Nationalism” speech—was chosen for its symbolism. By wrapping himself in the mantle of Roosevelt’s Progressive Era reform agenda, Obama hoped to lend credibility to his improbable pose as a man of the people and opponent of the moneyed interests.

The speech was notable only for its unbridled cynicism. As always, Obama proceeded from the premise that the American people are infinitely gullible and suffer from collective amnesia with regard to the record of his administration.

Editor’s Note:  Quite often the rightwing scum, the filthy flotsam represented by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and similar megalomanic scoundrels, lend credibility to the travesty of a “Leftist Obama,” simply by dint of their foamy, world-upside-down nonstop insults.  The richest of course is to call Obama a Marxist. Obama, the obliging shill for Wall Street , the loyal servitor of the American empire, the instinctive cowardly conservative…is a Marxist! Obviously, only massive cultural (and cultivated) political cluelessness can keep these lies (and the liars) in circulation.—PG

President Obama’s Osawatomie Speech was a Marxist Attack on America

December 07, 2011

Listen to it Button

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT 

Osawatomie Obama’s Waterloo by Judi McLeod
The Canada Free Press 
___________________ 

MAIN ARTICLE TEXT RESUMES HERE
Reviewing the events that led to the financial crash of 2008, Obama declared: “We all know the story by now: Mortgages sold to people who couldn’t afford them, or even sometimes understand them. Banks and investors allowed to keep packaging the risk and selling it off. Huge bets—and huge bonuses—made with other people’s money on the line. Regulators who were supposed to warn us about the dangers of all this, but looked the other way or didn’t have the authority to look at all…

“It combined the breathtaking greed of a few with irresponsibility all across the system. And it plunged our economy and the world into a crisis from which we’re still fighting to recover. It claimed the jobs and the homes and the basic security of millions of people—innocent, hardworking Americans who had met their responsibilities but were still left holding the bag.”

This is a fair description of what amounts to a criminal conspiracy against the people of the United States and the world, carried out by a financial oligarchy that exerts absolute power over the political system. A bit further on Obama declared his commitment to a country where “everyone plays by the same rules.”

Yet under his watch, not a single banker, hedge fund manager or financial regulator has been prosecuted, let alone convicted. On the contrary, the president has handed them the keys to the national treasury and tailored his policies to enable them to continue their speculative activities and make more money than ever.

The fury of the state has been reserved for those who have sought to protest against the plundering of society by the financial elite and the resulting growth of poverty, unemployment and inequality. They, for the most part student youth, have been assaulted by baton-wielding police in riot gear, packing rubber bullets and using pepper spray. The protesters have been arrested in the thousands. Obama, with his silence, has signaled his support for these attacks, carried out for the most part by Democratic mayors.

Obama strained to present his policies as diametrically opposed to those of the Republicans. After the worst economic crisis in eighty years, he said, the Republicans “want to return to the same practices that got us into this mess.”

This from a president who has made “bipartisanship” the watchword of his administration and done his best to restore credibility to the Republicans after they were repudiated in the 2008 election that brought him to power.

In every aspect of domestic and international policy, Obama has continued and escalated the policies of his Republican predecessor. He has gone beyond Bush in slashing social programs, waging aggressive war, and attacking democratic rights—including officially ordering the assassination of American citizens.

After attributing the entire blame for the deregulation of big business and the growth of inequality to the Republicans, ignoring the fact that these processes proceeded apace under Democratic as well as Republican administrations, Obama declared that his solution began with “making education a national mission.”

This is yet another example of shameless hypocrisy from a president who has adopted the education program that was previously the province of the Republican right, and spearheaded an unprecedented assault on the jobs and conditions of teachers and the very principle of public education.

Lodged within the fog of populist phrase-mongering were code words inserted in the speech—verbal winks and nods—to reassure Wall Street: “the free market is the greatest force for economic progress in human history… It’s not a view that says we should punish profit or success… business, and not government, will always be the primary generator of good jobs… This isn’t about class warfare.”

With tens of millions out of work and new reports each week detailing record levels of poverty and inequality, Obama declared that capitalism has “led to a prosperity and a standard of living unmatched by the rest of the world.”

His invocation of Theodore Roosevelt was preposterous on two counts. First, Obama is not proposing the slightest measures to address social inequality, unlike Roosevelt, who, under conditions of emerging class battles and the growth of the socialist movement, advanced a significant bourgeois reform policy, including a progressive taxation system, unemployment compensation, and laws to restrict child labor and establish minimum wages.

Second, Obama falsifies history. These reforms were not showered on the people by benevolent presidents or bosses, they were extracted from the ruling class through mass struggles, involving millions of workers in sit-down strikes and general strikes that rocked entire cities and defied the murderous violence of the employers and the state.

In his 1910 speech, Roosevelt warned, “If the reactionary man, who thinks of nothing but the rights of property, could have his way, he would bring about a revolution.” Over the next half century, the American ruling class was forced, kicking and screaming, to adopt measures that lessened social inequality precisely to avoid revolution.

As is now clear, those concessions to the working class were not permanent. Precisely the failure of the labor movement, due to the treachery and pro-capitalist orientation of the trade union bureaucracy, to break from the Democratic Party and build an independent socialist movement disarmed the working class and allowed the ruling class to wage a counteroffensive.

Obama and the entire bourgeoisie are now seeking to utilize the economic crisis to repeal the 20th century and destroy all the social gains of the working class.

For all his pseudo-populist bluster and his invocation of an earlier period of progressive reform, Obama could offer no serious measures to address the social crisis. His only concrete proposal was passage of an extension of his payroll tax deduction—a measure that is striking only for its hopeless inadequacy. It is fundamentally reactionary to boot, since it will allow corporations to reduce their Social Security taxes, thereby draining the government benefit fund for seniors.

The president’s central focus is to join with the Republicans in shredding what remains of the social safety net. “To reduce our deficit,” he boasted, “I’ve already signed nearly $1 trillion of spending cuts into law and I’ve proposed trillions more, including reforms that would lower the cost of Medicare and Medicaid.”

We will leave it to the professional apologists for the Democratic Party, from the New York Times to the affluent upper-middle class types who occupy the offices of the Nation, the AFL-CIO trade union apparatus and various pseudo-left groups to try to paint in “progressive” colors what has turned out to be the most right-wing administration in modern American history.

For our part, the Socialist Equality Party in the US will do everything in its power to expose those trying to hoodwink the working class with identity politics and the hoary myth of “lesser evilism.” The fight for social equality means the fight for socialism and the independent political mobilization of the working class to take political power in its own hands.

Jerry White is a political analyst with the WSWS.ORG, an organ of the SEP, a socialist organization.

 

 ADVERT PRO NOBIS
________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

IF YOU THINK THE LAMESTREAM MEDIA ARE A DISGRACE AND A HUGE OBSTACLE
to real change in America why haven’t you sent at least a few dollars to The Greanville Post (or a similar anti-corporate citizen’s media?). Think about it.  Without educating and organizing our ranks our cause is DOA. That’s why our new citizens’ media need your support. Send your badly needed check to “TGP, P.O. Box 1028, Brewster, NY 10509-1028.” Make checks out to “P. Greanville/ TGP”.  (A contribution of any amount can also be made via Paypal and MC or VISA.)

THANK YOU.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________

 




The New York Times and the privatization of Medicare

Kate Randall, WSWS.ORG

It is important to be clear from the start. Any proposal that takes money from Medicare and funnels it into the pockets of private insurers—whether in the form of “vouchers” or under the guise of “premium support”—constitutes privatization 

In an editorial published on Sunday, the New York Times discusses the pros and cons of “premium support” for Medicare. As with every Timescommentary devoted to health care “reform” since the Obama administration initiated its campaign to overhaul the US health care system, the editorial is steeped in cynicism and dishonesty.

Headlined “What About Premium Support?” the editorial purports to offer a balanced examination of plans that would give Medicare beneficiaries “a set amount of money to shop among private plans for their own insurance.”

The Times begins by pointing to the “most extreme version of premium support,” proposed by Republican Congressman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, which “would save the government money mainly by shifting costs to the beneficiaries, who would have to decide whether to forgo treatments or pay more for coverage.”

The editorial then notes that while “most Democrats have been fiercely opposed to privatizing Medicare” and believe “the traditional system can be reformed to reduce costs without demolishing the whole structure,” these opinions are now shifting. Due to “concerns about the rising deficit and the long-term sustainability of Medicare,” the editors write, “some centrist Democrats are backing the premium support idea.”

It is important to be clear from the start. Any proposal that takes money from Medicare and funnels it into the pockets of private insurers—whether in the form of “vouchers” or under the guise of “premium support”—constitutes privatization of the government-run health care system for the elderly and disabled.

It means the destruction of Medicare as a universal government health care program—the most significant social program enacted after World War II. The Times’ agenda in weighing the advantages of this or that version of premium support is to promote such privatization.

The Times has relentlessly campaigned for cutting health care costs for the government and the health care industry by reducing supposedly “unnecessary” procedures and “overtreatment” of patients. With the promotion of premium support, it now takes this campaign one step farther.

In Sunday’s editorial, it argues in typically duplicitous fashion that while “it is far too early to talk about scrapping traditional Medicare,” nonetheless “serious analysis and testing of premium support are clearly worth pursuing.” What follows are a series of arguments aimed at concealing the implications of implementing such a proposal.

The best approach to premium support, the Times opines, would protect beneficiaries “from any added costs if competition does not keep prices down.”  The suggestion that either party or any faction of the thoroughly bribed US political establishment would impose price controls on the insurance industry is absurd, and the Times knows it.

The editorial goes on to say patients “could pocket the difference” if they chose a less costly plan, i.e., hard-pressed seniors would be driven to sacrifice health care to pay for rent and food.

The editors then get to what really concerns them: whether under the pressure of rising premiums patients “will think seriously about whether they need a costly CT scan.”

“We are skeptical,” they write, “that patients who are chronically ill or nearing the end of life … would second-guess their doctors and choose cheaper care.” The Times’ subtext is that people are living too long and receiving too many costly services and that any reform of Medicare must impose draconian cuts on such “end of life” care.

The closing paragraphs of the editorial point out that implementation of the Obama health care plan will provide a testing ground for the destruction of Medicare. Under the legislation, the government will provide subsidies to lower-income individuals and families to purchase private insurance on an insurance “exchange”—i.e., another form of premium support. The big question, the Times notes, is “whether premium support can work to hold down costs while providing good coverage.”

They already know the answer to this question: the overriding objective of Obama’s health care overhaul is to slash benefits for ordinary Americans while cutting costs for government and boosting the profits of private insurers, pharmaceutical companies and health care providers. The Timeshas consistently supported this agenda.

What Obama presented to the public in his presidential campaign as a drive for universal health care became, once he took office, a drive to cut costs. Now, with the endorsement of the main organ of the liberal Democratic Party establishment, its socially counterrevolutionary essence is revealed in support for the destruction of Medicare. And why should the axe stop there? The very same arguments can—and will—be used to justify the gutting of Social Security.

More than two year ago, as Obama’s health care plan began to take shape, the World Socialist Web Site warned: “His drive for an overhaul of the health care system, far from representing a reform designed to provide universal coverage and increased access to quality care, marks an unprecedented attack on health care for the working population. It is an effort to roll back social gains associated with the enactment of Medicare in 1965.” This analysis has been thoroughly vindicated.

The attack on Medicare, Social Security and other social programs is part of a broader assault on working class living standards being carried out by the ruling class and its political representatives in the US and internationally. At the same time that the US political establishment moves to destroy Medicare, it squanders trillions to subsidize the banks and prosecute a growing list of imperialist wars.

The Socialist Equality Party urges working people to adopt the standpoint that quality health care and a secure retirement, along with good-paying jobs, education and housing, are basic and inalienable social rights. These rights must, however, be fought for through the mass, independent mobilization of the working class.

They are incompatible with the crisis-ridden capitalist system. They can be secured only through a revolutionary political struggle against the Obama administration and both big business parties on the basis of a socialist program, including the nationalization of the insurance conglomerates, drug companies and health care corporations and their placement under public ownership and the democratic control of the working class.

Kate Randall is a political analyst with the WSWS.ORG, a socialist organization. 

 ADVERT PRO NOBIS
________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

IF YOU THINK THE LAMESTREAM MEDIA ARE A DISGRACE AND A HUGE OBSTACLE
to real change in America why haven’t you sent at least a few dollars to The Greanville Post (or a similar anti-corporate citizen’s media?). Think about it.  Without educating and organizing our ranks our cause is DOA. That’s why our new citizens’ media need your support. Send your badly needed check to “TGP, P.O. Box 1028, Brewster, NY 10509-1028.” Make checks out to “P. Greanville/ TGP”.  (A contribution of any amount can also be made via Paypal and MC or VISA.)

THANK YOU.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________

 




Occupy Atlanta Demands FCC Stop Privatization of New Broadcast Channels

The FCC has complete footage, but has so far refused to post the video. 
FURTHER ACTION IS IMPERATIVE. 

 ADVERT PRO NOBIS
________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

IF YOU THINK THE LAMESTREAM MEDIA ARE A DISGRACE AND A HUGE OBSTACLE
to real change in America why haven’t you sent at least a few dollars to The Greanville Post (or a similar anti-corporate citizen’s media?). Think about it.  Without educating and organizing our ranks our cause is DOA. That’s why our new citizens’ media need your support. Send your badly needed check to “TGP, P.O. Box 1028, Brewster, NY 10509-1028.” Make checks out to “P. Greanville/ TGP”.  (A contribution of any amount can also be made via Paypal and MC or VISA.)

THANK YOU.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________