Imagine an alternate Earth on which Obama came up with one terrific plan after another, and day after day Republicans and dirty Blue Dogs obstructed them in the Senate, then after four years a majority of voters said, “Fuck this ineffectual loser, let’s vote for [insert crazy right-wing motherfucker here].”

Feel any better?

As opposed to someone who gives the other side what they want and uses that as his starting point in negotiations?

Yeah. I’ll take that because we shouldn’t expect anyone to actually try. That would be exhausting.

.. took the words right out of my mouth tbogg …

especially the part about voting for obama or ‘are you fucking kidding me’ .. i can’t even stand the FDL home pages any more .. deleted them from my favs list .. and now that marcy moved .. you’re all of my fdl shit that’s left .. :)

Well, I sometimes console myself by recalling that I don’t live in America, I live in Ignorantmotherfuckerland. I mean, they can’t even get progressive leadership in France right now.

Two headlines you can find right now on the Associated Press’ front page:

Perry expresses doubts on manmade global warming

New Noah’s Ark in Ky. aims to prove truth of Bible

Ignorantmotherfuckerland.

T, I love your blog, and I sympathize with how frustrating it is to watch the current political shitshow, but what exactly do you mean by ‘try’? What specific things do you think he could have done better? What specific methods should he use to get around Republican intransigence. We’ve got a House full of morons, a functionally-useless Senate, and a SCOTUS that you can’t turn your back on for a minute. What exactly is Obama supposed to do? Maybe this is Obottish of me, but I hear that he needs to ‘try’, ‘be more aggressive’, ‘work harder’, and whatever, and I’m just like, how? With what? We have a political system that doesn’t allow for the executive branch to just boss people around. That’s a good thing if the rest of the government isn’t filled with shit-flinging maniacs, which it unfortunately is.

I also wonder what you’re talking about when you say he gives the other side what they want. The teabaggers didn’t get their government shutdown, they didn’t get their default, they didn’t get their defunded planned parenthood, they didn’t get their ACA repeal, and they won’t as long as he’s in office. They’ve gotten some spending cuts, but if you look deeper, a lot of the cuts don’t amount to much, or are more theoretical than immediate.

Yes, it’s shitty, frustrating, obnoxious, and stupid. The attitude I’ve chosen to take is that politics in general is just a shitty thing 95% of the time, and you should approach it more like a battlefield than anything. Make tactical, in-the-moment decisions, don’t get too many people killed, live to fight another day. But I can absolutely understand why someone would want to throw up their hands and just say ‘fuck it all.’

Obama strikes me as the kind of guy who doesn’t like to lose, who goes for the sure thing.

“Path of least resistance” does seem to be Obama’s guiding principle.

I keep thinking and many have said that he is playing 11th dimensional chess and that when he gets reelected it will be balls to the wall and unicorns and cotton candy will fall from the heavens.

I sure hope so.

However I also do not think we can make another year and half taking one step forward and two steps back.

Obama needs to use what he has. The biggest fucking bully pulpit on the planet.

He needs to state his case to the American people every goddamn week if he has to. Tell them what needs to change, how it will be achieved and set about doing it. Eventually the asshats in congress will have no choice but to listen and get inline. The people will overwhelmingly demand it.
He has the megaphone and he hardly uses it.

I want him to go all Bill Murray from Meatballs, because in the end it does matter.

So all I can do is hope that he can change.

Bingo. Not holding my breath though.

Since when do teabaggers care about the will of the people? They care about their paymasters. Sure, a lot of them will get voted out next year, maybe even enough to flip the House. But like you said, can we survive another year and a half of this bullshit?

Maybe I’m wrong here, but it seems like the ‘bipartisanship’ of eras past owed a lot to the fact that it was considered shameful to publicly flip the bird to the President of the United States. Now the fuckers get rewarded for doing it, by Fox News, the Koch Brothers, the Crazy 27%, whoever. I’d absolutely love it if the general public became more involved and held teabaggers’ asses to the fire, and maybe I’m underestimating the power that would have, but at the end of the day, you’ve got to get past the guys who vote on stuff, and a lot of them are stark raving mad.

Dan Perkins (AK Tom Tomorrow) calls Obama “MiddleMan.” But that’s an understatement since Obama has never tried for anything in the middle–he’s ALWAYS started from the center right and worked his way rightward.

After 8 years of being told I’m not an American because I did not support BushCheney, I have now had the pleasure of being told for the last two and a half years that I’m not American because I’m part of “the Professional Left.” As far as I’m concerned. Obama can help Kristol finish that bag of salted dicks.

The fact that this makes me feel like a battered wife has not escaped my notice…

You know, that whole “battered wife” analogy only really works if you also consider yourself mother to everybody in the United States and had the option to actually escape to Venus or Mars.

Yay! Obama kept the Teabaggers from nuking us, we only got bathed in Agent Orange instead! You should be happy, you DFHs, you…

Personally I haven’t given up hope for Barack Obama even though he has shown little inclination for bold gestures. I’ll still vote for him for no better reason than the fact that the alternatives range from abominable to “are you fucking kidding?”.

Works for me, just like Clinton in 92, again in 96, Gore in 2000, Kerry in 2004. This is the average cruising speed of presidential leadership on this side of the aisle.

He needs to state his case to the American people every goddamn week if he has to. Tell them what needs to change, how it will be achieved and set about doing it. Eventually the asshats in congress will have no choice but to listen and get inline. The people will overwhelmingly demand it. He has the megaphone and he hardly uses it.

pasta65, between Citizens United, the Village People and the Teabagger Freak Show, that’s an easy call. We pretty well covered this back in an earlier post: use the megaphone to push a progressive agenda item like marriage equality, lose Ohio in the general. Period. (Not that Ohio alone decides a presidential election, rather that states further down Teh Motherfucking Crazy Foodchain than Ohio will go the same route.) You and I want to hear it, no doubt, but look around you: Teh Motherfucking Crazy has the upper hand in our national political discourse right now.

Jkat, same here.

“Obama needs to use what he has. The biggest fucking bully pulpit on the planet. But he has. He’s used it to tell us all to bend over at take it, in the name of bipartisanship & compromise. And while he continues to smile broadly and seem like a nice enough guy, it’s become quite apparent that his idea of a compromise is basically Republican policy, and what he really wants us to embrace is a downgraded status quo with a dash of lipstick. That includes more endless war, a surveillance state run amok, and a dismal disrespect for the rule of law. The pitiful “woe is him, what’s he to do with those lame-ass clowns in Congress?” stance is such a pathetic cop-out that even the most faithful supporters must by now realize that you can only claim you lost the battle of Good Against Evil if you bothered to try.

Obama has had years now (starting with a super-mandate of House + Senate) to at least try to accomplish stuff. But between his odd choice of change agents (Tim Geithner? Rahm Emanuel? Puh-lease) and his odd way of starting most “negotiations” with the ol’ lawn mower tactic he clearly didn’t want much Change. He still wants to rule the world with a big gun, screw the already-screwed at home, and he’s totally fine allowing those with power & $$$ to continue calling the shots and then join them for golf on the weekend.

That’s not really too surprising — what’s surprising is that anyone can still think he’s the ultimate strategist waiting for the right moment to whip out the pitchfork and start a revolution.

I think we may well see Obama replaced by Rick Perry in ’12 — and it won’t only be because Americans are genuinely ignorant, insane & infected by the cult of Jeebus, it’ll also be because the alternative of four more years of Obama is about as appealing as a stale Twinkie with milk. We’re pretty much fucked either way…

After reading through the first 4 paragraphs of utterly depressing reality, I was really expecting the “this” link to be a video of Shakira’s ass.

We needed it. We deserved it. We were let down. Shame on you, TBogg.

Dick Cheney and George Bush had dozens of people on more than one payroll for four decades whose only function was to spend every minute of every hour of every day cleaning up their mistakes. Along with Condi Rice and Don Rumsfeld, in 8 years they destroyed lower Manhattan, the Pentagon, and Baghdad; they introduced US military weapons-grade Anthrax into the US Postal System and dismantled American flight travel. Billions if not trillions of dollars were not only squandered, they are simply unaccounted for. The economy is in ruins, the American Dream is shattered, and the real estate we have in abundance is now worthless and nobody has a job. Rednecks in Mississippi and Alabama think they are doing better because they are now competitive with Chinese slave labor. Was I the only one here for all that? And we are still here, we are still a country, and the Republicans would like to take a second pass just to make sure they didn’t leave something behind, and I swear-to-God I don’t see anybody that bad waiting in the GOP wings. Seriously, what else can they do? Look at it this way. If the Republicans win again, Obama and Lieberman and everyone in between will be gone. That’s a lot of dead weight. I’m tired of getting stabbed in the back. Grab Thelma’s hand and punch it over the cliff. The worst is behind us.

@Spaghetti Lee: “We have a political system that doesn’t allow for the executive branch to just boss people around.” True. But we have a media system that rewards swaggering faux cowboys for talkin’ tough and saying stupid and outrageous things while punishing people with working brains for…having working brains.

Man, this is a depressing thread. Maybe I’ll just blow off work today, pop my copy of Galaxy Quest into the VCR and suck down a six-pack of Magic Hat #9.

Nah, can’t do that. Got cats to feed and a mortgage to pay, even if the house ain’t worth what I paid for it.

What was one of the definitions of insanity? Something like doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Sorta like advising Obama to do this bold thing or that one.

I gave up that bullshit a long time ago. He simply is not going to change. He’s too smart for all of us DFH.

Way back in 1980 I made the biggest electoral mistake of my life. I thought Jimmy Carter was a wimp, wuss, ineffective executive, and I voted for Reagan. My bad. Trouble is, Carter really was a poor executive, if a fine man. Given the same choice today I hope I would choose better, but….

Now Obama runs the same risk. He’s turning off his base. In relative terms, I see him as both a bigger wuss and not nearly as fine a person as Carter. If today’s Obama ran against yesterday’s Reagan, I’d probably vote for Reagan again. If he runs against John Wayne Perry or Ilse Koch Bachmann he still has a chance, but if he runs against J Alfred Romney, he may lose as badly as Carter.

He’s not behaving Presidentially, he’s behaving like the butler.

The back and forth between Booman and Greenwald on this topic has been interesting ….here’s a snip of the latest from Booman….

“Yeah, it’s frustrating. It’s soul-crushing in its suckitude. But that’s our system. On many of the issues that most concern Greenwald, the two parties are frighteningly alike. How do we get these assholes to stop the insane War on Drugs? How can we ever shrink the Pentagon down to a reasonable size? Is there any end to the expansion of the surveillance state? It seems like neither party has any interest in budging on any of these questions, and it’s appalling. But how about the areas where they do differ? Obama has overhauled the food safety system, advanced women’s rights in the work place, ended DADT and stopped defending DOMA in court. He passed the Hate Crimes bill. He’s appointed two pro-choice women to the Supreme Court. He’s expanded access to medical care and provided subsidies for people who can’t afford it. He expanded the CHIP program. He’s fixed the preexisting condition travesty. He’s invested in clean energy. He overhauled the credit card industry, making it much more consumer-friendly. The Dodd-Frank bill was weak in many respects, but still extremely worthwhile as a start to re-regulating the financial sector. He created a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. He’s also done a lot for veterans, and he got help for people whose health was injured during the clean-up after the 9/11 attacks. None of these things were priorities for Republicans. They actively opposed, directly or indirectly through obstruction, every single item on this list. In fact, they succeeded in killing a Cap & Trade bill in the Senate after it had passed through the House.
All of these things are improvements that would not have occurred under a McCain-Palin administration. Moreover, a McCain-Palin administration would have moved in the other direction on most of these issues, or come up with even worse compromises. And then there’s McCain’s white hot-love for Iran and what that might have meant for the country.”
http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2011/8/16/223210/466

“hope that he can change”

noice. Eh, he is who he is. You can rationalize it away or excuse it (“He would do lots more if only they would let him do it!”), but in the end, it’s not merely the results but the attempts and the attitude we go by. Take away Pete Rose’s famous (or _in_famous) hard-charging hustle, and he’s merely another light-hitting, decent fielding infielder who lasts about 13 years and is forgotten. I like Mr. Obama. He’s apparently a decent guy, a good father and a good neighbor, but I’m betting even Mr. Rogers would have been kicking butt and taking names (very politely) from the get-go. Mr. Obama has not been a good President for this time, unless you think institutionalized 10% unemployment, formalization of Bush-style anti-Constitutional government and destruction of both the Democratic Party and the middle class are Good Things (“but look what he’s been able to do!”). When the cops arrive at the scene of a riot, you don’t give them points for calming down a crying child, chastising a looter and then driving away. You want them to do what they were hired to do. Mr. Obama has not done that; as far as we know, he has not even made much of an effort to do that.

I keep thinking of Seth Meyers at the Press Corps dinner and his riff: “Obama in 2008? Mr President, you would have loved him.”

I guess what I have been hearing — that he’s really not a liberal — is at the root of it. He’s to the left of a bunch of fascists and authoritarians and Dominionists but what sentient creature isn’t? He’s not going to use the Bully Pulpit on behalf of ideas he doesn’t believe in. Even if he doesn’t believe in single-payer healthcare or an end to DADT an DOMA, there is still a lot of heat he could put on the opposition.

But if he runs against a Perry/Bachmann ticket (like they’ll last that long) or even Romney/[your name here], he may well win. Then what? With nothing to lose as a lame duck, will he roll the dice?

Maybe the 22nd Amendment was a bad idea: FDR couldn’t run again, and he was the reason for it. It might have allowed Reagan to be a three-termer, though: yuck. Shame the people who devised didn’t realize elections *are* term limits.

New Mexico idiots are real idiots.

I’m old enough to remember being told that most of those things Obama wasn’t intruding on the legislative process, and for the issues where that is true how can you give Obama credit?

From a commenter named “tom” at the Washington Monthly. I wish I wrote every fucking word.

————————

The predominately white progressive intelligentsia don’t see Obama clearly because of our racial blind spot. We don’t see the role of race in how he seems to understand himself and how other perceive him.

First of all, we think that he understands himself as one of us. A progressive activist, heir to the radical and New Left movements most of us were raised in. He is not; I think that he understands himself (and certainly his real base understands him) as the first African American President. We’re thinking Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. We should be thinking about Harold Washington, the first African American mayor of Chicago. Washington was elected and immediately faced a solid wall of opposition from most white aldermen in the city. Washington understood his role as breaking down that wall of opposition and assembling a governing majority, which he finally did after his re-election. Unfortunately, he died shortly thereafter. By the way, one of Washington’s political strategists was David Axelrod.

How does Obama break the iron unity of the GOP opposition to assemble a governing majority in the US Congress?

If we progressives were not blinded by our own assumption that our history is the only history, we might see how Obama may be seeing his situation.

White progressives often think that African American elected officials are politically naive. We will far more credit to Cornel West, who has never been elected to anything, than to an elected state senator, or even the President of the United States. We think that Obama does not understand the nature of John Boehner, Mitch McConnell or Eric Cantor, as though he has not sat across the table from them. He doesn’t understand how mean they are, we think.

Obama acts entirely within the tradition of mainstream African American political strategy and tactics. The epitome of that tradition was the non-violence of the Civil Rights Movement, but goes back much further in time. It recognizes the inequality of power between whites and blacks. Number one: maintain your dignity. Number two: call your adversaries to the highest principles they hold. Number three: Seize the moral high ground and Number four: Win by winning over your adversaries, by revealing the contradiction between their own ideals and their actions. It is one way that a oppressed people struggle.

Obama has taken a seat at the negotiating table and said “There is no reason why we cannot work out solutions to our problems by acting like responsible adults. That is what people expect us to do and that is why we have entered into public service.” That is the moral high ground.

Honestly, I have been reminded more than once in the last few months of those brave college students sitting in at a Woolworth’s lunch counter, back in the day. Obama sits at that table, like they did at the counter. Boehner and McConnell and Cantor clown around, mugging for the camera, competing to ritually humiliate Obama, to dump ketchup on his head.

I don’t think those students got their sandwiches the first day, but they won in the end.

Obama is winning. Democrats are uniting behind him, although some white progressives think that they could do the job better. Independents are flocking to him. Even some Republicans are getting disgusted with their Washington leaders. Obama is not telling us about lack of seriousness of the Congressional GOP; he is showing us the vivid contrast between what we expect of our leaders and their behavior. The last two and half years have been a revelation of the essential conflicts in our society and politics.

If white progressives understood much about the politics of the African American struggle in the United States, we would see Obama in the context of that struggle and understand him better. And you don’t have to be African American to know something about the history of the African American struggle. The books and the testimony is there. It’s not all freedom songs. But you have to be convinced that it is something that can teach you something you don’t already know.

Psychiatrist Nassir Ghaemi in his book A First-Rate Madness makes the point that normal people (like Obama) do not do well during times of crisis (like the current Great Depression II), largely because they are not risk takers. For what it is worth, he considers people like FDR and JFK to be abnormal.

Spaghetti asks: “What specific methods should he use to get around Republican intransigence?”

Good question, Spaghetti. Let’s look at the Bush Administration for starters. When Bush didn’t want to do something, he made a signing statement. In fact, he did it on more than 1,000 occasions. With that kind of will, Obama could have done an awful lot, like . . .

1) Once the Health Care bill got watered down to the point that there was no public option left, he could have signed an executive order opening up Medicare for all.

2) Once the Republicans held the country hostage by threatening not to increase the debt ceiling, he could have told them to suck an egg and invoked the 14th Amendment, as Pres. Clinton was urging him to do for weeks.

Yes, I understand that the Republicans have been assholes. But that’s exactly when you have to up your game. I gave you two examples of what Obama could have done on major legislation – these were things many people were urging him to do. Instead, he gave Boehner “98% of what he wanted.” So yeah – people like me, people like TBogg . . . we have a lot to be pissed at Obama about, actually.

Shorter Tom: “if only we ignorant white people could ignore all the minutiae like his political track record and other inconvenient facts, Obama could totally be MLK meets Malcolm X in a Muhammad Ali wrapper…”

That whole screed is almost like a delusional failception: a fail within a fail within a fail of unicorn fantasies.

“Path of least resistance” does seem to be Obama’s guiding principle.

I think the problem is that Obama has no guiding principle’s. I don’t believe he has any core beliefs that he will not abandon. He is a hollow man and that makes him a sad thing as a person and unreliable as an officeholder.

The problem with the concept of politics as battlefield is that if one adopts that attitude, how does it ever change? Politics should be about differing philosophies on how best to govern. It shouldn’t be about how can we crush the enemy and emerge victorious, pyric victory or no. How does it change if someone(s) doesn’t stand up and say, fuck it, this is how it should be done?

I’ll jump into my rainbow pony’s saddle and fly on out of here now.

Mortfrom wrote:

The problem with the concept of politics as battlefield is that if one adopts that attitude, how does it ever change? Politics should be about differing philosophies on how best to govern. It shouldn’t be about how can we crush the enemy and emerge victorious, pyric victory or no. How does it change if someone(s) doesn’t stand up and say, fuck it, this is how it should be done?

I’m not really understanding your point here, Mort. How do politics work in your idealized world?

So your solution is for President Obama to use the exact same tactics that the progressive Left vilified President Bush for?

I seem to recall quite a few “Bush is a dictator” screeds every time he handed down a signing statements to legislation. I don’t think that was a fever dream.

Frankly how can we accuse the opposition of engaging in hypocrisy when we’re just as willing to do it?

And I love that “just sign an Executive Order”. As if Congress doesn’t have the power to pass legislation to effectively cancel the Executive Order or refuse to fund whatever the Order demands. And flipping the bird to a Congress that your political party has control over is guaranteed political suicide.

Shorter Tom: “if only we ignorant white people…”

Well, thingy, if the shoe fits…

OT: Elizabeth Warren has formed an exploratory committee for the MA senate seat of the Playgirl model.

I really hope she runs and wins.

Digby, and I totally agree with it. I wonder how many folk are dying because they can’t last a couple more years until they can even think about getting a chance at health care? Or having their families broken up because of deportation and DOMA still being enforced?

Where to begin. First of all, once again, he’s not actually talking about a “balanced approach.” If he were he’d be proposing to tax the living hell out of corporations and wealthy individuals, not asking for some token tip money in exchange for cutting a big hole in the safety net. It’s not “shared sacrifice” to ask wealthy people to give up money they will not even miss in exchange for asking 65 year olds to wait an additional two years before qualifying for Medicare. In some cases, that’s going to be the difference between life and death. Telling people they have to give up any part of the only real form of security they have in their old age when they can no longer work, in order to get millionaires to pay what they paid in taxes only a decade ago, is not “balanced.”

Maybe when Obama sees himself neck-and-neck with Perry and the Crazy Flavor of the Day, he’ll get a fire in his belly, but I don’t think so. He’ll continue to squeeze over to the TeaBaggers for inspiration.

Ooh, a tad harsh, methinks. Tom makes some compelling points, though I don’t fully agree with all of them either. But still, there’s no need to ridicule, now is there?

But you have to be convinced that it is something that can teach you something you don’t already know.

A little humility can go a long way.

Honestly, I have been reminded more than once in the last few months of those brave college students sitting in at a Woolworth’s lunch counter, back in the day. Obama sits at that table, like they did at the counter. Boehner and McConnell and Cantor clown around, mugging for the camera, competing to ritually humiliate Obama, to dump ketchup on his head.

I don’t think those students got their sandwiches the first day, but they won in the end.

And this isn’t 1964. This country has already established that dumping ketchup on a person’s head for sitting at a lunch counter is the act of cowards. They took that abuse so Obama should not have to suffer the same. And I say Obama does those brave students a huge disservice by sitting there and ‘taking it’ in the name of ‘bipartisanship’.

Obama is winning. Democrats are uniting behind him, although some white progressives think that they could do the job better. Independents are flocking to him. Even some Republicans are getting disgusted with their Washington leaders.

I guess I’ve been seeing different polling than Tom. Sub 40% isn’t what I would call ‘flocking’.

I don’t know if it’s harsh, but really: comparing Obama’s performance with the brave kids who stood up to the sour remnants of Jim Crow? I don’t know what’s worse: the insult to the civil rights protesters, or the delusion that Obama is some sort of half-black Gandhi in disguise.

If sbruin and Tom want to see this whole thing thru a prism of black-and-white that’s their choice, of course, and maybe it helps them mask the bitter taste of reality. As for the rest of us “ignorant white people”, we supposedly “[...] think that Obama does not understand the nature of John Boehner, Mitch McConnell or Eric Cantor, as though he has not sat across the table from them. He doesn’t understand how mean they are, we think.” But that’s exactly it: we don’t think so at all. We think he knows full well — he’s a damn savvy player, and none of the “white intelligensia” whose opinion I value has claimed otherwise. He’s not naive or bowled over by the WASPy elite he’s up against — he’s ust been completely unwilling (not unable), to try to differentiate himself from them when push came to shove.

It’s not accusing him of “they say jump, you say how high?” Uncle Tom-ism, it’s a question of Obama happily jumping along with the rest of them from the get-go.

“comparing Obama’s performance with the brave kids who stood up to the sour remnants of Jim Crow?”

Interesting, I didn’t read it that way, though. I agree with Tom’s point (too bad he’s not here to explain himself) that understanding where Obama comes from is key to understanding who he is and how he governs. Beyond that, however, I have no doubt that Obama is not naive. Politically, he grew up in Chicago fercrisakes. However, I’m just (full disclosure) another middle aged white guy who will never, ever, understand what it is to grow up in a society that constantly and consistently puts roadblocks in front of you. Even now when we’re all supposedly “equal.”

When Tom Coburn says, “As an African American male, coming through the progress of everything he experienced, he got tremendous benefit through a lot of these programs. So he believes in them. I just don’t believe they work overall and in the long run they don’t help our country. But he doesn’t know that because his life experience is something different,” we just roll our eyes and say, “what a fucking idiot.” But what is it like to live with that every day of your life?

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/08/18/298737/coburn-obama-wants-to-create-dependency-because-he-benefited-from-government-programs-as-an-african-american-male/

Booman:

On many of the issues … the two parties are frighteningly alike. How do we get these assholes to stop the insane War on Drugs? How can we ever shrink the Pentagon down to a reasonable size? Is there any end to the expansion of the surveillance state? It seems like neither party has any interest in budging on any of these questions, and it’s appalling.

Yeah, God forbid anyone on the left should leave the couch when it’s not election season to do some political activism focused on an issue rather than a candidate.

Did either major party believe in immediate full equality for black people when Rosa Parks was asked to give up that seat? Did she say, “Oh, what’s the point? The two parties are like Tweedledee and Tweedledum”? No — she was fighting for a cause, not a candidate. The whole civil rights movement was to the left of the two major parties. They didn’t wait. They acted.

Spotts wrote:

So your solution is for President Obama to use the exact same tactics that the progressive Left vilified President Bush for?

Same exact? No. I’m not calling for Obama to arbitrarily fire US attorneys who stand in his way, for example.

But signing statements are evidently lawful, so Obama should do it.

You can’t bring a knife to a gunfight.

You also claim it is “political suicide” to give congress the bird. That would be news to George W. Bush, who got every penny he ever asked for, even if it meant using [gasp] reconciliation. Got many of his worst nominees confirmed by recess appointments.

Can’t bring a knife to a gunfight. You’ll lose every time. What’s good for the goose is indeed good for the gander in this case.

First of all, don’t misquote me. If you can only win by distorting and lying blatantly about my position, then you’ve already lost the argument and are a shameless hack.

I pointed out that flipping the bird to a Congress that your party has control over is political suicide. It’s extremely important that the italicized qualifier is present, because without it the argument is completely different.

Second of all, if one of the central points of your argument is decrying the “win at all costs and hang the law” Republican Party, you cannot turn around and then endorse those same tactics because they benefit positions you happen to agree with. At best, you’re engaging in situational ethics. At worst, you’re being a hypocrite.

His cover version of the classic Hendrix album:

“Acts as Bold as Fluff”

so the most powerful man in the free world, that chose his advisers from the banksters and w’s ranks, is not responsible for taking their advise and did not “stack the deck” to get the bad advise he is getting…

come on, you can do better than this

It’s “interesting” that for all the cries of “How dare you!” and “soul destroying” no one- not from this site- especially not Krugman actually takes issue with the substance of deaniac’s post. Merely that no one should criticize Paul Krugman, and how dare he call him a “political rookie” etc. etc. etc.

You can’t have it both ways, you can’t call the President every name but the child of god on a daily basis, call his supporters dumb mother fuckers and then cry like a 3 year old with a scabbed knee whenever anyone comes back at you.

Say what you want about Obama but i’ve never seen HIM tell YOU to be “more like Republicans” and support the President no matter what. But yet Krugman and many at FDL thinks that Obama should be afraid of the self proclaimed base- just like the Republican’s are afraid of the tea party.

Hint- their afraid of the tea partyers because they ALWAYS vote, they’re active at the local level- not the blogs- and they don’t whine. Everytime you say “he’ll never get my vote” you’re in effect saying “Just ignore me- i don’t matter.”

So, basically you want him to be just like Bush?

If Bush got “everything he wanted” why isn’t Social Security privatized? In fact, where is our comprehensive immigration reform?

The fact is, Barack Obama provided more for the Democrats in his 2 and a half years than George W. Bush did for his base in 8.

Do you know that Obama is a torturer, a murderer and a traitor to the constitution? Do you know he wants to cut Social Security and Medicare so that rich people won’t have to pay taxes? Are you aware that Obama makes false promises otherwise known as telling lies? My apologies if you already know these things. I only mention them in case you might want to reconsider voting for him.

Saying that Obama calls us once every 4 years for a quickie is generous. For the 4 years between crappy sex we get political garbage kicked in our faces daily.

I’m always saddened to see that a few years after the last quickie fuck, you’re planning to pick up the phone again and grab the lube. How about just letting it ring?

The problem with that analysis is that Obama wasn’t brought up as a Chicago African-American. He was brought up to be post-racial, and his formative years were spent in Southeast Asia and Hawaii, where the racial dynamics that domnate the US mainland simply don’t exist. He grew up with the equivalent of what is commonly understood as “white privilege” thanks to his upper-middle-class white grandparents, who did the lion’s share of rearing him with both his birth parents largely out of the picture as he grew up. It took him a long, long time to be accepted in Chicago – he was rejected by the local black community when he tried run against Bobby Rush, and it was only with his US Senate run that Black Chicago started to warm to him.

I’ll still vote for him for no better reason than the fact that the alternatives range from abominable to “are you fucking kidding?”.

Say it ain’t so!

It is one of the great paradox of US electoral life in the 21th century for a progressive: the fear of getting a GOPer must be overcome and transferred to the Democrat candidate, for if he/she can count on you no matter what, nothing will change.

Which Deaniac83 post, Insipid? He was singing a different back in 2007:

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2007/10/obama-lost-my-vote-general-election-too.html?m=1

Sorry, TBogg: as campaign slogan, “the republicans are even worse!”

is a prescription for a 2012 ass-kicking that will make the mid-terms look like a love tap from the voters.

Aide-advice or not, the responsiblity for his being so stupid as to ignore the fact that he was inheriting an either/or situation is on his bartab, not that of a bunch of “centrist” sycophants.

Either he confronted them and fought them tooth and nail, or they would eat him alive. And they have eaten him alive. Past tense.

No, I don’t. That’s the complete opposite of my position, and the position I’m arguing about with the person I replied to.

What, is it my day for people not to read what I post and just make up crap?

I have to point out a material error of fact in your post.

twinkies will never go stale and will still be good long after mankind has blown himself off the face of the planet and cockroaches and rats have inherited the earth.

but the orange people at the big orange site say we HAVE to vote for him!

Personally I haven’t given up hope for Barack Obama even though he has shown little inclination for bold gestures. I’ll still vote for him…

And there you have it. The reason why the wealthy and powerful and especially the politicians now ignore so many citizens. They know all they have to do is “present” everyone with two candidates – Democratic or Republican who represents THEIR interests, not the majority of citizens. REAL change will only occur if people stop accepting the status quo.

I’ve said before that I believe Obama’s advisers are to blame for this sad state of affairs.

you might have said it but you were wrong

his “advisers” are the people he agrees with, rahm was his hand maiden not the other way around and he had every importunity to put the succesfull economists who got it right(progressive) on staff, instead he deliberately and pro actively installed the very same people who created the problem

no, it’s not his “advisers” it’s him

sorry t

Yeah. Remember how everything changed after the Republicans won the 2000 election and a third party rose up and crushed the duopoly?

That was awesome.

At the for presidential races there are two parties and, barring a rich guy (Perot or Bloomberg) self-financing a third party challenge, that is not going to change. So you can vote Green Party or American Progressive Party Whose Agenda Matches Mine Exactly all you want but at the end of the evening you will be able to count all of your electoral votes using the fingers growing out of your knees.

“so basically, you want him to be just like Bush?”

Basically, he HAS been just like Bush.

He’s sustained bush’s clusterfucks, and created some of his own.

He’s protected the status-quo tax situation for the millionaires.

He’s protected the anti-trust exemption that the healthcare robber barons enjoy.

He took a public option off the table like it was a three-card monte game.

He killed the Dorgan amendment that would have allowed for the re-importing of cheap generic foreign drugs.

He’s fulfilled the republican wet dream of getting SS and Medicare on the chopping block.

He handled BP with kid gloves when they were poisoning the GOM, and he allowed NOAA and the Coast Guard to shave points for those turds like they were two crooked NBA point guards…

At every opportunity he’s appointed or picked corporatist shits like Bill Daley to help him do rehab on the GOP.

When confronted with Fox’s pimping of Breitbart’s charges of Sherrod’s “racism”, he pissed himself like a little puppy and couldn’t throw her under the bus fast enough.

The worst thing is that the GOP can point to his abject failure as a president and say that this is what happens when we get librul policies…the librul policies on which he was too chickenshit to risk one micron of the mountain of political clout that we gave him in 2008.

Speaking of progressives, it’s too bad he didn’t kiss us, ’cause he sure has fucked us…and the rest of the democratic party along with us.

Anyone who wants to see him nominated again is part of the problem, not the solution. If we do that, then we ARE the fucking retards that Rahm called us.

You’re right. Vote for Nader. That always works out so well.

Myself, I think that Obama is on the verge of throwing in the towel. I really don’t think he cares whether he is re-elected or not.

He may have an LBJ moment next spring. “I shall not seek and I will not accept…”

what a pants load of sheer crap!

I will start by pointing out that obama share NONE of the cultural heritage of the majority of African Americans that can trace their ancestors back to slavery.

Surely even you can see that obama’s “roots” have nothing at all to do with the fight against segregation, the right to vote, nor the open/blatant racism of the south/subtle racism of the north.

Every other point in your post falls when you consider that obama has had a great deal of privilege in his life and his family has NONE of the negative experiences that other African American families have.

not naders fault that al gore and folks like you stood down for a stolen election.

“Get over it” was the chorus from your crowd.

Amen.

Well, firebag yourself: Who else will vote for the DESPOTUS who asserts the (divine?) right of licence to assassinate YOU, his “fellow” American WITHOUT CONSTITUTIONAL DUE PROCESS?

Obviously you don’t have a clue as too what I’m saying.

If he did, it would be more lies like his 2008 “hopey-changey” garbage.

would rather have the republican in office elected as a republican then the republican in office elected as a democrat

obama has done more damage then any republican could have thought and is probably worse then bush

so I am not only not going to vote for obama, I will go one better then voting for nadar, I am campaigning for the republican whoever it might be

TBogg, in this election, the White House is a throwaway. It’s gone.

If you think differently, can you explain how Obama is going to turn the economy around?

And while you’re at it, take a shot at telling us if, 16 months from now, that same $3 bil a week going down the Iraq/Afghanistan urinal along with more of our troops dying, is going to be ignored by the voters.

Obama may get a little bounce of a few points here and there, but his train is on the toilet track, and it should be. I don’t think he’ll run again. There’ll be too many democrats telling him the political facts of life: that if he does, the democratic party will be the Whigs of 1860.

Considering the alternatives should not be allowed outside without adult supervision, let alone in charge of the world’s largest nuclear arsenal and also think The Handmaid’s Tale is a wonderful instruction manual?

Me.

And if you don’t like that, pound sand. It’s a bit late in the game for that white knight who’s the perfect Progressive candidate to come riding over the hill and save you. Whoever that was should have been in the race 6 months ago.

A) I’m not going to vote for Obama but that doesn’t mean I’m going to paint other Democratic candidates with the same brush. There are alternatives to voting for either the Democratic or Republican candidate.
B) While I agree with you that Democrats have no motivation to change as long as they can count on their base coming out no matter what, as I said over and over prior to the 2010 elections, punishing Democrats in this system always means rewarding Republicans and it’s not like the Democrats have learned the correct lesson yet. So, the Democratic base stayed home instead of going to the polls to “punish the Democrats” and to “teach them a lesson” and the Republicans swept to victory. How’s that working out for ya?
C) “Democrat candidate, “Democrat party” and so forth is a pejorative that Republicans use to diss Democrats. Why are you using it?

toilet track?

Is 2012 the last station before the turd-infested sewer?

What Perris said, X2.

Or, what Truman said: that the voters will prefer a real republican over a fake democrat, every time.

Ted Rall has a good piece up, to go with his cartoons ripping Mr. Centrist.

http://news.yahoo.com/whats-matter-obama-150202472.html

Well, he’s already dragged us into the sewer. That was accomplished in the mid-term hammering. From then on, he was nothing but a caretaker preznint, no matter what his intentions were, and I have seen practically zero evidence of good intentions.

This post just made me feel sad. There is a good reason you feel like a battered wife, TBogg: you’re acting just like one. Crawling back to Obama for another four years of sell-outs and abuse is not a healthy way to cope. You need to gather resources and courage, make a good plan, and get out of that abusive relationship. Yes, you can!

The Democrats have rewarded my decades of support and loyalty with one too many kicks in the teeth. So I just donated to Ron Paul’s campaign here: http://www.ronpaul.com/

I signed up for a free Ron Paul for President bumper sticker here: http://www.bullion-and-coin.com/ron-paul-2012/

I ordered five Ron Paul for President bumper stickers for $5 here: http://www.ronpaulstickers.com/

And I can’t wait to vote for Ron Paul in the Republican primary.

Sure I do. In light of reality it is just wishful thinking.

“There is a good reason you feel like a battered wife, TBogg…you’re acting just like one.”

Ouch, that’s gonna leave a bruise. :o)

Watching the people who are still hanging on to Obama’s coattails try to rationalize doing it, is getting to be black-humor funny.

Ron Paul is a racist. If you like voting for racists, then be my guest but I now know all I need to know about you.

Hint- their (sic) afraid of the tea partyers because they ALWAYS vote,

Then Obama damn well better get afraid of me fast.

Well, i didn’t have good things to say about President Obama in 2007 either. I was a Hillary supporter. Deaniac admits he was an Edwards supporter. But once he won the nomination i got on board in hurry.

If not always being on the right team disqualifies you, then I guess we can’t listen to former Republicans Cenk uygur, Arianna Huffington, Ed Schultz, John Aravosis, Cenk Uygur, and Markos Moulitsas nor present day libertarian Glenn Greenwald. And we certainly can’t trust Paul Krugman who spent a year working in the Reagan administration.

In fact, one of the craziest things about the rhetoric on this site is that I was using similar rhetoric in regards to Obama that some here are using now. I wanted someone like Hillary because i wanted someone who wasn’t afraid to hit back at the GOP. Obama said then he wouldn’t and he hasn’t. Those who say he has not backbone (usually on this site they choose to say something about his testicles or a euphemism for it) are wrong. He has it, he’s just showing it towards you as well as them.

The problem most have with Obama isn’t that they didn’t get what they voted for, it’s that they don’t know WHAT they voted for.

He sure is, and Barack Obama has killed a shitload of innocent people and damn near wrecked the democratic party while he’s continued some of George Bush’s worst policies.

There are better people to go to, than Paul, but there is no one better to run FROM, than Barack Obama, the guy who’s sitting in the Oval Office.

Oh. That’s different.

Well, I did point out that I’m not voting for Obama. Did you miss that or are you choosing to ignore it in order to maintain your “everybody on this blog lurvs Obama” narrative?

no one- not from this site- especially not Krugman actually takes issue with the substance of deaniac’s post.

Deaniac? Substance? Together? Perhaps Deaniac and Substance Abuse would go together better.

But yet Krugman and many at FDL thinks that Obama should be afraid of the self proclaimed base

We are trying to frighten all the banksters and their minions. I AM THE BASE!

Hint- their afraid of the tea partyers because they ALWAYS vote, they’re active at the local level- not the blogs- and they don’t whine.

You neglected to include that “teapartyers” are merely a creation of Oil Billionaires such as the KochRoaches.

But speaking of Deaniac, this is classic. That pragmatic progressive is sending a message. It is time for a fight! Deaniac says we have a rumble (behind the cafeteria after Last Period).

Let me send a message to Huffington Post, FDL, and all the ideologue havens in the Firebagger Lefty Blogosphere (that’s right, I said it again): You have been propagating your anti-progressive, pro-dysfunction political message without accountability for too long. In President Obama’s words, Enough! Count on us in the pragmatic progressive blogosphere to stand up and fight back. You do not represent progressivism or liberalism, and we are done letting you hijack it. You wanted a fight, didn’t you? Well, you got one.

. . . .and Manning and Wikileaks and Van and Dawn Johnson and meddling in the Spanish courts to stop investigations into US torture in Iraq and abandoning Labor WRT to card check and coddling Lieberman and applauding the dumping of those Rhode Island teachers and standing around with his thumb up his butt while schools across the nation are shedding teachers and standing around with his other thumb in his mouth watching unemployment rise and blaming Congress for his problems instead of taking some positive action and OH WAIT, Lily Ledbetter, that was good.

As for what I plan to do, I will continue to support candidates I like the best I can with time and money, support my local Democratic party, spread my little bits of wisdom here and there, pen a letter/email when inspired, and not vote for Obama.

Screw the Republicans, none of them are worth much.

he hasn’t done anything to make us want to vote for him again, either. And he seems to believe that we’ll do it even if he continues to have his underlings insult us. (If you think all of them were saying that stuff without his knowledge or encouragement, however quiet, you might wnat to check you level of skepticism.)

But don’t miss the opportunity here. Once we teach Deaniac to fight (We’ll take it easy because we wouldn’t want to hurt him.) he may get courageous and try to fight with the right.

I agree. Some might say he’s a lazy, but maybe its he doesn’t really care? In the back of his mind he knows he so far over now and he just doesn’t care. Plus, the less he does the better the rate the big Corps. will pay him for his speeches about how he slew the mighty firebaggers, back then and freed the free market even more!

Go put a sock in it. You weren’t here and don’t know what people thought.

I personally think the jury’s out on the racist thing, but I look at RP this way.

Anybody who can produce a Senator Toilet Bowl/Light Bulb/Aqua Buddha has something loose in his character.

My opinion of ‘Deaniac’ just dropped another couple of notches, from its already-low level.

Ron Paul is an idjit, and you might as well stay home instead.

I love it when people give long lists as somehow indisputable facts. He did not protect the “status quo” millionaire tax cuts, the voters did when they elected the Republicans. Elections have consequences.

He’s getting out of Iraq at the same rate he promised in the campaign and he increased Afghanistan, like he promised in the campaign. Libya is closer to Kosovo than Iraq and it’s a transparent ruse of the Greenwaldites to give Obama an Iraq. As is the deification of Bradley Manning.

One of the key components of the health care bill is exchanges which allows competition.

If you would actually look at what Obama campaigned on, you’d see that the ACA is roughly the same as what he promised in the campaign. Yes, it’s sad that he has no public option, but we do get free preventive care, 85% loss ratio and expanded local centers. I’d say a wash.

If you want to give him FDR majorities in the house and Senate THEN you can bitch that he’s compromised (of course FDR, even with his majorities compromise more than Obama has). But until then you’re going to have to man up and accept that we “only” got 85% of what he campaigned on (hint- it wasn’t single payer and no wars, never, no matter what).

Neither SS or Medicare is on “the chopping block. Never has been, never will be- UNLESS we elect a Republican slate in 2012.

He certainly did use his capitol to get a slate of legislation passed. The lesislation he ACTUALLY campaigned on. You have this weird fantasy of politics:

FDLers fantasy:

OBAMA: JOE lieberman, you shall vote for single payer health care!

Lieberman: No! I will not!

OBAMA: If you do not vote for single payer- I shall POUND the bully pulpitt! I shall strip you of your leaderhip role, and challenge you in the primaries!

Lieberman: OH LORDY PLEASE NOOOOOO!! NOT THE BULLY PULPIT! PLEASE! I shall do whatever you want. Can i help you close guantanamo too?

REALITY:

OBAMA: If you do not vote for single payer- I shall POUND the bully pulpitt! I shall strip you of your leaderhip role, and challenge you in the primaries!….UH… what… are you doing taking your pants down…. OH MY GOD YOU’RE WIPING YOUR ASS WITH THE HEALTH CARE BILL!

LIEBERMAN: Sorry, ran out of toilet paper… and i believe in recycling by using worhtless pieces of paper.

Do you think that Obama couldn’t have gotten the debt ceiling raised to whatever level was necessary before this congress? In the lame duck one just done that was certainly a possibility, but that wasn’t tried.

Obama made numerous very bad choices in the first two years of his presidency, if he wanted to keep any kind of a democratic majority, I say if. If he wanted to lose it then he was briliant. Arguing about what Obama can do now after he screwed the puch without considering what he might might have done when he had his majorities, is just silly.

Some of the things that Obama could’ve signed an executive order for actually would’ve brought the country (closer) to following already existent laws, though.

Let’s say that he used an executive order to shut down Guantanamo and either transfer the prisoners to the United States if there was evidence for a trial, or repatriate them to countries that won’t torture them the instant they landed on the ground.

Guantanamo was illegal in the first place. It’s going to be kind of difficult for Congress to basically challenge Obama when the executive order he passed would be attempting to rectify a previous illegality.

somehow i responded to myself rather than you Phoenis. You’d think as an Obamabot that I’d be better with the technical stuff. Sorry about re-posting:

Well, i didn’t have good things to say about President Obama in 2007 either. I was a Hillary supporter. Deaniac admits he was an Edwards supporter. But once he won the nomination i got on board in hurry.

If not always being on the right team disqualifies you, then I guess we can’t listen to former Republicans Cenk uygur, Arianna Huffington, Ed Schultz, John Aravosis, Cenk Uygur, and Markos Moulitsas nor present day libertarian Glenn Greenwald. And we certainly can’t trust Paul Krugman who spent a year working in the Reagan administration.

In fact, one of the craziest things about the rhetoric on this site is that I was using similar rhetoric in regards to Obama that some here are using now. I wanted someone like Hillary because i wanted someone who wasn’t afraid to hit back at the GOP. Obama said then he wouldn’t and he hasn’t. Those who say he has not backbone (usually on this site they choose to say something about his testicles or a euphemism for it) are wrong. He has it, he’s just showing it towards you as well as them.

The problem most have with Obama isn’t that they didn’t get what they voted for, it’s that they don’t know WHAT they voted for.

Actually he did sign an executive order closing down guantanamo bay his first day. Congress refused to fund any transfers or fund any prisons to hold them in the U.S. It was a 97 to 0 vote, by the way.

I find it very hard to believe that this was the end of it for Obama. If it had been Bush, he would’ve still found some way to get it done anyways.

it’s a transparent ruse of the Greenwaldites to give Obama an Iraq. As is the deification of Bradley Manning.

You are morally unbalanced, and you deny atrocities, paid by US Taxpayers such as me. This Administration is a criminal gang of psychopaths, same as the previous eight years. Bradley Manning has been tortured by the US Government by order of the Commander in Chief. Manning revealed Government corruption and crimes, at least one war crime.

Of course Obama’s support of Forever Wars in Irak and Afghanistan will be what destroys his Presidency. Then again he has still more Clusterfucks in Libya, Yemen, Gaza…maybe he will have an infinite number of forever wars.

Then there was the 2010 campaign, worst ever even though the opposition was Teabaggers and their Oil billionaire patrons. No issues, no fighting the teabaggers, no reason for voters to vote. After Tim Kaine’s Kabuki failure, Obama let KAine have six more months of neutering the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party, with the leadership of Obama and Kaine, has become just another centrist, teabagger institution.

The only really horrible decision i think he made was letting Congress go in August without the health care law done. He should of either 1. Submitted it without Baucus or 2. Made them stay in session.

There’s a weirdness that goes on with the American People of today that didn’t always exist: they don’t like things that take a long time. One of the factors that worked against Gore and allowed Bush to steal the Presidency was just the fact that “IT’S TAKING SO LONG!” People who are used to finding out the winner at the end of a tv show, or at worst the next week can’t stand a long drawn out court battle. Just pick anyone.

Health care took so long that even if it were an absolutely perfect bill, people would trash it, just because it ate up a year and a half of their time and wasn’t as entertaining as the OJ trial.

Sadly if Carter had bombed the hell out of Iran- killing all the hostages- people would of rallied around the President and maybe Reagan would of been an “also ran”. People at the time cared more that it took two years than the fact that he got them out.

Well, i deny that Bradley Maning is an “atrocity”. But yeah, if his LAWYER can prove any atrocities (being made to sleep naked, covered by a blanket- which Greenwald misrepresents as being forced to be naked 8 hourse in his cell hardly counts.

The guys represented by cousel, has been from the start. None of what was described in any way seems like torture- just normal treatment of prisoners. Especially ones that make statements about suicide.

Yeah, like bush “found a way” to privatize Social Security and reform imigration. He couldn’t waive a magic wand either.

It is called indefinite detention. It is called sleep deprivation. It is called solitary confinement. Put Manning on trial but he should be released immediately. His life is possibly at risk. Obama does use assassination and renewed the Contract with the assassins of Blackwater. Most dictators also use torture and assassinations to silence dissent.

You have demonstrated your support of torture and criminal wars which belong to Chicken hawk Obama. To repeat you are morally unbalanced and you deny the many atrocities, at home and abroad committed by Obama.

Do you really HAVE to psychoanalyze him? Rush Limbaugh and Beck and the right does that all the time too. it’s enough to dislike his policies without engaging in psychological gobeldygook which when boiled down just calls him an Oreo.

Disagreeing with Jane Hamsher and Company is not a character flaw.

Just out of curiosity Phoenix, did you ever hang out at Bill Maher’s blog?

I have heard no evidence of most of that stuff you said. And the charges against him are serious. His “indeffinate detention” is because he admitted to a crime.

Sorry, but his treatment is no different than that of people in jail all over the U.S.. If you want to take on our prison system, i’m with you. But Bradley Manning is a representative of the prison system, not Obama’s Abu Ghraip.

You are not allowed to spread lies and disinformation here.

First, Manning was indeed treated differently than other prisoners in the brig at Quantico, and the brig command was told repeatedly Manning was not a suicide risk.

Second, indefinite detention is not a sentence; in fact indefinite detention is patently unconstitutional.

Third, in no way is Manning’s treatment representative of the US or Federal detention system; there has been no trial and no sentence.

This is so precious. Deaniac has another Post about “Professional Lefties”. These are the hard lefties I think. In fact, “Professional Left” is used seven times, but not in a good way.

Deaniac does have a point. You could even call it somewhat Substantive. The substance is that the Big Debt Deal was a Winner! And no one is challenging that substance. Repeat, rinse, wash, repeat…It is a winner…

While it’s flattering to see the strong words I used get the most whining response from the Professional Left, not one of them – not Krugman, not Sargent, and certainly not Huffington Post – has addressed the substance of my argument: that the debt ceiling deal was a substantial win for the President

I should of said no “convincing” evidence. Sorry. Tired.

Even P.J. Crowley, the State Department official fired for defending Manning, states that he is in no way being “tortured”.

Being made to sleep naked might be an inconvenient, being forced to stay up during the day, might be unpleasant, not having company might be a drag, but it’s not torture. Hell, i’d prefer that over the “torture”i had to endure in Basic training. Sorry, nothing given convinces me. I mean military justice is very harsh justice. It was when i was in, it is now.

I’ll probably catch it for this, but it’s the truth. 60 or 70 years ago, he’d of been shot already. I’m not saying we should go back to that- we shouldn’t. I’m just illustrating that military justice is a mother fucker.

People can disagree without being “liars”. I, and P.J. Crowley, disagree. His treatment is hard, but it’s not much worse than any soldier who’s given away State secrets. I believe this is more of an attempt to give Obama an Abu Ghraip.

You guys have been having just as many posts about Deaniac and the TPV. Deaniac says he wants to bring the fight directly to FDL. He’s doing what he said he would. And you have been responding. Not precious, just the “fight” he wants.

He’s not brave enough to show up here on his own, and bans “firebaggers.” I call that chickenshit.

Thanks. It is very thoughtful of you to say so.

I call it his blog. I don’t necessarily agree with him. I think i, and most of the folks on that Blog can handle any FDLer. But i do get tired of the CONSTANT bashing from all sides Obama gets. Whether it’s from the kenyan, maoist, marxist right or the corporatist, caving worse than Bush left. I used to go to places like Crooks and Liars, Huff post and yes, FDL to get away from anti-democrat talking points.

People go to Comic book convenions because they want to discuss whether Spiderman could beat the crap out of Batman if they ever got into a fight, not to have someone barge in there and DEMAND that they move out of their mom’s basement.

He bans FDLers because he’s sick of hearing it, not because he is incapable of refuting it.

But if you want to say that it negates his “want to fight” rhetoric you have a great point.

I didn’t make a galling admission, I’m sure he wouldn’t disagree with a word i said. He’s wrote the very same thing. Over and over again. He’s challenging FDL’s right to call itself the base.

But i guess i should just say “you’re welcome” kind of disarmed me with all the politeness and all.

Anyway, my cat has been prostrating himself across my keyboard confused that i would pay attention to it, rather than him. He’s a brat, but he knows how to get petted.

I think my cat is a Firebagger. If he weren’t so cute i’d trade him in for an Obamadog. Good night, i shall have to accept for one more day that there are people WRONG on the internet.

Shorter Tom: “if only we ignorant white people could ignore all the minutiae like his political track record and other inconvenient facts, Obama could totally be MLK meets Malcolm X in a Muhammad Ali wrapper…”

That whole screed is almost like a delusional failception: a fail within a fail within a fail of unicorn fantasies.

Well said. It was a masterpiece of absurdity. Gotta love the race based defense. That it also came with a poke at the honorable Dr. West was precious. I despise that sort of drivel.

He deletes and bans posts coming from the “bleeding heart liberals”?

Of course FDL isn’t the base. Liberals (who oppose extended wars of recreation, torture, erosions of civil liberties, etc) are “the base”. Or, they used to be. Times very well might be changing.

You’re right. Vote for Nader. That always works out so well.

Playing the Nader card is embarrassing.

Thank you.

“Hey, I’m just jazzed to be on the show, man.” -G. Fleegman.

Yet not so embarrassing as admitting that you voted for Nader.

I win.

Jesus – can’t you all go yell in some other area of FDL and leave those of us who come here for the snark and bassets in peace?

In my estimation, the progressive view is less about Obama’s dismal record (and it has been a dismal one) than it is about advancing policies that Americans actually need and actually want. And that are achievable with just the smallest amount of political courage.

However…

“He’s getting out of Iraq at the same rate he promised in the campaign”

Obama promised many times that we would be out of Iraq by 2009
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WYTKj8pU5M

“One of the key components of the health care bill is exchanges which allows competition.”

Even a sh*t sandwich has bread in it. Get past the small handful of good provisions and the law is little more than a French kiss to the insurance industry.

“the ACA is roughly the same as what he promised in the campaign.”

If you want call no public option and mandate to buy private insurance “roughly the same”. It’s kinda like saying 4foot2 and 6foot8 are “roughly the same”. After all, they both use feet and inches.

“If you want to give him FDR majorities in the house and Senate”

He HAD majorities like that his first two years. 60 democratic senators (later 59) and a commanding majority in the house. And he wasted them.

“Neither SS or Medicare is on “the chopping block. Never has been,”

The cast of characters, especially the supposed Democrats on the first Catfood Commission were almost ALL people who were on the record as advocating cuts to SS and Medicare. Obama CHOSE those people.

I guess there are people that view it as “pragmatic” to fudge the truth when it comes to a record that is easily researched. I don’t view being less than honest as having real pragmatism with the American electorate. I believe they are tired of being p*ssed on and then told it’s raining.

We need jobs, we need better healthcare reform than we got, we need education for our children, improvements to infrastructure. We need a host of things.

What we don’t need is more disingenuous political triangulation that doesn’t end up working anyway.

nader didn’t steal the election in 2000

Nader even tried to take a stand against it.

Nader didn’t fold after the stolen election in 2004.

Fools like you want to say “but it shouldn’t have been close enough to steal” (if you will acknowledge any facts at all.

After reading your post and comments here, I am sure you DON’T acknowledge any facts at all.

So what is your handle over at the orange site? Sure sound like a kos mo obamabot to me.

I wish I had.

Voting was never enough and I will never get back the time I invested in getting this particular warmonger elected.

I’m ashamed that I ignored my instinct because a friend who worked for two Presidents reassured me 0 was the real deal.

The zealotry of the anti-Nader haters isn’t amusing anymore.

I seem to recall there was a traitorous sCOTUS, some election fraud, vote suppression, but hard to remember. Some guy named Jeb and a woman named Katherine come to mind as well.

I can’t help but wonder why anyone blames there being better choices on the ballot for the theft?

Could it be, there is some commandment of democracy that states thous shalt have no other candidates beside the official R or D candidate and to keep them holy?

Personally I haven’t given up hope for Barack Obama even though he has shown little inclination for bold gestures. I’ll still vote for him for no better reason than the fact that the alternatives range from abominable to “are you fucking kidding?”.

From YOU?

S’rsly?

A noted sarcastic n snarkiest of the realm proggy, you BELIEVE this?

N folks wonder why I give up on progressivism . . . they’re in our foxholes n killin us . . .

I’m real sorry to hear this from ya, hoss.

Don’t ban me . . . ;-)

I’m not going to respond to your whole post point by point. Call me Chicken shit. Or Ishmael. NONE of the clips from the video say that he promised to be out by 2009. In fact they all say either 1. Phased withdrawal or 2. We have to be as careful getting out as we were getting in. That video proves MY point,not yours.

FDR had 70- 80% majorities, Obama had 60% and 2 of them were Nelson and Lieberman.

The “catfood commission” recomendations never passed, furthermore the term “catfood commission” is pure propoganda so that no one will actually LOOK at it. It’s pretty much black letter propoganda tool. right up there with proclaiming liberal media so that no one bothers to consider whether they ARE actually liberal.

If the ACA was such a “giveaway” to the insurance industry, why are they willing to spend billions to defeat it?

…and the zealotry of people who waste their vote in attempt to feel pure and good while ignoring the fallout afterwards has never been amusing.

As people keep saying, elections have consequences and we don’t have them so you can win a progressive merit badge because ‘at least you tried’. So, for those who voted for Nader in 2000, enjoy your bronze medal. That and $2 will get you a cup of fair trade coffee…

All right, here’s my question.

Let’s assume, just for the moment, that Al Gore decides not to concede the 2000 election. What happens next? The Supreme Court has essentially ruled that George W. Bush is President. Al Gore refuses to accept that.

Well, now we have at best a Constitutional Crisis because there hasn’t been a Presidency since Reconstruction that’s been challenged at that level of basic legitimacy.

At worst, you have just created a schism not seen since the days of James Buchanan. Do you really think that if Gore had “fought to the last man”, he’d have won the argument? I seriously doubt that, and the fight would have triggered political disaster that hadn’t been seen since the Civil War. And if you think refighting that particular one is worth it, you and I are certainly not going to see eye-to-eye.

Everyone says that Gore should have fought. No one seems to make it clear how that would have made a difference in a positive way.

I never ban.

Unless you talk shit about my daughter or my dogs.

Ever the dad…

Oh, I don’t know. If shit-tons more of us lefties had voted for Nader and at least grown the third party movement, we might not be so screwed now, you know?

Please don’t ban me either. I enjoyed the amusing parts, that’s what had me reading. I just despise damaging memes.

I do wonder why firebaggers wouldn’t be welcome here, kinda makes me sad even if I get that some may want a sanctuary within FDL. Maybe you can keep stuff off the FDL front page?

I’ve seen other places go the way of officially excluding angry liberals. It causes a bit of resentment is somewhat of an understatement.

K, thanks, I see the comment you don’t ban for being an angry liberal. Have a good one.

“NONE of the clips from the video say that he promised to be out by 2009″

5:56 – The pace would something like 2 brigades a month. That would put us someplace in 2009. That’s what he said. On camera. In that YouTube video.

“FDR had 70- 80% majorities, Obama had 60% and 2 of them were Nelson and Lieberman”

FDR had 63% his first term – when a LOT of the New Deal was instituted. If Obama can’t get anything done with 60% – even including 2 recalcitrant senators it’s something loud and clear. Ineffectual.

“The “catfood commission” recomendations never passed”

Still doesn’t change the fact that the chopping block was ready.

“I’m not going to respond to your whole post.”

Because you can’t. Most of the post is about what can and should be done about improving our future. Obama seems to be all about electioneering

In fact they all say either 1. Phased withdrawal or 2. We have to be as careful getting out as we were getting in. That video proves MY point,not yours.

We thought, because we are stupid. We thought the Obama campaign would end the illegal wars. I personally am so dumb that whatever Obama says, I get the wrong meaning. So I will just ignore him.

Military occupations do end. Sometimes it requires decades for the oppressor to become demoralized and bankrupt. Sometimes, the indigenous population rises up to fight and defeat the foreign invaders.

Why are we murdering people with robot drones? When will it end? Do you think we will have victory from any of Obama’s oil wars?

“….I will never get back the time I invested in getting this particular warmonger elected.”

So your position is that we’d have had a much more peaceful world with a McCain/Palin presidency .?….really..?

If Bush got “everything he wanted” why isn’t Social Security privatized? In fact, where is our comprehensive immigration reform

Reread my post – I said Bush got every CENT he wanted. And he did. Name something he asked Congress for money for (including the wars, including after the Dems took control of Congress) and didn’t get.

It really doesn’t have anything to do with ideological purity, merit badges, or feeling good, though. It’s about political incentives and pragmatic strategy and what one thinks the true goals of Wall Street are.

If Democrats economically move to the right (like their wall street donors insist) when they know people will vote for them no matter what, then the Dems will push through economically regressive policies every time. Without fail. It’s a “free money, no consequences, fulla personal win” position they’re in.

Second of all, if one of the central points of your argument is decrying the “win at all costs and hang the law” Republican Party, you cannot turn around and then endorse those same tactics

Reread my post. I did not say win at all costs. I went out of my way to say that we should not adopt tactics that are illegal. But signing statements are legal. So why not do it? You haven’t answered that question yet.

He said “something like” two brigades a month. Certainly the take away message was “careful going out as we were careless going in” not “i’m going to be out by 2009 as you suggested. Furthermore his campaign actually drew up a plan for withdrawal and it basically looked like what we got

Not being willing to trade talking point for talking point is not the same as not being able to. You’re engaging in Hannity style debate tactics. Claim a hundred different things are “facts” and beat the guy through volume, not accuracy.

It’s a deception to blame people who voted for who they thought was best. If you want to blame people who didn’t vote, would you blame those who were caged or suppressed as well?

Are you providing cover for the traitorous sCoTuS by blaming people whose votes were their voices?

Would you take away people’s right to vote for who they think would be best or is it satisfying enough to blame them for doing their duty, voting, and staying true to their principles?

I suspect that there is some very interesting thinking disconnect, break, that is occurring in those who blame the Nader votes. I think they know their democracy is a sham and they despise those who were not in denial and were willing to trade their vote for an empty promise from a D or R. I don’t quite know how to explain it yet, but I glimpse something that I think scares them, that they know they are unprincipled and are failing their democracy. I know, doesn’t quite make sense, but my instincts have proven pretty good even if I am often a little slow.

@frmrirprsn and @Frank33, everyone has been ignoring that idiot. Of all the blog posts across the lefty firebagger blogosphere, his site only has his little klatch of sycophants responding to his garbage- he has received the message he’s been Shirley Sherroded though. Please ignore the narcissist and let it sink in.

Because the progressives spent 8 years arguing they weren’t legal if they directly contradicted what Congress passed. And that’s what you are arguing President Obama should do – issue a signing statement in direct contravention of the law. Just because it’s “our guy” does not make it okay.

It’s that kind of situational ethics that pisses me off. And personally, I can’t shave with my eyes closed.

No. There would be trade offs for sure. I do believe the elected members of the Dem Party would be clearer about what they stand for. They would not trade their brand for team Obama’s brand. Our 6+ year peace protest folded after Obama was elected. Everything would be trade offs.

May I suggest you craft the question with more care? I only suggest this because I can’t imagine an answer would offer any new insight. Plus framing the question that way, is like imprisoning thought.

he’s not sick of it. He’s consumed by it.

Well, we kind of consume each other. Kind of reminds me of the Star Trek half/black half/white episode. We’re both claiming to be true liberals, trying to destroy one another. I guess to an outside observer it probably seems pretty nuts.

I could get more of what I want on the left from Ron Paul than I could Obama. I have no doubt he would pull the troops out. That’s all I ever wanted Obama to do. He probably would also take on the bankers who ripped us off instead of putting them in charge. And no, I’m not trying to say vote for Ron Paul, but I am pointing out that a guy in the Republican primary just said about 10 things in a debate that I wish could have come out of Obama’s mouth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMmVwW8h4Ho

See i disagree with the whole notion of “making a statement” through voting. I think it’s kind of lazy and silly. If you want to make a statement, go to city hall with a speaker phone. If you want to make a statement, start a blog. He’ll make a reply to a blog. You DON’T make a statement through. Voting is the time to be analytical and to choose the people best who will get the job done. Sure go ahead and push REALLY hard for Kucinich in the primaries, but if he doesn’t win, go for the next guy who has a chance of winning. Elections aren’t an expression of freedom of speech, they are a means of making sure we keep freedom of speech.

Indeed the report is that Obama believes being seen in any way a liberal will harm his re-election chances. So no “socialist” programs to put folks to work unless matched by cuts to “socialist” programs to help the unemployed survive.

Fuckin hell.

I’m going to print out this entire thread to give to any right-winger who needs cheering up.

“He’ll reply to a blog”… Who is “He”? The left doesn’t exist unless it’s to denigrate. There is a blog, it’s called FDL. :)

I don’t think you appreciate the situation with the parties. There will be no primary within the party. The Progressive caucus was put on ice with an ad-hoc vote to renew all the charters of the caucuses within the Californian Dem party because they wanted have a primary. The Progressives charter was not voted on because the party bosses would have voted to not renew. They decided to wait until November to let things cool down – or actually destroy any chance of beginning a campaign. This is the sword of Damocles, is it not?

Whose voice is being heard? What kind of democracy is this?

http://openleft.com/diary/15278/indispensable-enemies

If you were watching like FDL watches congress and the president, you would see more of these machinations. We have people that are former staffers and have contacts on the inside that point this out and it becomes more obvious.

“Claim a hundred different things are “facts” and beat the guy through volume, not accuracy.”

Interesting ad hominem, considering all I was doing was addressing YOUR points one by one.

I’ll return to my main point, however, which is this. The American people deserve more than empty promises and fudged, spin-doctored supposed results. The American people need public officials who can create programs that help them. Progressives are more interested in that than whether or not one team wins or loses.

I think you bring up a good point, Margaret, when you say that if I’m supporting Paul in the Republican primary, then I’m a racist and that’s all you need to know about me. I think the point is that you and I, and most of the firedoglake “community,” know little or nothing about each other.

I looked back at some of your other posts, and noticed that you’re a Texan. I grew up in Texas , and would like to claim that I’m not a racist, but the truth is that I have spent most of my life fighting the racist impulses that are deep within me. I don’t think it’s possible to grow up in a racist culture and not be tainted by it, and I admit that I am tainted, and no matter how hard I scrub at that stain, it is always there.

As a white progressive, I have worked for racial social and economic equality all of my adult life. I voted for Obama, and cried with joy when he was elected, only to see him sell out all the poor people who believed in him and donated money that they couldn’t afford to his campaign. Obama has achieved more of the Republican agenda than any Republican could have, and now he’s trying to destroy Social Security and Medicare.

Supporting Ron Paul in the Republican primary does not make me a supporter of racist legislation or programs any more than your opposition to the only Republican or Democrat running in the primaries who calls for an end to the wars, an end to the War on Drugs (which is a war against blacks and the poor), an end to all the NAFTA type trade deals, and a return of our civil liberties, means that you’re a troll or a fascist.

If we could discuss our ideas in a civil way; maybe we could learn from each other.

Of course a Democratic part is not going to renew a charter that wants to primary a democratic president. Neither would a Republican party. They can still primary him, they just can’t do it under the cover of being Democrats.

If i had a nickle for every secret source that has been wrong…. I wouldn’t be working for free as an intern right now.

I agree, that’s why i support Obama. And not wanting to go through a long list of bullit points one by one is more a statement of laziness than an ad hominem.

This should be fun,not work.

Of course a Democratic part is not going to renew a charter that wants to primary a democratic president.

Really? No matter how much of a Trojan Horse Republican the original candidate turns out to be?

Never, ever, under any situation?

What’s the purpose of the primary process when a member of the party is president, then?

Bush asked for a bigger tax cut than the ones he actually got. And in terms of wars, every President ALWAYS gets what he wants. Obama has gotten every cent for that too. The republicans made some noise about cutting off Libya, but they haven’t.

“I agree, that’s why i support Obama.”

And that of course is your choice. Why that choice (and here I’m talking about the President’s staffers and representatives) would include denigrating and demonizing people they ostensibly agree with, castigating them as “firebaggers” and “f’in retards” seems petty and absurd to me

Yes, this should be fun – and not include that kind of crap. But it’s their choice. (Maybe yours too) We continue doing what we’ve always done – fighting for social justice.

He’s accomplished more liberal legislation than any president in generations. There’s not a single President in history that lives up to the absurd standards you’re putting on him. You want a President that gets things done and NEVER compromises, that man has never existed.

Well, we’re not really fighting for social justice, we’re wasting time on a blog. It’s not really all that grandiose.

But i do promise to pen some time in for fighting for social justice tomorrow.

Speak for yourself.

You have no idea what I do when I’m not correcting spin.

Yes, Clarence Darrow, Ghandi, Martin Luther King and RFshunt, the great spin correcter. Someday there will be statues of you… i mean if anyone knew what you looked like.

Classy. It’s always good when somebody let’s their true colors show.

There’s a saying that goes: “You know a man by the company he keeps.” I guess that’s true of the President and his operatives.

Every single time the party in power has engaged in a strong primary of their sitting President, the sitting President wins the primary but then loses the general.

And remember when Ted Kennedy primaried Jimmy Carter, we ended up with Ronald Reagan as President. No one who wants to stay in leadership wants to be the guy putting up another Ted Kennedy.

It’s ok to laugh at yourself a little. You have to admit that stating that Paul Krugman or Deaniac or Jane Hamsher or Glenn Greenwald or Northwood or ANY blogger or columnist is “fighting for social justice” is just silly. I know you want to pretend that Obama has turned this into a fascist country, but he hasn’t.

If you can do it in your underwear, it’s not really “fighting for social justice”. Krugman writes a good column, Jane has a popular blog, but that’s not fighting.

If you can do it in your underwear, it’s not really “fighting for social justice”

As I said, you have no idea what I do when the pants go on.

And every jerk I’ve ever met, when he’s caught out at being a huge jerk, always says the same thing.

“”Hey, it’s o.k. to laugh at yourself.”

Guess what, I’m laughing. At you. Feel better now?

He’s accomplished more liberal legislation than any president in generations.

Like what? Heritage Foundation’s/Romney’s HC”R”? “Progressive”, like calling for cuts in Social Security?

And the “spoiler effect” always happens. Except when it didn’t, with the Whigs.

There’s no such thing as “every single time” in politics. Times change.

So wtf exactly are you doing? Fighting online for a corrupted party in the name of co-opting liberalism and progress?

Oh, you, in your pajamas, fighting the good fight to support cutting social security in the name of liberalism! That’s so very pragmatic, after all.

Jesus fuck.

So athena1, here’s the thing. They’re a corrupt bunch with a corrupt agenda. We can talk to them, of course, but it’s only helpful as a reality check. To see how far the corruption has seeped.

There’s a whole world of people out there in a whole lot of hurt. And that’s who we need to talk to, work with, get involved with helping. We need to stay clear on that, let the insults run off our backs, and get busy out where we need to be.

It can be done.

Non-Illegitematum Carborundom.

Don’t let the bastards grind you down.

Meant to be in reply to Athena at 172.

I already said what i’m doing. Wasting time and having fun. If i ever found myself getting actually angry at anyone over a message board, i’d seriously consider taking a time out.

I’m not “fighting” to do anything. I disagree with your statement that Obama or ANY Dem wants to cut social security. Other presidents, like Reagan with the aid of Tipp O’ Neal and Clinton have adjusted SS without ending it. But if you want to make sure it ends, give the GOP a full slate, they want to end it. Not Obama.

Health care reform has already helped people and will continue to help more people. The important word in progressive is PROGRESS not perfection. If you guys were in charge of civil rights you would of given up after the win at Brown v. Topeka and gone home in disgust because there’s still segregation.

Damn,i REALLY thought i’d get banned by now. I’m wasting WAY too much time on this site.

Maybe i’ll insult T bogg’s dogs. But i like dogs.

Ok… T bogg…. ummm… your dogs smell like dogs!

Hopefully that does it.

Yeah, you seem like a ton o’ fun.

Obama is no better than “are you fucking kidding” He just fucks us without saying stupid idiotic things and showing contempt for working people. But he still fucks them over just like a Repub and if that’s all you need is phony lip service , you’re covered.

Do you see the contradictory logic of these two statements you made @151 and @157
Here’s the setup:

Sure go ahead and push REALLY hard for Kucinich in the primaries, but if he doesn’t win, go for the next guy who has a chance of winning.

Here’s the excuse:

Of course a Democratic part is not going to renew a charter that wants to primary a democratic president.

You move goal posts. This is dishonesty and lacking in consistency and belief in principles.

You’re a True Believer in a cult of Personality; everything you do is based on advancing a demi-god who will then bestow upon you social justice that he secures for you out of his liberal goodness.

Unless he doesn’t.

Then you’ll return to the excuses and apologies: it’s your fault because he’s just a man, not a demi-god after all.
Perhaps you should consider advancing or working for the principles of social justice from the start. Presidents are vessels. If they cant get the job done, they should step aside. It’s not about them. it’s about us. He’s holding up progress. We’ve got work to do cleaning up after Clinton, Bush, and now Obama.

Here’s something that’s really fun.

Hey there, whoever is checking up on how well insipid is doing their job – insipid really blew it, huh.

Made OFA look small-minded, mean-spirited and totally unable to get their facts straight. It’s so bad, insipid had to start pretending to be a garden variety troll.

This is FDL, you really should assign somebody with more smarts, shouldn’t you?

Pretty funny, huh, insipid?

There’s other ways to work on third parties besides trying to somehow win the presidency. Perhaps trying for some city council spots? Or trying to get instant run off voting in your state? The problem with Nader and other progressives is that they only consider third parties during the presidential runs, the rest of the time they don’t want to do the work.

That’s not moving the goal post, Kucinich wasn’t running against a sitting president, he was running against Obama when Obama was also running for the nomination.

Plus we’re not talking about an individual candidate running we’re talking about a DEMOCRATIC party of a state setting a position which, i believe, is contrary to the interest of the democratic party. You can say i’m wrong, but it’s within the rights of the leaders of the party to state that’s not the direction they want to go.

I don’t think Insipid is a paid troll. S/He’s a true believer, uses too much of the same language found at among the clique of deniac, abl.

The Problem with Nader and other Progressives… other Progressives
What do you know of Nader, tell us all you know about Ralph Nader. …and other progressives. Project much?

What do you know of work? You have to laugh at yourself sitting in your underwear and all.

It’s a waste of time dealing with you.

Look, if i hurt your feelings, i’m honestly sorry. I thought you’d laugh at my joke.

For whatever it’s worth, i never disbelieved you when you said that YOU fight for social justice. I assume you’re an honest person.

When you said fighting for social justice you were clearly referring to FDL and company, not yourself. I thought that funny, not because FDL is a bad site, but because i think blogs are mostly just places where people can sound off. Not really do much. I will admit that i misread one of your replies and thought you were still talking about yourself as a poster rather than as a person when you said “speak for yourself” thus my statue comment.

I’m sorry i mis-read your post. Their was no malicious intent in any of my statements.

He wrote unsafe at any speed about the corsair which proved that the auto industry was the problem, not the drivers, that alone saved hundreds of thousands of lives, he was instrumental in passing the freedom of information act, he’s the father of modern consumer advocacy.

I wish he would of used his considerable talent to work on a real third party, rather than wreck the democratic party.

Well see there, I’m not a party hack.

It doesn’t matter when a primary happens. Kucinch and Gravel were shut out of the Debates but this isn’t anything new. it happens all over the country in down ticket races too. Marcy Winograd tried to debate Jane Harman and Harman didn’t bother to show up. Other national progressives like Waxman and Lynn Woolsey stepped up to support warmonger Blue dog Harman over Winograd.

Go ahead and read this: http://openleft.com/diary/15278/indispensable-enemies

It’s still very relevant. Politics is a dirty game of power and there is not very many principled politicians.

Of course it’s a waste of time, we’re discussing shit on a message board. Did you think we were writing the magna carta? This thread will be history tommorrow.

If Ralph Nader had wrecked the Democratic Party it would have been his single greatest achievement.

Yeah, if only we could get rid of that fucking right to assembly.

That whole book is bullshit.. The South Tried not having political parties during the civil war, it made governing next to impossible,their was no base to rally voters, there was no organizing force.

Basically, all that book does is do the same thing to parties that the Republicans try to do to Governments- make it into this evil boogeyman.

No, its a waste of time because you aren’t here to learn or participate. You are here to convince us all of the superiority of your positions.

If you brought something new, or of value other than OFA platitudes and simplistic and inconsistent ideas it would be worth the time. Until you have your own come to jesus moments I don’t think you will make good connections with people here. I get the feeling you are very young. the People that are on FDL are mostly older- Late 40′s to 60′s average and have been at this for a long time. Take a look at the YouTubes they share. Many were hippies in the 60′s or served in the Vietnam War.

Don’t you know about Tammany Hall?

This book? Woodrow Wilson, FDR, JFK, LBJ, and even McGovern? Is this back in the civil war?

what does this have to do with anything? Did you run out of bullet points?
I’ve outta here. Good luck insipid. It’s a bitch when you figure out what you feared really is the truth. Obama is no knight in shining armor, just held back by circumstances beyond his control. Good night.

You’re not bringing anything “new” either. There’s not a single “talking point”, you, or anyone else has said that has been in any way unique. I’ve heard all of them many times. Saying “It’s all the fault of the two party system” is as simplistic as it gets. And you’re wrong about my age.

Don’t be under any illusion that you’re here to do anything but tout the superiority of your position. If you really think you’re here to learn, you’re fooling yourself. You’re here for affirmation. You’re here to feel superior to the “apologists”

What does the right to assembly have to do with political parties? And you think that I’M the one that has to learn things?

And it will be a bigger “bitch” for you when you realize that most of the programs he’s accomplished were really pretty good and that Barack Obama will be as beloved as the other presidents you seem to hate FDR etc.

People use that kind of rhetoric to destroy Unions. Jimmy Hoffa, corruption, organized crime. Just because there’s corruption in an organization, doesn’t mean the entire thing is corrupt.

You brought up right to assembly, then you connected it to political parties and then said I didn’t know about the connection. And I hate FDR.. and my rhetoric could destroy unions because I said the parties were corrupt. Nice straw men. Jesus.

This isn’t “winning” insipid.

Nite.

I was saying that your rhetoric towards political parties is similar to the rhetoric towards unions. Not that you were tring to to “destroy” unions. Talk about straw men.

There’s nothing to “win”.

Sleep tite.

Word.
Watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP44ngv9hZI

Black and otherwise poor folks aren’t dumb.

No, you’re not going to get banned. That’s not how we roll.

You’ll just have your misinformation corrected every step of the way. Sorry.
Facts are a motherfucker to deal with, aren’t they?

Do you need me to spoonfeed you quotes and links about how Obama has had it out (publicly) for Social Security from since he was in office? He really was talking about cutting SS and Medicare right off the bat. And we can prove it.

If you really haven’t been paying attention, and really do need spoonfeeding, I’ll do it.

Actually, the Greens have won a number of local seats.

http://www.gp.org/elections/officeholders/index.php

Why don’t you know about that?

I am having deja vu. Wasn’t there a Democratic President who moved too far to the right and sought re-election when unemployment was above 7 1/2%? Oh yea! Jimmy Carter!

WOW! Over 200 comments!

Somebody tell nonpartisanliberal.

nonpartisanliberal is here in spirit.

I do like whoever said TBogg bans folks. How fucking ignorant….