The issue under discussion at MSNBC is a book by Peter Schweizer called Clinton Cash it is a #1 best seller on Amazon, $16.00 for Kindle. What? And $17.00 for hardcover. The book documents the patterns of corruption that lead to congressional resignations and new laws, the ties between Clinton's personal fortune, their foundation, and foreign nations.
Schweizer reveals the Clinton’s troubling dealings in Kazakhstan, Colombia, Haiti, and other places at the “wild west” fringe of the global economy. In this blockbuster exposé, Schweizer merely presents the troubling facts he’s uncovered. Meticulously researched and scrupulously sourced, filled with headline-making revelations, Clinton Cash raises serious questions of judgment, of possible indebtedness to an array of foreign interests, and ultimately, of fitness for high public office.I don't think I'll buy the book nor read it. It will make me sad. There my head will be filled with all these awful details and I'll end up knowing all about how dreadful these people are and I'll know exactly why. It will pour out of me in conversation in torrent ruinously for myself and I do not want that. No. this is not for me. I'm on tilt already. This is not what I live for. Okay, so what went on?
The book is damaging, obviously. It must be countered. Media Matters to the rescue. On the job and with alacrity Media Matters assembled a 7,000 word offense against its author. It does take the simplest of all minds available to ask the most direct and straightforward and child-like question, "How can you know if the claims are legitimate when the book hasn't been released and you have not read it?" Brock concedes he had not read the book.
Another panelist asks Brock if he's more interested in attacking the author or in getting to facts. Brock obfuscates, dissimilates and attacks along usual lines.
Brock claims the ability to smell a put up job a mile away, and I believe him. Cynically, Brock adds that any doubter should check Clinton's record and that's where the dullest of all lit right up, "We can't!"
MSNBC finally having enough of David Brock's bs is the subject of the post at National Review.
This is how you know when a personality is collapsed. Brock sees or smells or whatever political put-ups a mile away, of course he does, he sees them everywhere, but he didn't see that kindergarden-level contradiction out of his mouth. Glaring as that is, it did not occur to Brock what did occur to the thickest individual on the stupidest cable network of all. That is what is interesting to me. Not Clinton. Not her corrupted family foundation. Not the book that talks about this, but rather, what happened to Brock? I saw him on tv a decade ago and he had not yet tipped off the cliff. This is a story in his own photos of a gay boy who went to Washington intense with magnetic attraction to power so that he'd do anything to be near it and latch onto it, connect with it however possible, fuse with it however he could, he lived and breathed ate and shat the desire to be part of national power, and what became of him.
32 comments:
He's schmarmy and greasy - the perfect appearance for a Clinton evil troll. Media Matters. & now we know why. The Clintons would collapse without the blue media covering for them.
Brock - OK he looks like a troll but he's the ultimate highly paid leech-lackey-mobster.
When you fail on the most epic of failure networks - that's some major bottom feeding failure.
It's a race to the bottom om the left.
He's really greyed. He should dye his hair!.
Stages of evolution into an entirely politicized being.
“a political put-up job, and I can smell it a mile away.”
Sounds like the pundit version of "No, I don't know him, but I know his type."
I did not know the Bronki Beat video is so compelling. Never saw it before. I like that a lot.
If I needed someone to stick up for me, David Brock would be the last person I would choose.
Fox Judge Napolitano said that If these allegations are true they easily top what Menendez is being charged with.
Chip - do you hate him more for being comfortable outside of the closet or because he found the political right to be a more easily pilloried house of cards than the left?
Hating him for simply aging doesn't seem like it could really be the point. Unless you believe he should still be thumping to the beat in skinny pants at your favorite discos even at his age.
I really hope you don't still do that.
I didn't know he was gay. I really don't care one way or the other. He's a parasitic troll who got in bed with the Clintons to manipulate reality, push false narratives and hide all the various types and quantities of Clinton corruption. Media Matters.
Besides, he needs to shake it up and dye his hair. He really is a human troll doll. (lol - John)
Chip that was epic.
Especially; " I don't think I'll buy the book nor read it. It will make me sad. There my head will be filled with..."
And
" it did not occur to Brock what did occur to the thickest individual on the stupidest cable network of all"
Hoo-aah!
His last picture suggests medical problems and/or unwise plastic surgery.
The naked greed and corruption of the Hill & Bill Partnership! Bold as brass. It stuns. No forgiveness for the Republicans if they don't make this issue #1 and keep it front and center should she be the Dem candidate.
Everyone ages, but monetizing the immanetization of the eschaton really takes it's toll, y'all. King Putt's looking greyer these days, too. Lying leaves a mark.
Here's my perspective on David Brock.
I worked in D.C. during the Clinton Administration, for a national lobbying organization, on the conservative side. We were trying to stop bad legislation (we succeeded) and then hold those who voted wrong accountable (we succeeded), and that was part of the GOP takeover in 1994. I don't mean my group did it all; we did our part. And then, when the GOP took over, we were trying to move the ball on good legislation; we got some votes, which is very worthwhile.
I left to enter the seminary in 1997, right when things shifted from issue-focus to full-time Clinton-destroying.
Meanwhile, Brock was doing his thing, which was all about Clinton-destroying. He was at the American Spectator, churning out all those stories about Clinton. TAS rode that issue hard, getting their "moment in the sun"; and Brock, in turn, got his. He probably had a lot of doors open, or hoped for that. According to Wikipedia (!) he got $300,000 a year from TAS. They had a bunch of money back then, apparently.
Here's the thing. Lots of people were trying to oppose the left agenda in those days, but some did it the way I was, focusing on issues, some did it, focusing on destroying people's reputations. They all were called "conservative," and they overlapped.
Brock had his second thoughts; later he said he did some shady things. I've known some people over the years who have these "conversions," where they renounce politics and their former associates -- but in reality, what happens is they feel bad for things they did. That's more about them, and their choices, than the movement they were part of.
Another angle on this. There's no denying that along with those political movements that are all about "the cause," (left or right), you've got people who are really all about the moolah. Of course they don't own up to that, but that's the truth of it. You generally know who these people are on your own side; and as someone who was about "the cause," I and my compadres held the money-seekers in contempt.
One more thing. Once Brock started turning on his friends on the right, where was he going to go? He could have left politics; but if not, then he has to find new friends. I kind of doubt he can do this again, and go back to the conservative side.
BTW, when I said things shifted, in 1997, to full time Clinton-destroying, I didn't mean for the folks I worked with; I meant, for Clinton's opposition in Congress.
I was just searching for info about Brock, and I found this article (http://articles.latimes.com/1997-06-16/local/me-3870_1_david-brock) from 1997. Here are the last few paragraphs:
Brock is trying to retain conservative beliefs and his self-respect. He has publicly repudiated Aldrich for printing the Clinton rendezvous rumor as fact. But Brock says he still stands by his reporting about "Paula" and the Arkansas troopers--with one exception. Despite his belief that the story is true, "If the troopers came to me today with that same story, I'm not sure I would do it," he said. "I've had second thoughts."
What bothers Brock is that his reporting has seduced conservatives into pointless personal hatred of the Clintons, rather than focusing on principled argument against their policies.
But where does he go now? Most of the conservative outlets that trumpeted Brock's charges--the American Spectator, the New York Post, the Weekly Standard, the Washington Times--are money losers subsidized by their conservative owners because they print ideologically reliable propaganda for the conservative cause.
Brock just quit that team.
I bolded the part I agreed with then, and agree with now. The last part sounds about right as well.
i always played the song Small Town Boy when I was in Waunakee WI
There is a video of Jimmy Sommerville walking by a guy in the street singing Small Town Boy. Jimmy stops and sings with him-the guy flips when he figure outs he is Jimmy.
Jimmy Sommerville is also gay.
Another heartwarming 'mo anecdote from Titus.
We've been watching this story unfold for almost 25 years.
Even when Willie went down to Haiti, we knew he was pulling his usual shenanigans.
But it is nice to see it in print.
Can't wait for the companion book on the Os and the Choom Gang.
AprilApple said...
I didn't know he was gay. I really don't care one way or the other. He's a parasitic troll who got in bed with the Clintons to manipulate reality, push false narratives and hide all the various types and quantities of Clinton corruption. Media Matters
Precisely. Ritmo hardest hit.
We were trying to stop bad legislation (we succeeded) and then hold those who voted wrong accountable (we succeeded)
There's the vengeance and vindictiveness we need responsible clergy to stand up for!
And people wonder how mediocre candidates with no convictions get stuck forever in Congress. I guess that little revelation demonstrates why.
Precisely. Ritmo hardest hit.
April didn't write the post, you premium shit-for-brains.
Seriously, at the unemployment skills center you should put that in your goal description: Shit for brains.
There's got to be a market for that somewhere. Congress, maybe?
I'm actually pretty grateful for The Good Father's explanation for how truly awful losers get stuck in Congress: "Punishment" for not going along with something. I thought it was just soul-sucking moneyed folks with billions in mineral extraction industries, etc. But apparently a foreign country that has a history of thousands of years of manipulating and threatening politicians in Europe (when they aren't manipulating and threatening their flock) has now been imported into the American system.
No politicians with differing convictions or the capability to change one's mind will be accepted. The Congressional Catechism has been canonized! Deviate from it at your own risk! We can't threaten you with Hell but we can threaten you in other ways!!!
I played the Bronski Beat video 3 times.
Here's the thing, I don't much care for repeated refrains. With this song the repeated refrain is
move away
turn away
move away
turn away
move away
repeat
It amounts to acting it out. Very easy to perform. And when you do perform it in repetition like that it amounts to a dance. It becomes the dance of the song
The dance that is the repeated refrain of this song makes sense and is dramatic and compelling.
Now, having turned on the video a 3 times I notice the train tracks that appear at the beginning make the exact same motion that your body makes when you dance the refrain.
I liked the train tracks because they curve nicely into the next, moving to the left, shunting again to the left, and again, and when you look down the tracks into the unknown distance and wonder at the station you'll be let off they're all well kept up and without warble or warp. You can expect a smooth ride however you're shunted.
It's a very good song and the video has artistic touches that are not immediately apparent on first viewing.
He's tweaking on the first pic-pupils tell all.
I like the song Tell Me Why, Hit That Perfect Beat Boy and It Aint Necessarily So from Bronski Beat.
Jimmy Somerville went solo.
The other guy who formed Yaz with Alison something or another formed Erasure with some other mo-which was my college music group (and Morrissey, natch)-I loved to dance to Blue Savannah, from Erasure.
I went to ManRay in Camby and threw down during that time-early 90's.
ManRay was not exclusively gay-more gay/bi/straight.
I am glad I can enlighten you on fag history Ricpic.
My hubby doesn't know anything about gay history-or anything gay. All his friends are straight-he is basically a straight guy who is a fag.
Brock went from doing hit pieces on the Clinton's to Media Matters - which does hit pieces on Republicans and Conservatives.
I think I see a pattern.
Bless him father, for he knows not what he says.
You want to know what a starfucker looks like? It's David Brock. The poster boy of starfuckers.
Post a Comment