Fortunately, President Dr. Jill Stein is going to save us all with her Magical Persuasive Presidentin’ Powers because It’s Just That Easy….
Dr. Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate for President of the United States, promises a Manhattan-project jobs program that would ignite our economy, repair our crumbling infrastructure, and put the US in the lead at the forefront of the world’s newest and hottest technologies. She will put forward the health care policy most of us wanted in 2009: the public option, effectively Medicare for everyone. She will withdraw our troops out of Afghanistan and implement the advice George Washington gave in his farewell address: “The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible.” Jill Stein will bring to the table a demand for an equitable tax system, not one in which the wealthy pay too little and we the 99% have to close schools, fire police, and shutter fire stations to make up the difference. Climate change and food security are at the top of her agenda, as is getting the money out of politics. A Jill Stein presidency will herald the liberation of a democracy currently hijacked by wealthy Americans like the Koch brothers and by corporate banksters like Lloyd Blankfein the CEO of Goldman Sachs. From the perspective of those of us in the 99%, the only plausible reason to fail to vote for Jill Stein is that voting for her will take votes away from Obama who would be better for the 99% than Romney. Let me explain why this fails to show that we should not vote for Jill Stein.
[...]
If we the 99% were able to stay focused on these issues basic issues and vote for candidates who would address them when they were in office, we would change our nation in one election by electing candidates who represent us and not the corporations, the lobbyists, or the military-industrial establishment. There are moments when our ability as a mega-majority to change our nation to serve our needs seems so obvious that I marvel that we haven’t already done so. After all, this is a democracy and we are the overwhelming majority. So why is our government still bailing out banksters and not creating jobs? Keeping troops in Afghanistan? Paying subsidies to the grotesquely profitable oil companies? The answer is straightforward. The 1% who benefit from these policies are employing the tactic that Julius Caesar and Napoleon knew kept a more powerful force impotent: divide and conquer or, in our case, divide and rule. That is what the 1% are doing and we fall for it. Whenever we get close to uniting in a demand for change, the 1% manages to sidetrack us by having someone scream “abortion,” “access to birth control,” or “same sex marriage” and we hustle back into our camps and renew our media-driven civil war against each other. We fall for “Red Herring Politics” every time.
When we set aside these red herring issues and assess Obama’s record from the perspective of the substantive issues that unite us, we see a president who has benefited the 1% every bit as much as George W Bush did or as much as Romney will.
Ah, the return of:
I don’t do gonadal politics.
– Ralph Nader, 1996
Excellent. A proven winner.
Also, too on the Fluke front.




118 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About TBogg
RSS/XML Feed
Really enjoyed Ms. Fluke’s speech.
And yeah baggers, if you really think not voting Obama and/or voting Romney is going to help women in Oklahoma considering a wire-hanger abortion please go fuck yourself.
Meanwhile CNN this morning tells me that new numbers are out showing Europe sliding deeper into recession.
Thus the result of austerity measures cutting government jobs and services, which they assure us will any day now make rich people and corporations so confident that they’ll start trickling money on everyone out of sheer joy, like one of those little nervous dogs who’s just been given a new diamond-studded collar.
Meanwhile last week the Republicans went on TV every night to complain that we just need to cut cut cut more government jobs and services because it’s the only way to get our economy back on track.
It’s nice to learn that President Jill Stein’s Congress will be filled with Sparkle Ponies and fueled by fairy farts…
Is President Stein taking orders for ponies yet?
I prefer Shetland.
With President Stein’s Sparkle Pony iPhone app you can create the pony of your dreams…
Most analysts, quite foolishly, leave fairy farts out of the equation when drawing their conclusions.
I’d never try to convince anyone who lives in a state that has any chance of tipping the election red to vote green. The idea that there’s no significant difference between the two major parties boggles the mind.
But that said, where electoral politics is already rigged solid red or blue, folks are free to vote for the candidate with the policies and ideals they most want to see enacted, even if only to send a message to the major party most likely to move in that direction.
No, you’ll likely never get Sparkle Ponies, but a little more glitter on the same old grey donkey might be a step in the right direction… …if it’s something that enough people in a position to ask do so, that is…
I’m all for practicality over idealism, especially anywhere there’s any chance it may actually make a difference…but you don’t get what you want by accepting whatever they give you, either. Some folks have to make demands for planets and stars, even if they settle for “only” the moon, later on…
We on the left have to work together wherever we can–and after Bush and now Obama, one would have to be a fool to ever let the right regain control or to think there’s no significant differences between the two major parties. But that doesn’t mean I don’t want more liberal candidates, preferably inside the Democratic Party, but elsewhere when necessary and possible. If the polling and whatnot here in NY allows, Dr. Stein may even get my vote…but only because I likely can… YMMV…
I recommend shorter paragraphs. And keeping it simple: if Bill Clinton can shred the GOP budget plan in everyday English, there’s no excuse for the wall-o-text that’s here.
I’m sorry, the 1% simply WILL NOT ALLOW the Sparkle Pony app and force us to track drones instead.
Dr. Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate for President of the United States, promises a Manhattan-project jobs program that would ignite our economy, repair our crumbling infrastructure, and put the US in the lead at the forefront of the world’s newest and hottest technologies.
Yes and Congress will naturally sweep her ideas right through and vote with resounding approval for all those ideas, amirite?
Jill Stein? Sellout. The REAL liberals are writing in Cindy Sheehan.
Still can’t quite figure out why the extreme level of hatred for Fluke from the right. I mean, she’s not blah, like the President, so it’s not a racial thing.
My guess is pure jealousy. Here is a young woman who came out of nowhere, speaks eloquently and truthfully, and does not respond to their gutter jabs. Basically, I think Loesch, Shapiro, et.al. are pissed that someone not born into the lucky sperm club like themselves – and has more natural ability and talent – won’t acknowledge their importance to the world.
The ugly step sisters are just pissed that Cinderella made it to the ball.
But austerity measures are a proven success at making government assets cheaper for one-percenters to buy. Share the wealth… with the wealthy!
Basically, Fluke is a slut, dontcha remember? She wanted to have sexytime using free birth control, paid for by the honest tax dollars of good Christian folk. And she got Rush Limbaugh in trouble for shooting his big fat mouth off.
That’s why they hate her.
Cindy’s in the Veep spot, supporting Roseanne.
All of these changes will be brought about by Green Lantern energy, which is possible only if you have the force of will to use it.
Dr. Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate for President of the United States, promises a Manhattan-project jobs program
Man, do these people even know what was the purpose of the Manhattan Project?
Still can’t quite figure out why the extreme level of hatred for Fluke from the right.
It’s because round these here parts, we don’t brook backsass from our fillies.
I hear you, but it’s like they take it to another level with her. I think Chris may have hit the nail on the head @18.
Bart Gruzalski’s piece is littered with stuff like All Obama had to do was to give a talk to the nation from the Oval Office explaining the [public] option and its benefits and the public would have insisted on its passage. and Obama could have talked to the nation on prime time [prime time, by god!] from the Oval Office about our economic recession, the need for jobs, the need to repair our infrastructure, and about how a jobs program putting millions of Americans to work would tackle all of these problems and If Obama had fought for us and the Republicans obstructed him, at least we would know we had a champion for the working American and the 99% in the White House.
Yes, if he’d only given a talk, why, those republicans would have rolled right the fuck over. And on and on and on Bart goes, with endless carping about political capital and championing and all the other intangibles which somehow were not correctly utilized by Mr Obama, but presumably would be by Jill Stein with great effect.
He gives his argument the shaft right up front, though, by pointing out that From the perspective of those of us in the 99%, the only plausible reason to fail to vote for Jill Stein is that voting for her will take votes away from Obama who would be better for the 99% than Romney
You can stop talking now, Bart. One of the reasons that third party candidates can promise the moon is that they know they haven’t a chance of actually being compelled to produce it.
At least the Greens didn’t go with Cynthia McKinney this time, they may be able to regain some credibility with Stien, but I’m not sure constantly running presidential candidates who barely register is a net plus for a movement that tends to have more resonance on a local level. Especially if it aggravates potential allies.
At minimum 1.5% of the vote goes to third party candidates every presidential election. These people are largely impervious to any argument concerning how the issues they actually care about will be effected by the differences between the Democratic and Republican candidates. They may even realize that their vote is a ‘wasted” vote, but that’s pretty much true of everyone who doesn’t live in the 9 or 10 battleground states.
Perennial third party champions are at least engaged in the process, and are far less a problem than the millions who know that who is president can make a difference in their lives, but still can’t be bothered to vote, or those who leave the voting booth right after voting for president, because they don’t think it matters who their Congressman or Senator is.
As a progressive, Jill Stein has lost more elections in Massachusetts than Mitt Romney. That’s Massachusetts, not Indiana.
Give me a break. The only tangible difference between Republicans and Democrats is who is going to suck harder on the dicks of the Wall Street scumbags and corporate fatasses. With Romney and Obama that is an open question. Remember it was Clinton who gave us NAFTA, repeal of Glass-Steagall, and suppressed efforts to regulate derivatives. Obama has followed in his footsteps. Things have to get worse before they can get better. Why settle for chump change distributed by the corporate Democrats ? The entire corrupt system has to collapse before it is rebuilt from the ground up.
You know, last night as I watched Fluke’s speech, I couldn’t help but hope that George Tierney Jr of Greenville, SC was watching the convention coverage.
how many Senate votes does the Green party have?
zero?
good luck with that, Dr Stein.
Aw hell. Now I am revealed as a snarker, but at least I can do it more accurately now.
Oh, for fucks sake! Why do things have to get worse before they get better? Seriously? Is that your agenda? Hasten more poverty, more fractured infrastructure, more sickness and death with another Republican administration? You are deluded. Seriously, you are.
And on another note, phrases that should be banned from the internet: “sheeple,” “wake up,” and “rebuilt from the ground up.”
Everyone must suffer! If there’s one thing true Progressives™ NEED, its communal pain. What immoral bullshit.
Oh please, do enlighten us on how we can speed up the collapse of the system, because I am completely sure that we, the disorganized, the OWS wiggle fingers/deciders, and the rest, can certainly out manuever the MIC and the 1% as they grab for the very last brass ring. It will be a workers paradise!
You forgot the an-ar-chy! an-ar-chy! chant.
Typical undergraduate mistake….
I’m putting my order in for my sparkle pony. I am sure Dr Stein will do all the shit Obama just fucking refused to do. I’ve been told so many times that he coulda done it all.
Shit yeah. Let’s blow the fucking place up. Or better yet, let’s just go stand in this corner right here and ignore these fucks. That will teach them.
Here is how they get things done (not a parody):
No tactics. No means. They’re more “big picture kind of people”. Let the uneducated and the poors suffer through the pain and do the work once the juicebox intelligentsia have laid out their ‘vision’.
We can call it: Occupy Animal Farm.
The word ‘sheeple” shall NOT be banned from use by those worthy enough to utter it
{sotto voce} It is a Summoning Word. {/sotto voce}
Or they can ask some of us round these parts and we can do it for them.
If things have to get worse before they get better, well, we’ve skipped the doldrums. A Shakira sex tape has been rumored …
Oh, okay, banned not for sheeple, but for the advanced mathematics (I was a liberal-arts major).
donnah and ChrisVosburg are both right. But there’s another element that makes the wingnuts crazy regarding Fluke: She doesn’t look like a proper slut.
They want a slatternly appearance that will reinforce their assertions, yet Sandra Fluke looks and sounds like the girl that would make your grandmother swoon with delight if you brought her home.
How are you supposed to convince your wimminfolk not to go off listening to people like her?
Are we laughing at the idea of voting for someone who doesn’t have a secret “kill list”, doesn’t assume every man in a war zone is a legitimate target for destruction, doesn’t favor transcontinental free-trade agreements designed to gut the working class, didn’t sign a law giving the president the power to lock up people indefinitely without a trial, doesn’t favor shoveling billions of dollars to big finance with quantitative easing, doesn’t favor radically increasing oil-drilling, and didn’t want to triple the amount of US troops in Afghanistan?
Why is that such a strange notion?
Nice. How about if you enlighten us about exactly who you’d prefer to see die in the process? Because I assure you that under your scenario a lot of people will die, and the vast majority won’t deserve it.
“It’s nice to learn that President Jill Stein’s Congress will be filled with Sparkle Ponies and fueled by fairy farts…”
Are you proud that you wrote that?
The president, whoever they are, can pull America out of its murderous wars overseas, have the justice department investigate financial fraud instead of whistle-blowers, reclassify marijuana to make it legal and pare back the idiotic war on drugs, and not approve the Keystone XL pipeline that would make global warming irreversible…without any need of Congressional approval.
So you’re saying a political movement motivated by the teachings of The Secret might fail? Interesting.
“…without any need of Congressional approval.”
Your idealism is admirable (and adorable) but do you really believe that the President, whoever they are [sic], would not have to deal with some heavy duty consequences, political and otherwise, of acting unilaterally?
As noted, the Occupy movement has done some good stuff – my favorite is that they knocked much of the “regular media” flat on their collective arses, and deservedly so (especially the in-the-tank financial/business “reporters”).
Given that entropy and dispersion were bound to inevitably win the day for street protest activities lasting more than a couple weeks, my hope was always that those early street gatherings would serve as the basis for small groups to organize and plan, and for individuals to take those plans back to their homes and offices, and put things into action based on the strength of their combined skills (organizing, IT/communications, fundraising, etc.). Does anyone know if reporting has been done on this sort of thing, i.e., that such follow-on activities actually happened? It would probably be reporting at alt-media or blogger-levels that would find it, and it may not be so easy to find.
“Acting unilaterally” is a poor choice of words. Some areas clearly fall entirely under the president’s jurisdiction. The president is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces. The president is the nation’s top law-enforcement officer, and the Justice Department reports to him or her. So does the FDA which controls which drugs are criminalized and which aren’t.
Some activities require more than one branch of government. Some don’t. That’s just how it is.
Sounds like we’ve found the “B ark”.
“As a progressive, Jill Stein has lost more elections in Massachusetts than Mitt Romney. That’s Massachusetts, not Indiana.”
What’s your point? And money impacts elections more than any other factor, doesn’t it?
I can assure you that all people will die, it’s just a question of when they’ll go; don’t get so tense about it.
Thanks for the civics lesson.
The political consequences of, say, decriminalizing marijuna, would doom Obama’s re-election campaign. Can’t you just see the Rove inspired political ads: “The pot addict in chief just put more drugs on the streets for your kids.”
Rescinding DADT was a political calculation (as well as the right thing to do) and will result in more votes gained than lost.
All the President’s action have consequences, regardless if other branches of government are involved. That’s just how it is.
Remember, satire is god, and god is dead.
“The political consequences of, say, decriminalizing marijuna, would doom Obama’s re-election campaign.”
Well, probably not, since a majority of Americans favor just such a move:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/22/legalize-marijuana-56-percent-rasmussen-poll_n_1537706.html
I, for one, look forward to Medea Benjamin’s confirmation hearings.
“All I need are some tasty waves, a cool buzz, and I’m fine.”
Christ, you are a moron aren’t you? It may have escaped your notice, but Presidents don’t rule by fiat. Grow the fuck up and sit the fuck down.
I doubt that the legalizing marijuana it would move the needle a measurable amount. Most of the people who support legalization already vote for Obama. I do.
That 56% number you referred to isn’t like a secret reserve of voters who didn’t vote last time around. They won’t get added to the majority from 2008 and push Obama over 100%, that’s not the way percentages work. Iknow it sucks when reality fucks up your world view.
Most of the 56% have already chosen sides and already participate. While on the other hand there is real danger that Obama will lose the votes from the people who voted for him the last time around don’t support legalization. I bet that Obama has better statisticians than you, working for him
Um, yeah:
Whatever TK421 has must be contagious. I over simplified my comment above, I forgot about all those Libertarians who support legalization of marijuana.
What I should have said is:
the President cannot de-criminalize marijuana. we are bound by our own laws as well as international treaties to keep it illegal.
at best, a President could try to lessen prosecution at the federal level. but that still leaves the states to enforce and prosecute as they wish.
Hey there tk421 sounds like you need some love here. I know where you can prolly find some. Check out the corner of…. (for a small fee….)
My response to Sandra Fluke is this: give her fistful of cash, then sit her down to a rockin’ dinner of my stuffed shells with homemade sauce and asparagus salad; bread from a great baker friend of mine, then talk and encourage. Love her.
Not to pile on, but, you know, a whole lot of things _can_ happen. Whether they’re likely to happen, or even realistically possible; well, that’s a different story. I mean, tomorrow, Rush Limbaugh can go on the air and tearfully apologize to Ms. Fluke and to anybody else he has attacked over the years, _and really mean it_! I’ll leave it to you to figure out what the odds are for that to happen. It’s good to be idealistic; it’s good to fight for the impossible, because sometimes you (amazingly!) win. Try to temper your idealism with understanding that what _can_ happen probably _won’t_ happen, and that most people will not do what you think they ought to do. It may not have escaped your attention, as well, that self-righteous indignation tends to attract spitballs and jeering from the audience. One of the big goals in life is getting where you want to be, and one of the most effective ways to get there is to convince other people that they want to help. Getting them annoyed with you isn’t the best way to get them on your side. Watch tapes of Bill Clinton and Freddy Mercury and ML King in action (among others) and see if you can get some ideas about how they managed to get the audience eager to go wherever they were headed.
Your reply to him was ever so much nicer than mine — I salute you. Really, absolutely no snark at all. Just respect for your patience.
Yeah, MLK was really careful not to annoy anyone. That’s how he made such a difference, right?
“On some positions, Cowardice asks the question, “Is it safe?” Expediency asks the question, “Is it politic?” And Vanity comes along and asks the question, “Is it popular?” But Conscience asks the question “Is it right?” And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must do it because Conscience tells him it is right.” — Martin Luther King, Jr., “Remaining Awake Through a Great Revolution” (31 March 1968)
I really don’t get all the energy expended against third partiers. Does anyone really think that a neo-Naderite replay of 2000 is in the making? Or is it some sort of tribal shunning exercise?
This doesn’t seem to make sense. The President has the power to have people killed, detained, or deported, drop bombs on countries without declaration of war, raid marijuana dispensaries in states where they’re legal, put the safety net on the table, ok the Keystone pipeline, prosecute whistleblowers. But when it comes to doing something good, or even just refraining from doing bad things, he’s powerless because doing so would interfere with his being re-elected to an office in which he is powerless?
If people believe the only things any President can possibly be expected to do are things which won’t cause Karl Rove to oppose his/her re-election, then it wouldn’t matter all that much who’s elected. “Not a dimes worth of difference” would be their position, not that of third party proponents.
“This doesn’t seem to make sense.”
Not to you. Most people understand that the President still needs to get hs judges confirmed, his budgets passed, and his legislative priorities approved. Getting re-elected is obviously important to politicians, but getting shit done is also dependent on the allocation, and application, of power. Politics, in other words.
And Obama’s never done anything good? And seriously, you think my point was that Obama is afraid of Rove? You sound like you’re talking to a chair.
I’m very proud of Marion for writing that. It’s fucking funny and got your Hello Kitty panties twisted in a bunch. Apparently as purity goes up a troll’s humor goes down.
Bravo Marion! May the Great Sparkly Pony smile upon you!
There was a raid here in HippyTownUSA last week but from the news reports Obama was no where near Oregon.
Fucking Magic Powers, how do they work?
OK, no I don’t wish to imply he never did anything good. We may differ on whether or not it’s sufficient to balance the bad. However, we’ve seen the President exercise sweeping powers to do the things I mentioned. Again, we may differ on whether you think those things are bad, but they’re certainly bold, large things with great impact.
Yet you say a President is severely constrained from doing anything equally bold, and large and with an equally great impact for good (“sparkle pony” I guess is the word of the day). So given your perspective on the huge constraint on how much good can be done, the difference between one candidate and another being able to do good starts to be very small, doesn’t it?
If people choose to support Obama for re-election, that’s their choice, but why such low expectations? It doesn’t have to be a pony, but I can’t agree that he’s powerless to do better than he has done. It would be easier to understaned that choice if the people making it weren’t so defeatist about asking for any improvement at all.
I’m not sure I understand your question. I don’t know about the specific incident to which you refer, but the raids are being conducted by the Department of Justice, which is part of the Executive Branch.
http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/editorials/article/Feds-war-on-medical-marijuana-goes-overboard-3519870.php
About how magic powers work?
Whenever I hear someone make a comment like “Obama raided a pot clinic” I always wonder how the fuck he, personally, does that.
There’s only so much time in the day, so he has absolutely got to have some awesome magic powers…
Do you have the same question if people say “Obama got Osama bin Laden” – no he didn’t personally raid any clinics. He is the President. The Justice Department reports to him. Not magic.
Full disclosure: I think Obama’s been a good President. He’s done well with the hand he was dealt and if he worked for me (and he does) I would give him a year-end bonus. So I’ll be voting for him because he’s earned a second term.
That being said, there’s a hell of a lot he could do better, and I think he will. Unfortunately, the truth is that this is a horrible fucking world, and Presidents get the rare privilege of deciding who lives, and who dies. So, if a few innocents die in drone attacks, but thousands of kids can live because they now have health insurance, my friends who have M.S. or those living with AIDS now have hope for a cure because of relaxed restrictions on stem cell research, I’d make the same call. It’s the horrible fucking choice the President gets to make. Could any of us make that choice, day after day, and then go home and hug our kids or make love to our spouses? Every day has the potential to be a shitty day at the office.
I’m sure you’re a nice person, Mary, and I would bet you’ve had to make some tough choices in your life. But please don’t make assumptions about my low expectations of our elected officials.
Yes, we differ greatly on our assessment of the proportion of good and bad in this Presidency. I’m sure we’ve both had and will have that discussion a million times.
But for purposes of this thread, I’m trying not to make any assumptions about your personal expectations. It’s just that people who are strong supporters of the President may or may not say, as you did, that you think he’ll do better next time (even though to my knowledge he hasn’t told us anything he plans to do better, and has in fact made it clear that he will do some things worse, like keeping the safety net on the table).
But strong supporters don’t seem willing to criticize him, or make any demands. Can you imagine if the same level of energy and passion that supporters put into criticizing the Republicans, for example, went into a consistent, passionate energetic, critique of the President – not the kind that’s directed at R’s of course, and not even the kind that critics to the left would make, but from the strength of being on his side? All I hear is that the poor President couldn’t do any better, on issue after issue.
It never ceases to astonish me that the President’s critics on the left see him as an intelligent, well-educated person and a skilled enough politician to get himself elected to the most powerful position in history, though disagreeing as to how he used that position, but his supporters see him as helpless in so many instances.
He’s got the magic preznitin wand. Passed to him by Bush. We have to make sure Rmoney doesn’t get it because, combined with his magic funderwear, he would devastate the country, nay, the WORLD!!!
Yes I do.
the FDA which controls which drugs are criminalized and which aren’t.
I thought that was done through something called a “law” – which, IIRC gets passed by local, state and federal legislatures, or as some people like to call them, “Congress.”
Good. Then we both understand it’s a figure of speech, and a distraction from the discussion of whether the President has the power to do things that have a huge impact on people’s lives.
And Dr President Jill Stein’s Manhattan Project is gonna build a big fluffy rainbow cotton candy whip*-o-benevolence that’ll crush the preznit destructowand?
* not whip as in car, although a cotton candy car would be pretty awesome!
I see you’ve been here since the HCR debate. I’ve been here since before the Plame Affair when Christy Hardin Smith (Reddhead) was a front pager. Since then, FDL has consistently criticized Obama from the left. Much of the time, I agree there is great value in that.
But, as you know, Tbogg’s place is different. The “I wish Obama would address my pet issue” crowd is boring. And definitely not funny. Humor in political discourse is vastly under-appreciated around the mothership sometimes.
Phew, I need some doggies. Enjoy the speech.
The FDA under the Controlled Substances Act can classify drugs. Marijuana is currently classified as a dangerous drug like heroin. In states where medical marijuana is legal, the President said he would not go after them, but now he’s doing it anyway. And by “he” of course I mean the Department of Justice which reports to him.
You and I may know it’s a figure of speech but there’s a fuckload of people that don’t.
I blame Obama.
I surrender. Guilty of not having been here since Plame.
I read TBogg from time to time. It’s not my brand of humor, but that’s just me. I do acknowledge he has a great way with words, and makes me laugh out loud. I’m not asking anyone to address my pet issue. I’m just saying there’s enough talent and passion here, whether I agree with the specifics or not, to “humor” the President and the D’s into being better, but it isn’t used that way. Believe me if I had TBogg’s writing skill and wit I’d give it a try, but in addition to not having been here since Plame, I don’t write all that well.
Well, thank you for a civil discussion. I’ll stop now too,
No need to surrender. It’s been a pleasure, I’ve enjoyed your well-written comments. ;-)
That’s a wonderful response! May I steal it?
Yeah, raiding licensed pot dispensaries that are legal under state law and local ordinances is going to make people really fond of you. Not. In this case, it’s DoJ and the US Attorneys.
You’ll have to take that up with Dirty Harry.
By the way, Clint got a bum rap at the RNC. He tried to do something spontaneous and improvey and got ridiculed for it. And rightly so. He went to the wrong convention. Old-time conservatives are no longer welcome in the Republican party.
Nice of you all to do rear guard action for O and the status quo and stomp all those p̶e̶t̶ ̶i̶s̶s̶u̶e̶s̶ hopes and dreams and rainbows into the dirt before some group starts thinking they’ll get political representation without patronage.
Notice though, how somethings stop being regarded as pet issues and worthy of recognition as a worthwhile values soon as Obama gives it his blessing.
The gays should have came here so all you super serious grown ups and comedians could pop all their sparkle pony balloons, call them names and point and laugh, and thereby give Obama all the political maneuver room to go as rightward as he need to… but then with the threats from the fairies of dumplin’ land hoping against hope, I guess it made those patronage prices go up, didn’t they? Bigots dug deeper.
So in essence by carryout your little mean girls role, you’re also lowering the sellout price and hurting Obama in the pocket.
This is cowardly and sad what you’re doing here. You’re ridiculing any attempts at even trying to envision or imagine a better world, and it’s the vision we’re lacking in this society. Getting to the moon was a vision.
Getting us as close to sustainable non-polluting energy is what one goal should be now. How to get local democratic capitalism instead of state capitalism without the usurious parasites of finance capital is needed. They are capable of that, they delivered a very wel thought out, professional critique of the financial reform bills to congress.
I’m not part of it, but… Occupy is a child movement, because we’ve lost the social knowledge to create movements. You don’t encourage your children by ridiculing them.
This is for you: You can just link to boorish party orthodoxy so you wont have to type or try to think of new and fresh soul killing, apathy inducing stuff anymore. It’s all been done for you.
Most of the time you’re funny Tbogg, but when you use your talent for good.
There’s a big difference in ‘Enforcing Federal on the Books’ and ‘Changing Federal Law’ – guess who does what? Think about it, it might surprise you. Likely not, since you seem to have blinders on.
FDR used to say:” Your argument is absolutely correct, and I completely agree; now, force me to do it.” if you understand this, you might struggle up another rung of the ladder of self concienceness.
when you use your talent for good.
And lo, upon that day, Tom wrested the Cotton Candy Whip-o-Benelovence from its Fluffy Bunny Bund guardians and used its soothing powers to ease Wembley’s mini-ped. The CCWoB, drained of its precious bodily fluid, could no longer impel knuckledragging Bush appointees to become Bronies nor Arizona cops to become Breatharians. And America was saved the Sanctimoniocalypse.
Hail Emperor TBogg!
There may be disagreement, but I don’t think there is blindness. Unlike those who seem to think the President was helpless to do or not do anything except that which he has done or not done, I give him credit for being able to make choices and take responsibility for choices he makes.
The Justice Department has a choice of which crimes to prosecute. President Obama initially told us he would choose not to go after medical marijuana dispensaries in places where it was legal, then he made a different choice.
The FDA has a choice to reclassify marijuana as something other than a drug as a drug that’s as dangerous as heroin, and therefore needing to be restricted in the same way as heroin.
The Attorney General reports to the President. The head of the FDA reports to the Secretary of HHS who reports to the President. They serve at the pleasure of the President.
You may agree or disagree with the choices made by the President and those who work for him. But it’s not blindness to recognize that they have these choices.
Marym writes: President Obama initially told us he would choose not to go after medical marijuana dispensaries in places where it was legal, then he made a different choice.
As is nearly always the case with the “he broke his promise” sobs of the Obama detractors, what you chose to hear and what was actually said are quite different. Here’s Obama in an interview with Jann Wenner and Rolling Stone in April:
“What I specifically said was that we were not going to prioritize prosecutions of persons who are using medical marijuana. I never made a commitment that somehow we were going to give carte blanche to large-scale producers and operators of marijuana – and the reason is, because it’s against federal law. I can’t nullify congressional law,” Obama said.
“I can’t ask the Justice Department to say, ‘Ignore completely a federal law that’s on the books.’ What I can say is, ‘Use your prosecutorial discretion and properly prioritize your resources to go after things that are really doing folks damage.’ As a consequence, there haven’t been prosecutions of users of marijuana for medical purposes,” Obama said.
2009
http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.additional-resource.php?resourceID=003169
On Oct. 19, 2009 the US Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a memo to “provide clarification and guidance to federal prosecutors in States that have enacted laws authorizing the medical use of marijuana.”
In an effort to make the most efficient use of limited resources, the DOJ announced that prosecutorial priorities should not target “individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state laws providing for the medical use of marijuana.” Specifically, individuals with cancer or other serious illnesses who use medical marijuana and the caregivers who provide the medical marijuana in accordance with state law should not be the focus of federal prosecution.
http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/sourcefiles/USDOJNewPolicy.pdf
I guess you’e saying that evolving that into not prosecuting users of medical marijuana who can’t obtain it because their dispensaries have been shut down doesn’t technically count as a promise broken. However, it is still an example of choosing to do something, not being helplessly constrained by insurmountable obstacles.
Prolly should have said Marshal Plan.
“Final Solution” would have been a very bad idea.
Marym writes: I guess you’e saying that evolving that into not prosecuting users of medical marijuana who can’t obtain it because their dispensaries have been shut down doesn’t technically count as a promise broken. However, it is still an example of choosing to do something, not being helplessly constrained by insurmountable obstacles.
First, let’s be clear: You acknowledge that you have in fact mischaracterized Obama’s– and his administration’s– position, with a somewhat weaselly oh well technically I guess that’s what he said he’d do.
Second, most medical marijuauna dispensaries are a fucking joke and you know it. There’s money to be made here and the simple fact of the matter is that they are usually simple scrip mills cranking out product to people, the lion’s share of whom have no compelling medical reason for its use, but have found a sympathetic Dr Feelgood who’ll write it up (but does not direct its use or monitor its efficacy, by the way). Often the doctor can be found on duty at the dispensary. This is not “compliance with existing laws,” obviously, and it is for this reason, when it is investigated and found, and sister, it ain’t hard, that prosecutions proceed. Again you already know this, so why the bullshit?
Third, you seem to derive your education on this extremely tricky subject from the editorials of an advocacy organization. There you will learn that Marijuana is harmless, a statement no bona fide clinical trial conductor would ever make. For starters, there’s the harm associated with smoking, and for seconds, you’re fucking high, Lebowski, so your judgment is affected and you’re more likely to make dumb decisions (like blowing off work or school), and for thirds, the dosage is all over the map from joint to joint, which makes meidcal trial difficult to conduct, inasmuch as potency from lot to lot varies. 10mg of Prozac is 10mg of Prozac, but “a joint” is all over the map.
Fourth, these are factors taken into account by the FDA and its parent HHS, in review of numerous clinical trials, finding that Marijuana is not “safe and effective” and it’s why it remains on schedule I. You’ll note, if you bother to look, that cannibinoids (THC pill) are not, by the way, and this is largely due to concerns about the lack of controls on the delivery system of setting fire to and inhaling the smoke of a rolled up botanical product, for god’s sake.
Fifth, it is unrealistic to expect the President to micromanage each of the agencies which you feel “serve at his pleasure.” The DEA sees no reason to remove marijuana from schedule I, but takes advice from HHS and the FDA, which don’t either. But you don’t see why Obama shouldn’t simply ignore the science, and say fuck that, and direct his AG to Tell the DEA to take it off Schedule I, which theoretically is possible, but no sane President would do. It would be a extension of executive power, and ignoring science is what Conservatives do, not Liberals.
And lastly, there’s also the fact that the US is signatory to international treaties that require that controlled substances defined in the treaty in the most restrictive category (which marijuana is, by the way) be similarly restricted in local (federal) laws.
So not insurmountable, no [laughing].
Cmon, Mary, ya gotta look harder at this. It’s true of msot of these claims about what a hopeless sellout Obama is; you just don’t understand the true situation or appreciate the complexities of it.
And that’s what really irritates us “Obamabots.” I actively seek out both sides of the argument, and you won’t.
Nobody here has claimed that Obama is helpless. You’re the one who keeps sliding down that slippery slope.
We are saying that his powers are constrained. That he has to consider the political consequences of the battles he chooses to fight. And make choices as to which battles he fights and when he fights them.
We are saying that just because his list of priorities doesn’t align perfectly with yours doesn’t make him a bad president. He is probably driven more by a desire to get something done as opposed to fighting futile battles just to validate his leftwing street cred.
We are also saying that voting for a third party presidential candidate is the same as not voting st all. They aren’t going to win and not voting/wasting a vote on a third party condidate helps Romney.
If you are diappointed with Obama, then you are really hate it if Romney wins. And by the way, if Romney does win it’s not going to help Green Party presidential candidates win future elections. If 8 yrs of Bush II couldn’t do it, nothing will.
Prolly should have said Marshal Plan.
I think perhaps “Public Works Administration” may have been the metaphor that Bart and Jill were scratching around for. [snort] “Manhattan Project,” jeez louise!
This bears repeating. I live in Sacramento and I can tell you first hand that pot dispensaries sprouted like weeds a few years ago. The local free press rag, The Sacramento News and Review, carried an advertising insert each week that had as many pages as the newspaper itself. Growers were taking over foreclosed homes and turning them into huge indoor pot farms.
Were they doing this because there’s a shortage of weed for those poor glaucoma or cancer patients? Of course not. They were doing it because they could reap huge fucking profits selling mass quantities of pot to every Tom, Dick, and Harry who could pay $50 to their local “Dr. Nick”.
The pot bubble we witnessed here was no different than the mortgage bubble we saw in the early 2000s. Thousands of growers, doctors, and dispensaries working in collusion to suck as much money into their bloated guts as they could before the public wised up.
I wasn’t arguing the policy. I was using it as an example of the President’s power to act. It was an example of the President seeming to choose not to disrupt state licensed marijuana (part of the quote is from what the Justice Dept., not some left-winger,said in 2009), and then seeming to choose a different path.
There’s a reason they chose a different path. Things were going way fucking out of control. From your handle I assume you live in Illinois. I also assume you have no idea what was going on here in California. A crackdown was overdue.
I’m not a regular at Tbogg’s, though I get a laugh or two when I read a bit of his work on the FDL front page, so understand that I haven’t earned credibility here, though I do find it somewhat odd that nearly every response to me (not yours) has used derogatory language of some sort.
I don’t think I said anything about whether specific Obama policies were good or bad, or what I thought of the balance between good and bad. I was merely responding to yesterday’s comments, in response to some of the Convention speeches, on this and other threads, that I disagree with the way these policies are evaluated by Obama’s most ardent supporters.
I see the President as an intelligent, well-educated man, a published author, who has taught at a prestigious university, was a skillful enough politician to get elected to a state legislature, the U.S. Senate, and the most powerful office in history, and, coming into an office with powers already expanded by his predecessors, has used these powers in even more unprecedented ways. These accomplishments show someone who has courage and commitment to goals, whatever one may think of any specific goal.
However, for some here, and maybe I’m overstating it, it seems that anything beyond what the President actually managed to do is a “sparkle pony” beyond what any reasonable, mature person should even be thinking of; and that even if it were something worth thinking of, the President is constrained by his opposition from doing any of them. While the constraints are real in many cases, in others the legitimate powers of the Executive Branch enable the President to act, and not every one of those actions would be unpopular or difficult to “sell” to the American people.
I find the low expectations people seem to have of the President to be, not always mature and pragmatic, though in some cases they are, but sometimes unnecessarily defeatist.
I don’t accuse people who support Obama of being complicit in what I see as his worst failings, and I don’t expect people to accuse me of withholding support because I think Romney is better, or because I think a third party candidate can win in 2012. What can or can’t be accomplished through third party electoral politics and voting, short or long term, is a very different discussion, which takes place elsewhere on FDL, and is a worthwhile discussion in my opinion, but it wasn’t my intention to continue the discussion here where it’s not welcome.
As I said, I’m not a regular here, so I think I’ll end my part of the discussion, and give the regulars courtesy of the last word if they want to respond. Thank you everyone for an interesting discussion.
From their 2011 “420 Guide“:
No, again, you’ve mischaracterized it as a choice, and the choice he made as a policy decision, and thus mischaracterized the policy. In the instant case the choice was whether to uphold federal law or direct his DOJ to refuse to uphold it in the face of clear violation of it. Turns out, these fellas we elect are sworn to uphold the law.
Yeah, whaddya gonna do, huh? The choice you allege he has simply doesn’t exist. Bottom line is he’s President, not God.
For a minute I thought you said “backass”, which made me think of Ms. Fluke farting in his general direction.
In case you haven’t figured it out for yourself already, the “Blame Obama” crowd visits regularly. Most of them are upset becuase Obama hasn’t specifically addressed their pet peeves by weilding powers that are normally reserved for Kings.
At least you make a good faith effort to respond to the points being made and you do acknowledge that real life is complex.
The Occupy movement has done a few good things: When they’ve deigned to, say, work with unions like SEIU and local groups (like ISAIAH in Minnesota), various local chapters have worked to highlight the foreclosure crisis and in the process have saved many persons from losing their homes, or at least got them far better terms than originally set on evictions.
Furthermore, the very fact that the Occupy movement existed was enough to shift the conversation away from All Deficit Fearmongering All The Time and carve out a little space for asking “Why the fuck are we letting billionaire assholes like Pete ‘Concord Coalition’ Peterson, a sworn enemy of Social Security since before his stint in Nixon’s cabinet, trick us into trashing what’s left of the New Deal just to keep him from paying taxes when by rights he should be paying what he would pay under Eisenhower?”
It’s true that even people who are sympathetic to its aims are often more than a little frustrated with its fixation on process (something I suspect came from its libertarian wing), but even its experiments with direct democracy are useful; we get to see what is and isn’t possible in terms of direct democracy in the Age of Twitter and Facebook.
The more intelligent and practical members will take what they have learned and apply it effectively elsewhere. These are people who, a little over a year ago, were generally either apolitical or disillusioned to the point of non-participation. Now, they’re participating — many of them with increasing effectiveness as time goes by.
Marym writes: I do find it somewhat odd that nearly every response to me (not yours) has used derogatory language of some sort.
I think it’s fair to expect derogatory language if you exhibit willful ignorance and a lack of good faith in argument here.
Fortunately, both of these are what Anthropologists call acquired behavior, not innate. In other words, there’s hope for you yet: this is behavior that can be modified.
Be a big girl and for god’s sake stop whining.
I believe the point might be that the starry-eyed saviors who show up every four years are ineffective, inept, i.e. shitty politicians. And since elections are political, a vote for the starry-eyed savior (as opposed to a vote for the racist shitheads who bleed votes from the right — who themselves also blow as politicians with the single, frightening exception of George Corley Wallace) is a purely symbolic gesture with real-world consequences: Voting for Nader in Florida in 2000 instead of the guy closest to Nader in spirit — Al Gore, for fuck’s sake, who might have prevented 9/11 AND got us a start on a climate-change fix but would probably have also done a lot of crappy middle-of-the-road shit that would have pissed off Ralph and Jill — put a really awful, horrid, sulphurous beelzebub named Dick Cheney at the controls of the government. That really happened, haging chads and butterfly ballots aside. With enough heartfelt symbolism in November, they can take over again so we can get that whole Armageddon thing back in high gear.
The Occupy Movement isn’t moving any more. I had a lot of hope for it but not high expectations. It really DOES need to become the new ACORN, an organizing, facilitating force of some kind with better internal controls. Or it needs to coalesce in some other way. Join the Greens, pick out a few districts and try to win some elections beyond the city council level.
I’m curious to see your homework backing that statement…
Many Occupy branches are doing just that.
It helps if you view the Occupy concept as a seedbed to grow and train activists, particularly those who are disillusioned by party politics; Occupy’s distance from party politics helps to attract the people who are (sometimes through years of bitter experience) turned off by party politics so much that they forsake all activism; Occupy helps to get them back into activism, into organizing, and often into party politics.
Speaking of “the new ACORN” — much of ACORN’s national staff, including their head political guy Kevin Whelan, have descended upon a local Minnesota group, Minnesotans for a Fair Economy, and essentially Borged it in the course of working with the local Occupy groups.
No external force is as capable of paralyzing activism on the left as the desire for “consensus” .
As destructively juvenile and counter-productive as the actions of the “black block” anarchists are, they at least understand the futility of seeking collective agreement on every action.
i’m voting for stein
Answer me this, Obama apologist douchebags: How in the sparkle pony fuck does a sitting president NOT get to forbid torture as unofficial American state policy? Or NOT direct his Justice Department to investigate without fear or favor crimes committed by financiers(see Kennedy, Robert, on dealing with LCN)? Or bringing to prosecution, to the full extent of the law, those responsible for documented illegalities surrounding the BP spill? Or NOT using a back door coalition of international interests to topple Qaddafi, in violation of both US and international law?
On which president’s watch is the suspension of rule of law not just OK, but GRRRRRREAT? Why, a Democratic president’s, of course!
You’ll get the fucking you deserve,no doubt about that, cheerleaders. The rest of us, with our intentional communities, sustainability, real conservationism, underground economy, and neighbor-helping hippy-ass sparkle pony-ing will also get the fucking you deserve.
For the record? Dr. King was a way better human being than me or just about all of you. And he sayeth, conscience, not expedience. So stick it, parochial twerps.
You backsassin’ me girl {laughing]?
As you have correctly inferred, backsass cannot be found in our M-W 10, which pretty much means that you are an uppity filly if there ever was one, and I owe you a drink at the Prime Time Tavern in Hollywood, if you ever happen to be there.
Nice one, PH.
letsbegin writes: Answer me this, Obama apologist douchebags: How in the sparkle pony fuck does a sitting president NOT get to forbid torture as unofficial American state policy?
For the sake of argument, let’s take this, the first of your madcap ramblings.
Obama put the kibosh on abusive interrogations, by executive order.
That said, the torture you’re referring to is, don’t tell me, let me guess: Bradley Manning at Quantico, who was held in solitary confinement and had to sleep naked under a rough blanket. See, you envision Andy Dufresne in the hole at Shawshank; those of us who have actually been in prison think of the luxury of having a cell to oneself. You have been successfully deluded by those who would have you believe that Obama ran down to Quantico every night to insure that Bradley was unhappy, and I’m looking at you Glenn Greenwald.
Poor warrior snowflake. Oh dear rough blanket.
He was moved to Leavenworth awaiting trial, and now he’s back in the custody of the JRCF while his very good attorney, seeking to put as much distance as he can between his client and his offense, files endless motions to delay the trial.
Okay, that’s your first sentence, the torture claim.
The remainder I may disregard as similarly flawed, may I not? I’ll take that as a yes.
PFC Manning is, as implied, kind of a head case. Advocacy of him should include where he’s at and what he did. You sure you wanna be there?
Thanks again Ralph.