And "tarp" of course is "prat" spelled backwards.
Much against my better judgment, I put on the Tarpley show Saturday as a counter-irritant to dishwashing. What a tired, fulminating hack Web has become.
Rather than acknowledge any possibility that the election is rigged in favor of his sweetie-pie, Hillrita, he starts dumping on John Zogby for calling the match a dead heat, suggesting he should retire from polling. He then starts impugning the Zogby brothers as part of some evil pro-Obama cabal, possibly allied with the US Intelligence.
Yeah, this is personal. My wife and I know the Zogbys well, and Tarp the Prat's remarks of March 8, 2008 would qualify as slander if they were not so evidently the product of a once-fine mind now irrevocably deranged by paranoia and delusions of grandeur.
John Zogby is a thoroughly decent man, but his vocation is based on the premise of an accurate count of votes--and that will never happen if the results are not what they want.
As for Tarpley, beyond Saturday's slap at John Zogby, his repeated epithets, smears, and catch-phrases are quite Limbaughesque (if not downright LaRouchean). It is a misuse of his vaunted (formerly) great brain to spout such blather in the service of the elite. He bowls over the credulous with his big words, his lapsing into Italian or German, and his air of being a fount of inside information.
And now, with his Hillary badge in full view, he has long last revealed himself as a total sell-out to the high-rollers in the Big Casino.
And no, Web, I'm not getting my marching orders from Langley, the Obama campaign, or Zogby International. I'm a total skeptic, and I don't really give a good Goddamn who becomes President. I'm fairly sure it will be tipped in the favor of HRC--but things will no doubt continue to be lousy (and probably get worse) whatever figurehead gets the job. It's not a process over which I feel I have any control--and so I focus on more personal matters.
Just don't fuck with Utica, or with anyone from Utica--particularly if I know the party in question, and grasp the full magnitude of the horseshit you're dealing.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Two words, Webster. Rose Law Firm. Okay, three words, but the point is that she's corrupt as hell and why support her? Because Larouche's last and fast fading hope for any power is within the 'Democratic'?? (*choke, gasp*) Party. So let's all fight for petty advantages and positions of influence while the world dies. Good strategy.
I'm a member of DC 911 Truth:
In reading the latest hit piece against Obama (who I am not supporting) by Mr. Tarpley, I am left wondering anew, "Where's the beef?" Where is the substance to back up your title? You simply do what you always do in your broad attacks: you make one outlandish statement after another without offering any proof. Quite frankly, I cannot understand how people take you seriously and give you credibility. Any supposed credibility you formerly had has been forfeited by your relentless assaults on Obama and those who have chosen either to support him or have chosen not to support the candidacy of Bill and Hillary Clinton.
You are guilty of engaging in endless ad hominem insults and invectives devoid of any meaning and lacking any instructive value. Apart from some sycophantic desire to know your perspective on various issues, I cannot help to see how you offer anything of value or delineate a view that elucidates and clarifies the Obama campaign or party politics. Your cut and paste pieces are just as empty and vapid of meaning as the slogans we have been inundated with during this primary season. They are filled with many words and little meaning. They are reminiscent of the Popular Mechanics' hit piece and just as ineffective as works of a straw man. They are not worthy of 21st century Muckraker journalism.
I am starting to think that you honestly don't want to be taken seriously, but merely want to have a forum for throwing up a mass of verbal and paper confetti that obscures the homogenous policy and positional stances of the two remaining candidates for the Democrat Party nomination. We are to believe that there is such a stark and dangerous difference between Obama and Clinton that our entire future hangs in the balance. That is such a sophomoric perspective few would even deign reply to. But you dare not stop the fear-mongering there. No we are told that an Obama presidency would be far worse that even Bush II. Really?
You simply refuse to take the time and back up what you say with proof. Most though not all people in the 9/11 Movement or antiwar crowd expects a standard of proof to be met. Time and time again you fail in that regard. You falsely believe that somehow you have built up a reputation and some "gravitas" within the Movement so as to leave you free to wage a slash and burn campaign against one foe after another. While others are called to task for their sloppy and distorted views and presentations, you are given a carte blanche. Frankly I cannot accept the notion that you deserve such consideration in the future.
Since you support the Clintons, I wonder why you are unable or unwilling to defend them or your support with specifics in lieu of the nonstop character assassination of Obama. Your vituperations are the epitome of the politics of personal destruction par excellence that tears down the other without raising the level of discourse. Each article you write makes it all the more clear that you are masquerading as a truth seeker, all the while dragging us into a muddle of division and distraction.
Roger,
Bravo!
Andy
Once a Larouchian always a Larouchian.
Post a Comment