(Brought to my attention by a reader, Tommy Boy.) I think this first picture (above) is a great contrast between what most would consider two extreme positions. On the right — can you see the irony? — a “revolutionary” socialist/Marxist. On the left a Bible thumper who is holding a cross intimating salvation either before Christ’s Second Coming or before one dies [or you will be forever damned]. The difference is that the Bible thumper wants stability and economic justice (as the Constitution provides). She would believe that her actions can neither speed up or slow Christ’s coming. She would also believe that nothing but a free choice would be involved in the accepting or rejecting the gift of salvation by said sinner. The “revolutionary” believes that those who do not want this change should be forced to make up their mind. Read here Pol-Pot, Stalin, Mao, Hitler, and the myriad of revolutionaries in the 20th century. In other words, any person — believer or skeptic — would want that Bible thumper verses what you see below. (All pictures enlargeable upon clicking):
Ministry of Truth? Hmmmm…. seems like I heard that somewhere before…. oh, yeah:
The Ministry of Truth (or Minitrue, in Newspeak) is one of the four ministries that govern Oceania in George Orwell‘s novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. As with the other Ministries in the novel, the Ministry of Truth is a misnomer and in reality serves an opposing purpose to that which its name would imply, being responsible for the falsification of historical events; and yet is aptly named in a deeper sense, in that it creates/manufactures “truth” in the newspeak sense of the word.
(click poster for larger-fuller version of it)
BigGovernment has this on who this Minister of Truth is:
This week President Obama revealed his latest attempt to control the media, the Internet, and the information revealed to the people of the United States by creating a new “press” office of sorts, an Obama ministry of truth, if you will. Obama’s grandiose name for this new office is the Progressive Media & Online Response department. Also named was its new director, Jesse Lee. Lee, it turns out, has an interesting connection to one of the most outrageous anti-American, anti-military media efforts in recent memory.
Jesse Lee, you see, is married to Nita Chaudhary, one of the people responsible for the 2007 MoveOn.org newspaper ad that maligned General David Petraeus as “General Betray Us.”
That’s right, the guy that President Obama has chosen to “correct” the Internet and media and to relay the president’s “truth” is connected to one of the most anti-American, anti-military, left-wing activist groups in America. Lee and his wife are typical, hardcore, leftist extremists yet now they are in the People’s House with Lee responsible to “correct” the people themselves when they dare to question The One.
As David Steinberg notes, “Lee’s relationship with Chaudhary was not a negative for his White House career.” On the contrary, the man married to the woman that helped head an attack on the very general Obama himself has given greater duties has found her baleful influence to have either helped him reach a position inside the White House, or at the very least been a non-factor.
Shouldn’t it have been a factor, though? Shouldn’t Obama have shied away from hiring a man for his ministry of truth who is cozy with someone who stands against the very country he leads? One would think that being married to someone who belongs to one of the leading anti-American activist groups in the country would be a draw back. Apparently, Obama sees it as a plus. And need we be reminded that Moveon.org is funded by George Soros? Now we have a guy who can be directly influenced by George Soros in a new position right in the White House.
The Washington Post critiqued the ad by MoveOn.org, saying this:
However, MoveOn.org does not provide adequate factual support for its larger assertion that Petraeus is “constantly at war with the facts” and is “cooking the books” for the White House. In the absence of fresh evidence, we award MoveOn.org three Pinocchios [out of four].
And to catch those up on this controversy — if you hadn’t known about it — this deceitful ad was removed from MoveOn’s site after Obama appointed Petraeus to a position. Newsbusters reported this, then:
In a classic example of liberal hypocrisy, the far-left leaning, George Soros-funded group MoveOn.org has removed its controversial “General Betray Us” ad from its website.
For those that have forgotten, shortly after General David Petraeus issued his report to Congress in September 2007 concerning the condition of the war in Iraq and the success of that March’s troop surge, MoveOn placed a full-page ad in the New York Times with the headline, “General Petraeus or General Betray Us?”
This created quite a firestorm with media outlets on both sides of the aisle circling the wagons to either defend or berate both the Times and MoveOn.
Now that President Obama has appointed Petraeus to replace the outgoing Gen. Stanley McChrystal to lead the war effort in Afghanistan, the folks on the far-left that castigated Petraeus when he worked for George W. Bush have to sing a different tune.
With that in mind, the ad, which has been at MoveOn’s website for years, was unceremoniously removed on Wednesday as reported by our friends at Weasel Zippers:
It was there the last time Google cache took a screen shot of it (June 18th), so it was scrubbed sometime between then and today. If you try the link now (http://pol.moveon.org/petraeus.htm) it goes to MoveOn’s default page.
I guess MoveOn couldn’t possibly bash this General now that he’s working for Obama.
To give readers an idea of the firestorm this created at the time, here are some NewsBusters articles published after this ad hit:
With Petraeus now part of the Obama administration, it’s going to be fascinating watching all of the media members and outlets that supported MoveOn’s ad now backtrack and gush over the General they once despised.
Audio from Department of Labor representative Dolores Huerta’s speech praising Venezualan dictator Hugo Chavez and saying “Republicans hate Latinos,” reveals that Huerta’s appearance seems to have been supported by Congressman Raul M. Grijalva (D-AZ). A representative from Grijalva’s office attended and “brought” Huerta to the Aprill 2006 speech, which addressed students at Tucson High Magnet School….
