“Radical” Isn’t As Scary as Hannity Is
Andy Ostroy is all het up over the right wing framing of Barack Obama as a “radical”.
Radical, defined: of, relating to, or constituting a political group associated with views, practices, and policies of extreme change d: advocating extreme measures to retain or restore a political state of affairs
The fact that the right is trying to frame Barack Obama as a ‘radical’ is not a bad thing. Anyone other than the very few who are profiting from the war, the dying economy, the rape of the US Constitution, lying politicians, and a government owned by Halliburton, Blackwater, Lockheed Martin and a few others should support a radical change, not reject it.
By his very appearance, Obama represents radical change. The pathetic attempt of the pundits on Faux News to frame that as a bad thing shows their desperate gasps and grasps for relevance.
As their ratings drop and viewers flock to less idiotic choices for news, their rhetoric becomes shrill and off-key, because somewhere deep down they know the truth: Barack Obama represents change — radical change — that will turn this country back from the dark place their boys Bush and Cheney have led us.
While Faux News may try to frame Obama as a ‘radical’ and paint him as a country-wrecking throwback to the rebellious sixties, the reality is that the only way to put this country back on track is through radical change. Here are some of the changes Obama will bring:
- Respect for the United States Constitution
- Responsible fiscal management
- Ending the war in Iraq
- Responsible diplomacy
- Restoring accountability in government
What REALLY scares the Hannitys of the world is the possibility that the crimes that have been wrought upon each and every citizen of this country will be exposed, and those who extolled their virtues will be irrelevant.
Of course, to me, Hannity is already irrelevant. So is Faux news. One radical change I’m looking forward to is seeing the FCC hold them responsible for their irresponsibility.