Speaking for me only
Watch this video of Obama on Charlie Rose in 2004:
Now watch Hillary mischaracterize Obama’s statements and smear him as elitist:
Hillary can go pound salt, and she can shove her self-serving bullshit down her obnoxious piehole. If the party elders (are there any?) can not figure out what this power-mad lunatic is doing to not only Obama, but the goals of the party, and if they can not realize how she is simply, in her quest for the Presidency, reinforcing the bullshit Republican narrative, then the Democrats don’t deserve to win. If people can not stand up to Clinton and call her on this crap, we deserve four years of McCain.
Don’t feed me that conciliatory “they are both wrong” BS. One person is in the wrong here, and that person is Hillary.
I am kinda curious how Clinton’s scale for gauging “elitism” and “demeaning” and “un-American” remarks is operationalized. Clearly Clinton is stating he is too elitist and out of touch and un-American to be President, but does her scale for this allow for him to still be her Vice-President? Is the scale on the same continuum as the Commander-in-Chief thresh-hold that she and McCain have both passed but Obama has not? Because if so, that would really make sense- Obama is not ready to be CinC, is way too elitist and out of touch to be President, but not too out of touch and elitist to be Vice-President.
Could a reporter please ask her to explain her measurement of these things?
Back during the Wright flap, people suggested that clinton was trying to destroy Obama’s chances in the general election out of spite and, more importantly, so she could run against McCain or his VP in 2012. At the time, I scoffed at that. However, now I think that maybe that’s exactly what she’s doing.
Gee, JC, why don’t you point that big, bad Anger Cannon at the Terrorists? We might win the War On Arabs with your bile-spewing help.
You must be getting some big eyeball numbers off of this serial rant you’ve been on. I hope boost in ad dollars is helping you with an upgrade in your psychotherapeutic drug cocktail.
(No one deserves four years of McCain, BTW. A little less hyper with your bole, please.)
I’m sure a lot of folks may be on you to stay quiet and stick to ‘better things’, John.
All I can say is, keep kicking the doors down on this sort of ridiculousness. It deserves every ounce of derision it gets.
I really, really, really could not care less about traffic to this website. Thanks for questioning my motives and dodging Hillary’s bullshit, though!
“…reinforcing the bullshit Republican narrative.”
That’s exactly it. I wouldn’t be surprised if 50% of the McCain attack ads against Obama this Fall use this Clinton-endorsed, Republican-style issue framing by recycling video clips of Hillary, Bill, and their surrogates.
This is an honest question:
When did this blog go from a level-headed opinion blog on politics to a non-stop anti-Hillary political attack blog with no for time ideological impurity? John Cole, I’ve been reading this blog for years, and while I’m not suggesting you tailor your content to appease me, or any readers, what’s with the anger? I don’t like MCCain, Obama, or Clinton…and I’m amazed that you’re evidently infatuated with Obama to the point that you get foamy at the mouth defending him from Clinton’s attacks, which are par-for-the-course in any campaign.
Like I said in the thread below, this is Clinton’s “OMG, an election is coming, find something to attack on!” strategy. She did it before WI. She did it before OH/TX. And now she’s doing it again. Seriously, Obama could go into a burning building and save some kittens and Clinton would spin it as Obama being out of touch with dog owners.
Hey, John, you should add bog ads (or whatever the lefty equivalent of bra and panties media is) to your side bars. Then at least the “extra hits you’re getting” would actually be worth some money to you.
Maybe even enough to pay for the extra bandwidth fees you have to pay to support the hits.
Simple: If Obama, Mrs. Obama or one of Obama’s aides/associates/pastors/relatives/grade school teachers said or did it, that action is automatically elitist, demeaning and un-American (with an option for un-Christian).
However, when a candidate behaves as though Democratic voters who have been subjected to seven + years of “You’re an un-American, terrorist loving elitist dooky head,” from the fRight Wing are too fucking stupid to notice The Hills are shouting the same damn nonsense is not at all elitist and is a sign that one is in touch with the common man. Yeehaw.
What the hell are you talking about? There is no ideological purity test here, I let people say pretty much whatever they want, and if people can make a persuasive argument that will change my mind, I will in fact change my mind.
Don’t confuse me rightfully being pissed off at Cltinon’s bullshit hatchet jobs with some sort of ‘ideological purity’ test. Clinton is free to state how she and Obama would be different. What I won’t tolerate is her running around launching and parroting bullshit smears that he is “elitist” and “out of touch” and “un-American.”
Fair enough, there really isn’t any purity test. Not really what I was saying. And the comments section is diverse, also not trying to say otherwise. Everybody just seems to bent out of shape!
How can Obama not be elitist? I read that quote and heard it in audio, it even sounded elitist.
The Other Steve
Screw that. Go over to youtube and look at films from Iraq.
Humvee driving, actual firefights. Or views of supply convoys
Am I allowed to ask why they’re driving Mercedes trucks?
Davis X. Machina
This is an attempt at an honest answer.
Obama is my fifth choice, after three announced and one unannounced other candidates. I doubt he was any higher on JC’s list last October, either.
Anyone who’s mastered rock-paper-scissors knows what’s happened at this blog.
But Obama stops McCain. Clinton stops Obama. And a McCain presidency will mean the end of the Republic in anything like the form I grew up with. (And no, I’m not exaggerating).
“The problems of two little people don’t amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world. …”
I find myself getting similarly worked up over this. Why? Because there was a good sense that Obama was closing her out in PA, that while he wasn’t likely to win, it might be within 5 points. That would’ve signaled the beginning of the end.
This has allowed HRC to breathe more life into her campaign, that is still nonetheless likely not to get her the nomination. So mostly this is just hurting Obama, which is why a good number of us are pissed.
I do think we need to chill out a bit though. I have a really hard time seeing this as being anywhere near close the Wright issue, which Obama handled with skill. I still say he’s got plenty of time to turn this “gaffe” around. The guy is exceptional, and we need to trust him to navigate the BS of the primaries along with the serious stuff that he’s likely to face in office.
The Grand Panjandrum
After last nights report of her “hunting” experience and being taught to shoot a gun, I look forward to the pictures of her sitting in a gunrack laden pickup truck, drinking a can of Bud, with a mouthful of chewing tobacco.
The Jed Report has an excellent video capturing Clinton’s Hail Mary attempt to takedown Obama.
Jesus! Where’s my fucking latte? This shit is about to jump all over my last nerve.
Tom in Texas
Why the politico is worthless:
12 reasons why Obama’s bitterness will cost him the election.
Clinton is only doing this because she really, truly, deeply believes that Obama is unelectable.
I’m off to an English brunch and a museum visit (my great aunt is in town from Philadelphia. She’s a strong Clinton supporter). Maybe looking at pictures of Pompeii will take my mind off this.
Sunday satire, (hey JC, you could use a giggle):
Totin’ that gun and the Bible after pounding those boiler makers last night, at least it’s now out how Hilliar cures a hangover.
Duck and cover!
It is bs to say Obama is adored by the media. They way they take something he says and spin it to favor Hillary’s fantasy is amazing. They accomodate her and join in with the distorting of what Obama has said. It sickens me.
And I noticed how the media is saying nothing of the Annie Oakley act by Hillary in her latest tall tale of being the great white hunter as a girl.
Oh, for heaven’s sake.
This is not a “fair” blog. It never has been. It is an opinionated blog, and a pretty fierce one, at that. It is a blog which draws conclusions, not hastily, but cautiously and thoroughly, and one which, once those conclusions are drawn and held to be valid, follows them through to *their* conclusions.
By the way, in an amusing irony, BJuice is is actually validating the argument in favor of Hillary staying in: “It’s making Obama a better candidate.” Now that it’s clear that Hillary is going to lose, her attacks should be treated as the ones that the other side will be bringing forward in November, and nothing else. In that vein, we should be looking at what lines of scorn and derision work against those attacks, since, for better or for worse, that’s how we here roll..and, man, are we rolling with them.
I left the GOP and became a Democrat when Clinton was “inevitable.” Not only was Obama not my choice, but I joined the party prepared to support Hillary. Of all the candidates, Dodd was the one I wanted, but I was pretty much resigned to voting for Hillary, as it was “clear” to anyone when I joined the Democrats that she would be the nominee.
Hell, the number one question I was asked when I switched to Democrat was whether or not I would vote for Hillary, and my response was always- “Of course.”
I have noticed how all primary season, when Obama defies the conventional wisdom the media and the vulture, Hillary, declare him a hopeless rookie and him all but, dead. And everytime they end up looking like fools when it turns out Obama is on the mark and the media and Clinton hopelessly out of touch and out of date.
One reason for Clinton doing this is that she honestly believes that only she can beat the gop in the general. How elitist and arrogant is that? She cannot beat Obama but, thinks she is stronger then him….huh?
And for the most part the media agrees because they know how much the gop wants to run against her and both Clintons provide so many good stories and scandals to cover.
Turns out Hillary is the kind of person people want to have a beer with. Along with shots of Crown.
Here she is with some real men in Indiana:
The politico is the best of the right-leaning web sources out there. They at least entertain Democratic ideas as if they are somewhat plausible before descending into outright ridicule.
And really, is there anything out there that is more destructive than Chris Matthews, anyway?
Not anymore. It’s gotten to be a single message blog. Which I appreciate since I really don’t have time to read it these days.
The NRCC (that’s the National Republican Congressional Committee, in case anyone is unfamiliar with the acronym) is now pressuring Democratic superdelegates to back Hillary. Can there now be any doubt that, if she got elected, she’d sell us out faster than her husband did?
Heh. If Obama wins the election I have no doubt that she will claim he never could have got there if she hadn’t prepared him with her “Carefully crafted not at all sincere, you know I respect you Mr. President Republican style hack attacks. (I kan haz cabnet position plz?)”
Fine, whatever. Is she eligible to sit on the S.C.? If not she’d make a great A.G.
Don’t feed me that conciliatory “they are both wrong” BS.
My goal was to equally piss off Balloon Juice and TalkLeft, to get in on some of that sweet, sweet bomb-throwing sectarian Web traffic action.
I have to guess that TalkLeft it totally intolerable right about now. No thanks.
So, here’s my take on Hillary kicking back beer and whiskey and talkin’ bout shootin’ in the back forty with her pappy.
“Barack Obama thinks you people are stupid. I’ll take that one step further. I know you people are stupid and I’m going to prove it by so brazenly pandering to you that only the dumbest among you could possibly fall for it. See, even though I’ve always been wealthy, I can prove I’m regular folk by drinking various fermented and/or distilled grain beverages and regular folk food with you rubes and you’ll therefore vote for me and prove my opponent’s point. Thank you.”
Er … You might want to check where the bombs are falling.
Um … pointing out reality is “elitist”? I read that quote and heard it in audio and didn’t even remotely find it “elitist”. This “controversy” is an attempt to make a mountain out of a molehill.
Turns out Hillary is the kind of person people want to have a beer with.
And look how well that worked out the last time people voted that way!
Utter nonsense. John is, justifiably, pissed off at Hillary’s latest desperation tactics and has not hesitated to say so. The blog is not a “single message” blog; it’s a blog driven by current events. If you want John to stop pointing out that Hillary is resorting to Republican frames and tactics, then tell Hillary to stop resorting to Republican frames and tactics.
It just might work. The press is latching on to it something fierce. “Obama is an elitist” could be the new “Gore is a serial exaggerator” and “Kerry didn’t serve honorably in Vietnam.”
Cornbread by Hussien for Detroit
Some people need to look up the defintion of a word before they begin to start talking out the side of their necks!!
e·lit·ism or é·lit·ism (ĭ-lē’tĭz’əm, ā-lē’-) Pronunciation Key
1. The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources.
1. The sense of entitlement enjoyed by such a group or class.
2. Control, rule, or domination by such a group or class.
With that being said when did Sen. B. Hussein Obama say he believed this? If you got proof, provide the evidence to back up your sad as shit argument that he acting in this manner.
LOL…. My goodness, but myiq is getting desperate, isn’t he?
Coming from our local “Big Tent Democrat” I really don’t care…
“I voted for Obama BUT…”
It’s an attempt to snatch victory away from the electorate.
Supporting a candidate shouldn’t devolve to blind denial of a politician’s glaring shortcomings in regard to policy.
And whoever can’t hear the elitism in that quote, then you must be as tone-deaf as Barack Obama is. I’m a 30 year-old athiest urbanite from NY living in Atlanta, and I don’t own a gun, BUT, I can tell what Obama is saying. It fits right into the narrative that the Right paints of Obama, but that’s because it’s accurate.
It reeks of some sort of “since I am more intelligent and culturally-refined I can use my vantage point to observe the crude machinations driving humble small-town Americans to embrace quaint old ideas like guns and religion to make me feel better about my crappy life”.
That doesn’t sound elitist? if that’s Obama’s, or anyone’s, caricature of middle America, it’s one-dimensional and could even be portrayed as condescension.
Thing is, now Hillary is going to go and be all fake and be like “I love god and guns! look at me!”, which is dishonest. At least I think Obama was being honest and saying exactly how he feels, he just didn’t realize how it sounded.
i heard a few minutes of Press the Meat this morning, and they had the usual suspects: Luthor/Joker–er, Carville/Matalin, Murphy, and Shrum.
as i listened,i swear to God i thought they put on a re-run. that was because Murphy, Carville, and Matalin were all saying THE EXACT SAME THINGS in THE EXACT SAME WAY about this “Bitter” flap that they did over the “Rev.Wright” flap–“oh, this could be the end of Obama’s campaign”, “This could be the thing that turns it around for Hillary”, “The Republicans will make such hay with this”, etc.
…time for some Arrested Development DVDs on this fine Sunday afternoon.
Turns out Hillary is the kind of person people want to have a beer with. Along with shots of Crown.
And then she topped it off with her nightly dose of Ambien–the only way she’s been able to make it through each night. Those recurring nightmares about the nomination slipping away, you see.
From this coast the whole thing seems like a sideshow.
Are people in the midwest really upset that Obama used the word “bitter” to describe their attitude toward politicians? Are people in the midwest really upset that Obama said that the few things they trust in the world are their churches and their guns?
‘Cause I gotta tell you, I’m flippin’ bitter about politicians and politics. I trust my minister more than I trust my Democratic Congresswoman (Harman) or my Democratic Senator (Feinstein) both of whom resolutely and routinely vote, as has Hillary Clinton, to empower the Bush Administration while simultaneously decrying what Bush does with the power they give him.
If we on the west coast can be bitter about how our politicians betray us, why can’t midwesterners be bitter about how their politicians betray them?
Is everything so wonderful in Pennsylvania and Indiana that everyone is happy, or is it just that you guys are drinking funny juice?
I must admit that I’m plenty pissed at Hillary too, but for a different reason. Knowing that she hates those nice little quacky critters, I’ve been trying all morning to invite her on next Spring’s harp seal pup hunt. Heck, I’d even lend her a baseball bat, and she might even get a nice coat from the adventure, to speak nothing of the improved relations with our neighbors to the north.
Does she call me back? NO!
Just some lame ass requesting that I send her money.
Can you imagine a whore that wants MONEY without doing anything to gain it?
Next thing will be that she wants a nice harp seal pup fur coat after I do all the harvesting.
Get your own fur coat, Hillcunt!
And don’t try to call me back! I’ve been rejected.
Hill, you deserve the asshole (Bill) that you’ve got, and he probably couldn’t down a pintail or a teal, let alone a little harp seal pup with one swing.
And, no Hill, I won’t do shots of crown with beer chasers with you, even if you don’t wear undies at the bar.
I’m so let down!
I remember a few months ago when you were saying things along the lines of you found Hillary insufferable, she couldn’t be trusted with power, she’d do anything to win, and I couldn’t understand what the heck you were talking about. Now watching the video of her, so difficult to listen to, so fake as she pretends to be such a friend of gun-owners, taking any position to win, I’m going, wow, so that’s what everyone was pointing to all along.
As for the party elders stepping in, I think they need to be careful. There’s already a narrative developing that she was always the underdog, and the party elders are determined to give the election to Obama. It is astonishing to see someone like her with all the advantages she had going in portrayed as a victim, but that’s what her supporters on the blogs largely feel.
Has anyone else noticed how Republicans are allowed to insult San Francisco, Massachusetts, etc., as often and as badly as they want, and the press never says anything about it, but the instant a Democrat says anything that could be taken as even slightly impolite about rural America, the press throws a hissy fit and can’t talk about anything else for days?
An excellent email to Josh Marshall on Hillary. I would have posted it here but, did not want to post something that long so follow the link and read it.
really hits her hypocracy right between the eyes.
John has every right to talk about whatever he wishes. He’s just gotten a little boring.
And there’s a hell of a lot more going on in “current events” than Hillary and Obama. But you have to look elsewhere than BJ.
Dennis - SGMM
Has anyone seen any recent campaign footage of Clinton? I ask because I fully expect her to show up with a plug of Red Man stuffed in her cheek and an empty Iron City beer can in her fist for spittin’ in.
That is because brown people, foreigners, fags, and academics live on the coast. Real Americans spend their days up to their ankles in corn and pig shit and go to church 4 times a week.
Don’t you know anything?
NR, I’ve noticed but, I get even more upset with the smearing of the French. As if being french is something to be ashamed of and you are suppose to be some effete snob or something.
I am half french. My family in France and my mother are hardly elitist or snobs.
As long as we are continued to be trashed in silly cartoonish ways by republicans, I simply will not vote for them.
The french are mostly just ordinary people like any other place.
how do i that ? im just so dumb and ignint, i just dont no how to reed anythin else but BJ. i think my intrnt is broked, it ony git BJ. jon coal tels me all the news.
will you tel me wher to fine mor news than hilry and obarmo? im so dum and cand chanj teh chanl on my intrnit firfokcs.
whas a “currant evens”? do they hav pie ther? i lurvs pieh.
Yeah, like Obama said.
Beyond the substance of the quote, elitist or not, isn’t anyone worried that this guy is making idiotic mistakes??
He is campaigning for the President and he goes and says something all his enemies wanted him to say, and which could easily be construed as insulting to a wide swath of potential voters?
What kind of chump throws red fleshy meat to the wolves like that?
And, for the Republicans…they can say shit like that people because those people are not about to vote Republican, and Republicans have little hope of getting their votes ever, anyway. But Obama needs small-town white people to vote for him. What was Obama thinking?
You know what- everyone stop being nasty to people for expressing their opinions. Someone was really rude to louisms yesterday and it really honked me off, and I don’t want people crapping all over Sojourner.
Truth be told, this has been a one issue blog lately, so I can’t blame her for being bored. I am sick of the damned issue myself, and wish Hillary would knock it off.
Bob In Pacifica
QuickRob, there was nothing elitist on Obama’s observations. People aren’t just bitter, they’re pissed, they’re angry.
Obama perfectly described the okeydoke that the Republicans play. You take a bunch of angry people, get them to identify with you on superfluous issues (guns, God, gays, gravity, the Garcias, whatever) all the while continuing to fuck the angry people over on economic issues. And the angrier they get because they’re turning into dust, the more you steer them to attack windmills.
Now, if you have any concept of class theory you will understand why it is necessary to promote and bolster this okeydoke. The media, which is part of the oligarchy, must keep the lower ninety percent in check. They can’t have them actually vote for their economic interests. They have to get them to vote against their interests.
Now whot gauge shotgun is Hilly usin’?
Tell her campaign how you feel right here.
I noted that with the prospect of spending my “economic stimulus” check on the oral surgeon despite paying $300 a month in health insurance, it’s no big deal to forgo my lattes and donate $10 to the Obama campaign. Oh, and I begged her and Bill to Please. Go. Away.
I thought we were supposed to be the reality based community. Pretty sad that “giving” the nomination to the person who won the most pledged delegates would be considered somehow unfair.
it wasn’t any kind of mistake.
the fact that McCain/Clinton 08 attacked Obama over something he said is hardly surprising – it’s all they can do. so, they wait for him to speak, then attack him over it, even if they have to lie about what he actually said to do it.
big fucking surprise.
Quickrob, I am not worried. As I’ve said before, how many times has this man defied the conventional wisdom and not acted like a typical pol and the media and gop and Hillary have thought he was surely dead. That his campaign was over.
And everytime the ones coming out looking like fools and the worst for it are Hillary and the media. They look out of touch and old fashioned. No clue as to how we feel and what we think.
I saw comments on CNN political ticker and they were overwhelming in support of Obama and knew what he was saying.
And they were lambasting Hillary and the media for trying to spin this and make it look like a huge deal.
The people are not as stupid as they think.
OK…enough of the satire.
Obama get’s my vote if he holds the public hanging during the half time of next year’s Super Bowl for those convicted of WAR CRIMES…
A bit off topic, but not moreso than Hillary’s clubbing.
The ratings will be huge!
I like that idea. Hold war crimes trials for Bush and Cheney and the rest.
Most people would love it.
That doesn’t explain the media’s double standard.
NR, don’t you know the media is in love with Straight talk express…
They think McCain is the same as 8 years ago and still hold memories of that.
So, he gets a free pass on everything.
Now that is sheer genius!
Hillary talking about shooting ducks as a kid while drinking beer and doing straight shots with “real men” is pretty Hillaryous. I hope she scratched her ass, repositioned her junk and farted/belched loudly several times just for good measure.
I bet if someone at the bar had shouted “A case of beer for the first pair of tits I see!“, I am sure that ol’ Hills would have unrolled hers just so she could declare victory over Obama.
This shit almost writes itself.
Obama’s comments weren’t a mistake, if anything they give him the opportunity to say “Isn’t this the kind of bull that make you barf?”
NR: please remember that real conservatives don’t drink lattes, don’t drive foreign cars, and don’t live near people who look or worship differently than they do. Ask anyone at NRO whether they have a gay or black friend, and they’ll be clear that their friends are “the good ones” and the rest of those groups are evil personified.
Obama spoke of god and guns and anti-immigration sentiment as some sort of reflexive impulse of the simpletons who live in small town America.
By characterizing those human concerns in such a crude, cause-and-effect fashion he is belittling things people take very seriously by assuming that these people have faith in those ideals in a manner similar to how Pavlov’s dogs drooled for the ringing bell.
Elitism might not be the best way to describe it, but it’ close.
Just Some Fuckhead
LOL! (Except for the sex-based attacks. There’s really no call for that sort of stuff.)
Rob, the Pennsylvania primary is in nine days.
I propose we just wait and see if the voters agree with your take. How about that?
This has been SATSQ, Volume XII, Chapter CXXIV, Page XLVII
no, i’m not worried about Obama treating americans as if they actually graduated from high school.
but if you want idiotic mistakes, how about:
pretending you were under fire in Bosnia?
saying you are against NAFTA while your spouse and your campaign consultant take money from Columbia?
voting for the war in Iraq?
you know what, i’ll take Obama’s mistake [sic]. you can have the rest of that crap.
No — Obama spoke of god and guns and gays as things that people understand, that are the traditions they grew up with. He didn’t criticize those traditions, or speak to them one way or another — that’s the Washington press corps projecting their own anti-heartland bigotry onto those beliefs. The elistism is in the elitists, not in Obama.
Funny thing that, eh?
NR, I like your idea. But, let me also be on record that Hillary is a liar, and a shady person in general. Listening to her answer questions is painful because it’s so clear that she is full of shit. I’ve never liked her a day of my life, in fact.
On the other hand Obama is like a blank slate everyone is projecting all over. Right now everyone’s defending their ideal candidate, it just so happens that the vessel is Barack Obama, he being the next best Jesus available.
Maybe Obama will win in Pennsylvania, maybe that’s a good thing. I tried to analyze how I though Obama/Clinton could turn out (even making a picture!), and Obama certainly seems have an advantage over Clinton in lots of small-town USA states.
Not trying to pimp my blog, but here’s my attempt at analyzing Obama vs. Clinton’s chances in November vs. McCain.
To be clear, I don’t even like McCain terribly much, not since McCain-Feingold infringed on Freedom of Speech.
Obama’s not going to win Pennsylvania. That was just never possible for him.
Now, if he suffers a 20+ point blowout, I’ll concede that this, or the Wright flap, or both, have done some damage. But he loses by single digits, I think he’s in good shape going forward to the general election.
You know that measure by which people overwhelmingly preferred Bush to Kerry? Well, Clinton wins it in spades! Four more years! Four more beers!
This is politics. No need for gauging. Hypocrisy doesn’t exist here. You see an opening and you attack it. If Obama said something that would allow her to call him a shrill, cackling, fucking whore that only got into this race because he was being carried by his spouse, she’d say it. And really, we shouldn’t be surprised because politics has worked that way forever. She doesn’t believe it, but moral vacuums like Penn and Rove have convinced them they need to say it to get elected. This is what needs to change. But I’m done being pissed at Hillary for playing the game as we’ve asked it to be played for the last 2 centuries. I’ll point it out to help make it disappear and I’ll be pissed at the Clinton supporters that join in the effort. This isn’t a proxy battle on an issue, but the issue itself playing out and some people are willing participants in making politics the arena of shit that it is. I don’t have a problem kicking those people in the teeth.
I think that’s what Obama was getting at when he said he needed to run now – that in time he too would likely succumb to the moral vacuums like everyone else, but he hadn’t gotten there yet in his view. My hope is that a successful grassroots campaign will allow candidates to avoid some of the more corrupting influences.
“I hope she scratched her ass, repositioned her junk and farted/belched loudly several times just for good measure.”
That thar is the fuggin’ POST OF THE DAY!
incidentally, this is often the way it is with Ds. there’s a reflexive cringing afraid of the GOP section, an inflexible ideological section that parallels (though not identically) the inflexibility on the right, and then a muddled middle.
what i find so refreshing about Obama is that unlike Kerry (who didn’t know how to respond) or Clinton, (who seems to think that the way to respond is to pretend to be a GOP member), he (Obama) actually confronts crap-slingers. will it work? i sure hope so, but i’m not planning to get my knickers in a twist about it. he’s handled himself far better than anyone else out there on the trail.
now, can we PLEASE talk about GWB saying “it’s your baby” to authorize torture? was this an example of Arendt’s idea of the banality of evil, or is GWB an idiot who actually doesn’t understand what he is doing? it’s a real, and, i think, important question. or ask a different one about this. please.
So… Clinton is a liar full of shit and Obama is a naive, stupid moron.
I doubt I’m going to care for QuickRob’s view on the democratic primary…
There’s a reason for that. It’s that it IS a blank slate of sorts. I mean Obama the candidate is a good candidate. What he said is nothing new, nothing extreme. It’s something he’s been talking about for years, and it’s the truth. Watch the Charlie Rose interview linked there, he explains it perfectly. Those social issues, their communities, are things that these displaced people can COUNT on. It’s their bedrock. And as they lost so much and will never get it back, they don’t want to lose any more.
In any case, The reason why Obama is a blank slate isn’t Obama the candidate. It’s Obama the movement leader who’s more than willing..eager even..to just be the one to push the first few stones down the hill to form an avalanche of change. Obama the guy pales in the face of Obama the movement. And that IS a blank slate. Because the movement is everybody. It’s John and Tim, me and you, hell, it’s even myiq2xu. This is not an ideological issue. There’s no purity here.
This is simply getting people involved and interested in how their government is run. It’s changing the status quo. How will it change? Obama has his ideas. But then again, the movement could flatten him as well. Best thing about Obama? He knows this and accepts this. I even think in ways he welcomes this.
The biggest misconception, I think is in people not realizing this.
I’m leaning towards Clinton, but I would be happy with Obama.
Somebody, somewhere wrote something like “In Washington, a gaffe is when a politician tells the truth.”
And just like his “typical white person…” remark, this is one of those times when he’s being politically incorrect and telling the truth.
It’s human nature for people to give a [email protected] about the things they can control, and as Obama said, rural America has been unable to control their economic destiny for 30 years (really much longer). So they’ll give a [email protected] about what they can control – God, Guns and Gays.
OK…you want to talk GOP? How about GWB’s Legacy?
Yup, it’s a bit off topic from bashing poor ol’ Hillary, yet, only Obama has the education to conclude this chapter and bring justice. Therein exists the hope.
And yes, the American populace is “BITTER” and demands justice.
HANG THESE BASTARDS!
Hey, PeterJ, I can’t help but be honest.
I honestly think Obama has a good chance of getting nominated, and would probably be a better choice for me as his seeming respect for the free market. Unfortunately, I am one of those rubes who are buying into the evil media’s caricature of Obama as potentially an extremist who affiliates with Wright, fan of Farrakhan, and whose campaign volunteers have up posters of Che, and who thinks poorly of dumb small-town America.
Clinton truly is endorsing health-care socialism, and as someone in grad school getting my doctorate I know all-too-well the detrimental effects government has had on health care quality, availability, and costs…thanks much to Hillary. Truth be told, though, both Dems have ideas which will likely seriously cause further damage to the health care market in America. A cursory examination of the crumbling doctor-patient relationship is an example of the HMO-system Washington handed us a few years back.
I would be a fool to not vote i my own economic interests, and my interest is not in further regulation, and bargain-basement government-controlled health care which will just end up being rigged auctions going to the lowest cost provider, resulting in worsening care and minimized choice.
How does the argument for Obama’s remarks being elitist go, other than to say “Well, they sounded elitist”? That’s not an argument; it’s just a restatement of your position.
I’m from Oklahoma, and I found what Obama said to be spot-on. There needn’t be any spite or condescension in such an analysis. Plenty of my fellow Okies – and my relatives – are genuinely nice people, but they determine who they vote for sometimes on the basis of crazy shit pushed by the likes of Fox News.
Of course, I’ve been in the tank for Obama for a while, so take my comments with an appropriately-sized grain of salt.
I just got banned from MyDD again in the latest purge of Obama supporters. Apparently, it’s not OK to take exception to racist comments by Clinton supporters.
The Clinton campaign — as always — is trying to have it several ways at once. On the one hand, they suggest that Obama is young, and untested, and pretend to offer an olive branch by suggesting that Obama might one day catch up to Hillary’s level of threshold-breaching experience — if he subordinates himself to her.
But I don’t think that Senator Clinton would ever offer Obama the VP slot if she ever finds a way to wrest the nomination from him. She has oddly, inexplicably, joined in harmony with the GOP in desperately looking for a way to use an N word against Obama.
The GOP tries all kind of rhetorical flim flam to brand Obama as a liberal Commie pinko stealth Muslim stealth black nationalist radical angry Negro offspring of Commie pinko miscegenating far left radical parents. They have largely failed despite their most strenuous efforts.
Senator Clinton and her most noxious advisers and supporters have been equally consistent in always trying to find ways to demonstrate that Obama is “unelectable,” a more dainty slur than the ones hurled by the GOP, but ultimately the same kind of thing.
With this latest faux furor over Obama’s “elitist” comments, Clinton — the 109 million dollar woman — can again trot out her own special version of the N word. Obama, in her mind, cannot be given the nomination because he is “NOT one of us!”
Like the Republicans, she will fail. Both she and the GOP have spent the weekend trying to tell the supposed small town boob-wa-zee exactly how they should think and feel about Obama, but carefully they do not take the time to actually let these folks speak for themselves.
I feel your pain.
Maybe that’s what Barack tried to say to the “Great American Middle”.
Keep trying to take exception.
Truth is more powerful than lies, whatever the consequences.
I believe Condi said that.
He’s a narcissist. He lacks empathy and can only see the world through the lens of what fulfills his projected outward image. He grew up with a powerful dad and has never achieved that power himself until he was elected president. Dad had the power to disappear people as head of the CIA, but Jr. never did until now.
His primary goal seems to be to pack as much inherent power in the Presidency to take the title as most powerful person ever and having clearly established America’s lead as power agent. He doesn’t give a shit if we have to sodomize some children on the way there. His personality defect prevents it.
Oddly, Saddam wasn’t much different.
You do know that Obama denounced (and rejected!) Farrakhan, right?
I believe he also distanced himself and went so far as to say his father smelled of elderberries. I may be making up the elderberries part.
Remember, it’s not racist if he is in fact a dirty nigger. That’s why you got banned – you didn’t read the mydd statement of reality before entering.
OK, QuickRob — you’re a self-admitted concern troll, and I’m coming to think of you as a second-rate spoof-drool-troll, too. “Fan of Farrakhan”?
Without his handlers to control him and when he speaks his own mind and not from a very carefully crafted script, Obama reveals himself to be a clueless, doltish, effete, self-defined superior elitist, empty suit.
This clown makes John Kerry seem like Joe Six-pack.
It’s amazing that the liberal standard bearers condsider that those with religous and second amendment beliefs are in reality simply backwoods, inbred, sister-screwing, Bible-thumping, gun-toting, toothless, uneducated, Negro-hating, bigoted rednecks
NR, that doesn’t change the fact that Obama respects and admires a man who respects and admires Farrakhan. Denunciations are swell but the connection appears to exist, no?
Pat Robertson’s nutty commentary was a negative for Bush and Wright’s nutty commentary is especially negative for Obama, because Obama clearly counted Wright as an important person in life, who influenced Obama greatly and whose church Obama proudly belonged to, until this spotlight…At least Bush wasn’t out there trying to minimize a deranged religious extremists vile and divisive words with some odd moral equivalence to his racist white grandmother…
If Bush were to denounce all the ideas of the “neocons”, despite his apparent affinity for such philosophy, would we suddenly have no case to make about Bush being open to such philosophies? Denunciations are usually acts of political expediency.
demimondian, calling me a troll….is that supposed to minimize everything I say? I don’t really think calling someone name’s is a good way to get across your ideas, at least I am trying to communicate rationally.
Follow this link and sign the letter. Stop the swiftboating of Obama.
You’re making it sound like Hillary was replying to the Charlie Rose interview. Why? Do you think we’re idiots? The Hillary comments are aimed at the Obama comment in SF recently, not Charlie Rose show from 4 years ago.
That doesn’t make him a “fan of Farrakhan” like you said.
A friend of mine has a grandfather who he greatly respects and admires. His grandfather has been a positive influence in my friend’s life. But guess what? His grandfather is also a racist who respects and admires people like David Duke.
Does that make my friend a fan of David Duke?
If you’re going to play “Six degrees of Kevin Bacon” with various hatemongers around the country, I don’t think ANY politican’s hands are going to be clean.
Gotcha. OK, Oliver, you’re outed.
IHNBT. YHL. HAND.
A video from last Friday, Hillary saying “Shame on you,” to Obama for using Republican talking points and lying about her instead of debating her on the issues.
NR, Obama respects and admires Wright, who respects and admires Farrakhan.
This equation is not rocket science.
If your friends grandfather respected and admired Mussolini, and Mussolini respected and admired Hitler, then I would assume your grandfather respects and admires Hitler. These are not leaps of faith, this is deduction. It could be incorrect, but I tend to call a spade and spade.
Great, by my count, 10 of the last 15 threads have been Clinton bashing. 2 might be said to supporting Obama.
Someone doesn’t have a fixation?
There is no “equation.”
You are trying to smear Obama by association, by claiming that Wright’s opinions are Obama’s opinions when Obama has explicitly said on multiple occasions that they’re not. And you are ignoring the fact that Obama has explicitly denounced and rejected Farrakhan to do it.
There is no equation – only dishonesty on your part.
The Other Steve
This whole thing is interesting. It seems that Obama’s one strength has been the fact that he doesn’t come off as elitist. He’s willing to take any question, and answer it with his honest assessment.
This seems to be another case of attack the opponents strength, straight out of the Karl Rove handbook.
They were commenting this morning on how the real problem for Hillary on this is if she tries to overplay it. I am confident we have crossed that line, given how over the top people sound.
Well, like I said, if Bush were to denounce all the ideas of the “neocons”, despite his apparent affinity for such philosophy, would we suddenly have no case to make about Bush being open to such philosophies? Denunciations are usually acts of political expediency.
Of coure he denounces things which cause a drop in his favorability ratings…
This is no joke. After a too-long period of no contact with a friend I worked with on the Kerry campaign, we chatted a few nights ago about the election. I respect her a great deal but was dumbfounded when she said she was not comfortable with Obama because of the views Reverend Wright expressed.
The Other Steve
Well, of course he is.
I have no real interest in smearing Obama, he seems like a nice guy and I don’t like Hillary at all. I’m just using logic to connect some dots.
The Other Steve
Reading QuickRob’s blog, he’s a member of the 28% club.
Just keep that in mind here.
The Other Steve
Deductive or Inductive?
QuickRob, I take you to be one of those internet-age, blogworld know-it-alls who laps up whatever narratives are getting lots of play but who hasn’t been in the world long enough to tell shit from shinola. I get that from your posts and your blog.
I also think you are very likely to vote for McCain if you haven’t already decided to do so.
So speaking only for me, piss off.
Except for him being a naive, stupid moron?
Exactly. He’s a soon to be pie eating nut.
The Other Steve
I think what John is showing here is that Obama has a pattern of discussing this issue, and is in fact his strength in the campaign. What Hillary is doing is attacking his strength for purely political reasons.
The question really is, does Hillary or anybody else truly believe Obama is an elitist? Given all of his past discussions.
Sojourner, you shouldn’t be dumbfounded. It is not hard to understand how people are coming to such conclusions. And liberals should be, more than conservatives, weary of political extremism.
Just because it’s not the extremism that is usually the “right wing” variety, now everyone turns a blind eye on the crap in their own backyard. Wright is an extremist, the fact that many people share his views does not legitimize them, and Obama’s reluctance to pro-actively and in no uncertain terms disavow his Reverend’s views only serves to convince on-the-fence supporters that perhaps Obama is not all as he seems. This should be of critical concern to the Democrats if Obama gets the nod. Continuing to pay no attention to the implications of it and to downplay it as some sort of misunderstanding might be disastrous.
Did we get linked by Protein Wisdom or Talk
I do now.
Ok. genius. Name a single instance where Obama has said, written or done anything that emulates Wright’s rants. And Bush could never all the ideas of neocons because IS a neocon. He’d have to denounce his own very existence.
Ah, it’s all because I’m an idiot?! Now I see!
And, yes, please do read my blog. Maybe when you start to understand that this isn’t a black-and-white world you will come to appreciate the viewpoints of others without resorting to denigrating those who don’t share your very limited world-view which is so clearly based on conflict.
I’m glad you were able to surmise how ignorant and naive I am from a cursory review of my blog, I am in awe of your depth of perception.
Truth be told, though, I shouldn’t be so snotty as to point out that you are employing the fundamental attribution error, an error in logical thinking, which is leading you to make incorrect presumptions about people you don’t actually know shit about. Since I am a moron, though, what I just said is meaningless. After all, I’m the enemy!
Fixed it for you.
The Other Steve
John McCain is far worse though.
The Other Steve
Can you answer my question? It seems like such a simple question for someone who supposedly understands the application of logic.
Who says that Obama is the only talented speaker in this race:
Put that in your dashiki and snort it, Obamabots!
What exactly are the implications? What kind of disaster awaits the nation, pray tell, when Obama is in the White House? Let’s not hint darkly. Spell it out for us.
For extra credit, tell us how it would be worse than what the current Armageddon-then-Jesus-returns nuts are wreaking on us now.
The Other Steve
Why do you think this?
That’s easy. July 20, 1993.
Well, no, you’re just a disingenuous crank who doesn’t have our best interests at heart who would like to mislead us into believing you do. Either that, or you brought your Thursday dinner club material to Saturday night at the LA Comedy Club — and you’re about to discover what that feels like. Bluntly put: you’re a liar or a fool, and, either way, asking for sympathy for what you’re about to experience is a trifle rich.
Have fun, guy. It’s gonna be rough.
Hey, sharks…he’s had his warning. He’s yours now.
JackieBinAZ Says, you read me wrong. I am referring to the possibly disastrous election results for the Dems if Obama gets nominated to run vs. McCain.
He gave himself away when he mentioned Farrakhan.
Only the absolute dead-enders are still using that line of attack against Obama. No one else is. Not Hillary. Not even McCain.
If he’d just stuck to Wright, he probably could have been a lot more successful with his concern trolling.
On the other hand, people who admire George W. Bush, who approved “enhanced interrogation techniques,” obviously support Hitler and his Nazi regime, which regularly used the same techniques of torture.
Yep. Fallacy Connection is an easy game to play.
Of course, Obama is in good company when it comes to being branded as an elitist. He just has to throw off the phony political consultant BS that says that a candidate has to pretend to be just like every single person whose vote he courts, or the lamebrain nonsense that the best seal of approval is the judgment that a politician must be someone that you want to have a beer with.
At its best, the Democratic Party has been much smarter than this, and Obama should be proud to be counted in the company of “elitists” such as Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt. Here’s a bit from the recent PBS “American Experience” biography of Eleanor.
Adjust for gender and exchange big ears for buck teeth, and you have a fair picture of Obama.
Oddly enough, Eleanor Roosevelt also caught hell from the pundits and the self-appointed guardians of national character for daring to suggest that a group of Americans might be bitter. People tried to slap her down, but it only made her stronger, and more respected by millions of … gasp… ordinary folk, (Vernon Jarrett on: Eleanor’s commitment to African Americans):
The Magical Unity Pony comes from a great tradition – a great stable, if you will, of other unity ponies, who have the courage to stand with the people.
On the other hand, given the continued cluelessness of her campaign, I almost expect Hillary “I’m Not Bitter” Button Clinton to denounce and reject Eleanor Roosevelt.
A republican that dislikes both the democratic candidates and is worried about disastrous elections results for the democrats.
look up he word if you want, I am more interested in the actual political topic than I am in debating the meaning of inductive vs deductive reasoning. I am deducing that since A is related to B and B is related to C, that A is related to C. I’m pretty much done explaining such a simple thing any more.
As for demimondian, right now I am rolling my eyes vigorously. I am not trying to trick anybody here, I am speaking my mind and it’s a viewpoint millions of Americans share. If you can’t wrap your head around this, you need serious help opening your mind a little bit.
I have already been “sicced upon” by someone named Jen and I live to tell about it, I’m not trying to make any friends here. Send your “sharks”, do you know how dumb that sounds?
it’s not any kind of science, in fact.
The Other Steve
You might want to read it, QuickRob, as what you call Logic is simply a fallacy.
JackieBinAZ, I should repeat that I think Obama might have had a better chance at beating McCain as opposed to Hillary, and I prefer Obama over Hillary.
My point is that everyone closing their eyes and not being able to see from someone else’s perspective will not help deal with a real problem. And if no one deals with any of the very real concerns people have about Obama then that will not help anyone win an election.
The Other Steve
I’m actually enthralled by the possibilities.
There hasn’t been a Republican around these parts for quite some time. I thought they were an endangered species after how badly things have gone for their ideology in recent years.
I suggest instead of just trashing his comments, we should string him along a bit. Maybe get Oliver over here to cheer him on, as we used to do with Darrell.
No thx, therez some things even we won’t eat.
Obama is dealing with it.
The only ones that still seem to be really concerned wasn’t going to vote for him anyway. Like you. But thanks for playing.
The fact that so many of you have used so many written words to express opinions and frustrations make you elitists who do not deserve to lead the Democratic Party.
Once Hillary Clinton wins and begins sending the Starbucks latte-drinking elitists out of their trust-fund scumbag city jobs out into the countryside to farm rice, our glorious proletarian revolution may move forward!
My entire point over like 2 days commenting at this site (what you guys call “concern trolling” whatever the fuck that entails) I have been making a few points, most of which are getting lost in the idiotic attempts to paint me as either a right wing nut, Obama-hater, Clinton-lover, concern troll, or whatever. Here’s my points:
1) Obama’s campaign has serious issues to confront,
2) The Dems hating each other will not help them win at all,
3) Obama needs small-town America to win,
4) Such blind denial of a politicians faults is dangerous
You guys are all too busy working overtime to defend Obama, it’s almost absurd. You’re just a bunch of fanboys it seems. Unquestioned acceptance of a candidate isn’t very flattering.
That’s easy. July 20, 1993.
Oops. Fixed. Still /SNARK though.
Holy shit dude, I hope you don’t use that kind of reasoning in day-to-day life.
You are using ‘respect and admire’ in a very dishonest way. I can respect and admire Jimmie Carters work with habitat for humanity, or his love of woodworking without ‘respecting and admiring’ his position toward Israel
You haven’t established what it is that Obama respects about Wright or what Wright respects about Farrakhan. Do you even know WHY Wright and Farrakhan went to Lybia?
Wright and Farrakhan along with other ministers went with Jackson on that trip. Apparently Ronald Reagan ‘was grateful and admired’ Farrakhan and Wright as well.
Wright is to be admired and respected for dropping out of college to enlist in the Marines during Vietnam. None of our fearless leaders were able to bring themselves to perform such an act, opting for deferments or desertion instead.
So, tell us please, what does Obama admires in Wright and what does Wright admire in Farrakhan that makes it clear that Obama admires Farrakhan? And keep in mind as part of your answer, that Reagan is already on record for admiring Jackson and presumably those who accompanied him. Make sure that you don’t enable the transitive theory of admiration to make every breathing Republican admire Farrakhan.
The Other Steve
You seem to misunderstand. We already know all about your concerns. What we are doing here is making fun of you, because that is more fun.
So let’s talk about something else.
How about that John McCain? I’m really quite surprised that they picked him over McCain, considering Huckabee was a much better candidate.
At least I have the sense to not be so infatuated with a vessel that my defense of him is without question. People who become so engaged in the defense of public figures to such a degree run a huge risk of missing the obvious things that someone not so entwined in the clusterfuck of politics would more easily recognize as a problem.
Jed report remembers a Safire column, during the 1992 Bill Clinton campaign:
What BS. I’m you have the dem party best interest at heart. Just love the wingnut concern pa-troll.
Arguing with signposts
This is a huge assumption, and illogical at that. Just because A admires B, and B admires C does not mean that A admires C. You would likely need to know exactly why A admires B, and why B admires C. It is entirely likely that the reasons A admires B are entirely different from the reasons B admires C.
To give you an example: I admire my mother. My mother admires Hillary Clinton. Does that mean I admire Hillary Clinton? No.
You might want to go back to the dime store where you got that logic book and ask for a refund.
Most political blogs consist mostly of choir preaching. BJuice is where the truth of things gets hashed out, as any look at its evolution over the years reveals. It doesn’t take kindly to liars, phonies, and simpletons (or combinations thereof). If you want to present your actual views, go for it. It’s your concern trolling that pisses people off, and they are calling you on it.
Throwing in that Farrakhan bullshit is what pulled back the curtain all the way.
I’m just a benchwarmer who is here to watch the starting lineup. They’ll do a better job on you than I can.
I am known here as an Obama critic, but I take the defense of Jeremiah Wright. If you want to know why, read this article.
“In 1961, a young African-American man, after hearing President John F. Kennedy’s challenge to, “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country,” gave up his student deferment, left college in Virginia and voluntarily joined the Marines.
In 1963, this man, having completed his two years of service in the Marines, volunteered again to become a Navy corpsman. (They provide medical assistance to the Marines as well as to Navy personnel.)
The man did so well in corpsman school that he was the valedictorian and became a cardiopulmonary technician. Not surprisingly, he was assigned to the Navy’s premier medical facility, Bethesda Naval Hospital, as a member of the commander in chief’s medical team, and helped care for President Lyndon B. Johnson after his 1966 surgery. For his service on the team, which he left in 1967, the White House awarded him three letters of commendation.”
Martin, you are very correct. BUT you are taking what I am saying is a grave concern for the Democrats, and you are taking my opinion from deduction as some sort of TRUTH I am ready to defend. That is incorrect. I am saying what impression the scenario leaves on me, and how I feel about it.
I do, clearly, think that the Wright matter is not so cut-and-dry as Obama’s denunciation would have us believe. Obama is a politician, he knows the stakes, and he is going to denounce accordingly.
Ive read the blog for years. I’m not a liar, I’m not a phony, and your characterization of me as a simpleton is incorrect. All three of those things are in fact just further examples of the way you deal with opposing viewpoints, by personally attacking people you don’t agree with. I’m not about to lose sleep over such a trivial matter getting called names at a blog.
The Other Steve
LOL! Coming from a 28%er that is rich.
I used to come here much more often and sometimes comment, so the fact that I am now able to see a rift among people who formerly were more in agreement is what I am talking about. And the juvenile manner with which some of the commenters just automatically resort to trying to label me as a liar or whatnot says far more about the people making such statements, the intractability of their own entrenched and partisan views, and the problems this can create for the Democrats as they potentially cast off disillusioned voters. If calling me a liar makes anyone feel better about this situation, then by all means allow me to make you feel warm in fuzzy under your blanket of denial.
The Other Steve
People like QuickRob don’t care about a man’s service to his country. They only care that he’s a political opponent, and he said something scarey.
The Other Steve
Did anybody ever tell you that you sure do write a lot of words for not having anything to say?
We could go with the devil we know in the belief that Americans cherish their racism above their sexism or personal dislike of the Clintons. We could cower at the threats that if Obama is the nominee, Clinton’s issue-oriented and principled supporters will cross over and vote the candidate who most opposes her party and what it stands for. Or we could say fuck you because we trust that Obama can outmaneuver McCain at least as easily as he did Clinton and that’s a fight we want to see.
Your concern is duly noted though.
Service to ones country is not a permission slip to say dumb shit and no one can point it out. Your suggestion though, further illustrates my point about your juvenile tactics.
While I recognize that 90% of the people reading my comments thinks I am an asshole, 10% won’t drink the Kool-Aid and hate me just because I am saying something different and they are reading the responses I get and probably thinking to themselves that personal attacks on me really do show more about the attacker than the subject being attacked.
Truth be told, if Obama vs Clinton I already said I prefer Obama. McCain isn’t getting my vote for sure, either. He can do plenty of shit I don’t like in the next few months, and I might not vote at all. Unfortunately, I might vote against the Dem effectively out of my own economic interests and also not vote McCain and just choose a third party that doesn’t inspire as much dislike as the 3 main candidates currently inspire from me.
The Other Steve
Oh dear. I hope I have not offended you, because your opinion is of such importance to my sensibilities.
Im not offended at all, as I have already said.
Okay, but that IS concern trolling. It’s announcing that this thing is a problem because some people are irrational. We KNOW some people are irrational. Nobody can control the fact that they are irrational so they have to be excluded from the political calculus because there is no way to combat it. Some people will think that Obama is a muslim, some will think that Clinton did kill Vince Foster and some will think that McCain actually had a black baby and there is nothing that can be done to control for these things.
The only thing that can be discussed in a reasonable manner are those things that are reasonable.
And I’m not taking issue to the fact that it’ll take work on Obama’s part. I’m taking issue that what you call logic isn’t that at all because it is easily refuted. People admire and respect a great number of people. Your transitive principle should be applied indefinitely as you have presented it. Every person therefore must admire and respect every single other person. I can guarantee there is a respect and admire trail from you to Hitler, Pol Pot, Jeffrey Dahmer, etc.
That’s true because you are equating respecting someone *for any reason* with being equal to respecting them *for every reason*. bernarda respects Wright for enlisting. Wright certainly respects Obama, but bernarda need not respect Obama by extension because Obama didn’t do a comparable thing to Wright. Obama never enlisted. If that’s the basis for the respect, it’s not transitive at all. If Obama *did* enlist, and that’s why Wright respects him, then it would be reasonable to challenge bernarda’s view. You’ve never established the underlying rationale – which is the only thing that actually matters, not the meta crap of ‘respect’, ‘admire’, etc. Your view is that of 2nd graders that get into ‘best friend’ arguments.
The Other Steve
The Economy was so much better under Bill Clinton.
Makes me pine for the good old days.
If I were to say I hated you it would not be because you aren;t drinking kool-aid, or are drinking lattes, or whatever, it would be because you are doing a few really irritating things:
1.) Making bad faith sweeping generalizations about a bunch of people, their beliefs, and their motives
2.) Throwing up a lot of weakass concern troll bullshit when it is clear you don’t like either Obama or Hillary
3.) Acting the victim when people appropriately heap scorn and derision on your comments.
To top it all off, you then insult the people who are making fun of you as just making fun of you because we can not handle the absolute truth and wisdom of your babblings. We just don’t get your unique and informative insights, so IT MUST BE because we are all on the Obama kool-aid.
For most of the commenters here, this ain’t our first day at the rodeo. We know a concern troll when we see it.
The economy being good had very little to do with Clinton or Bush. The advent of China and India entering the global marketplace, with the likes of Brazil and Russia, is a huge factor in the great economy of the 90’s. Clinton deserves credit for not attempting to enact any particularly disruptive regulation, though his policies were not flawless. The AMT should’ve been done away with the Sarb-Ox is hurting smaller corporations trying to compete globally.
Then shut up for awhile and stop acting so offended.
Just Some Fuckhead
John, you totally missed an opportunity to say “Some fuckhead”!
The Other Steve
I for one am proud of this great nation, that it allows people like QuickRob the opportunity to comment on this great website.
It must be hard, for a man like QuickRob, who has had to overcome signifigant challenges and hurdles placed upon him by the lack of acceptance in society. Yet, despite these hurdles, he has been willing, nay I say courageously insightful, in his want to tell us about his signifigant concerns regarding topics he knows little about.
Instead of demeaning Quickrob, and heaving juvenile insults upon him, we should hold him up as a token, a prodigy if you will, of the types of commentator we would prefer to see more of.
I for one volunteer to send him a fresh box of Cheetohs.
Whose with me!?
1) who am I generalizing about?
2) I have stated that I like neither repeatedly, so what’s the problem?
3) I’m not the victim of anything but insults which people are using in place of honest arguments.
I am making no statements of absolute truth. You must all have reading comprehension problems. Irregardless of my blog and the judgments about my character which will be made, I am making some very obvious statements which are about my opinion and the opinion that many people share.
I know you guys are not fresh off the turnip truck, you’re also a closed-minded bunch of pricks, too. No one wants to recognize the 800 lb gorilla, everyone’s assuming McCain will be a pushover, and like Kerry everyone will just keep on whistling while walking off the plank.
I am not terribly concerned with the fate of either Dem candidate in November, and never claimed to be. I am just being met with such ridiculous resistance when I point out something which is fairly non-controversial, but which deviates from the script over here. This is a microcosm, that’s my point, and that’s the only absolute truth I’m talking about.
I would prefer the cheezy puff things, cheetos fuck up the roof of my mouth.
The Other Steve
Isn’t it interesting how when things turn bad, the 28%ers always claim the President can do nothing about it. But when it comes time to vote, they claim we have to vote for a Republican for the sake of the economy?
I’ve just always been fascinated by this. It’s hard for me to understand how any human being can wrap their mind around too opposing thoughts like this, and believe them so forcefully.
As anaside, numbered comments would be a helpful thing to follow threads. Is this wordpress or typekey?
I am getting my doctorate. My economic reason to vote Republican is not about the macro-economy, but about health care regulation and the insurance clusterfuck that needs to be fixed. It is in the best interest of most doctors to not enact govt managed healthcare, as any doctor who laments the hoops of medicare/medicaid can attest to.
The Other Steve
Earlier you were expressing outrage when we pointed out your statements were not truthful.
Again, it’s this notion of opposing thoughts held together in one mind, so firmly, yet so easily accessible for route outrage.
I’d be delighted to see what you are talking about, since I am not contradicting myself at all.
The economy is largely not influenced by the President, if anything Clinton was a benign or successful steward of the economy, though not without faults. I have no compunction in recognizing Bush and McCain both sat on their hands with their eyes closed as the mortgage industry imploded.
The Other Steve
This is clearly the way to solve our immigrant imbalance with Mexico. The doctors can move to Mexico where they will make much more money due to the lack of any insurance.
QuickRobot is developing a syntax error. Must be all that pie.
And I was never outraged, I simply rejected being called a liar.
Not me. I think he has a good chance to win this thing. I never misunderestimate the willfull ignorance of American voters, and come November there will be plenty of gullible pushovers in the booth.
I still think you are one of them.
The Other Steve
The Other Steve
I totally understand. I hate being caught lying too.
Mexico is another country, its to the South. You are confusing the issue.
Got any evidence of that, or are you talking out of your ass?
If you are asking will I vote for McCain, the answer is more likely than I will vote for Clinton or Obama. On my blog in fact about 4 months ago I said I wasn’t sure even McCain would get my vote. You might also note that I really don’t ever call myself a Republican at my blog, and for good reason: I am not particularly enamored with any of them especially, and they are a bunch of fuck-ups who use their power to increase their own power, and generally do a piss-poor job of watching out for the real people.
Next I will be accused of making up that blog post in January so that in April I could go try to “concern troll” at Balloon Juice.
I guess I’m not a “real man” since I don’t suck down glass after glass of overpriced, foul-tasting, mind-impairing microbe urine.
You slam Obama for being elitist, then have the gaul to imply that some people are better than others–more “real”–because they drink alcohol? As my grandfather (who drank himself to death) might say, you don’t know if you’re drilled or punched.
Martin, as everything I say is, it is what I am saying, obviously I think its NOT in the best interest of most doctors, like I just said. A poll doesn’t mean I am wrong it just means that 40% agree with it and 49% don’t.
And that website you linked to, is that based in a loony bin? Barack Obama has taken the progressive movement “back to the days of Stalin” huh? Jonah Goldberg called, he wants his shtick back.
At least I have the sense to not be so infatuated with a vessel that my defense of him is without question.
I hope you would defend “your vessel” if he was getting attacked for something like this. Hell, I would probably defend “your vessel” if he was getting attacked for something like this. I give St. McSame credit for telling bitter autoworkers that their jobs weren’t coming back and telling bitter anti-immigrant groups that the immigrants weren’t leaving. If Mark Halperin spent an entire weak zinging him for that and saying how out-of-touch it proved he was, I would criticize that too.
It’s not about defending “your vessel”, it’s about smacking down bs storylines like this one.
Gun control is hitting your target.
Davis X. Machina
…the detrimental effects government has had on health care quality, availability, and costs…thanks much to Hillary…
Sorry. No one making this assertion deserves to be taken seriously.
Falsum in uno, falsum in omne
Actually, no one — not even you — needs permission to say “dumb” things. It’s part of the fundamental right to freedom of expression. So is the right of people to over-react to “dumb comments,” as some have done to Wright’s remarks.
Odd. I don’t think you are an asshole. Nor do I hate you. It’s not that you are saying something “different,” it’s that you engage in easily dismissed logical fallacies, and then insist that you are some kind of rational, clear thinking commentator.
On top of this, your delusions of intellectual competence are mixed with a willful misinterpretation of a thorough demolition of your statements as some kind of personal attack.
Ultimately, you engage in a blatantly transparent rhetorical feint meant to keep the spotlight on yourself, even though you don’t really have much to contribute to the thread topic other than a concern about theoretical outcome of the general election based upon speculation on the possible reaction to some of Obama’s remarks.
Blatantly transparent and a waste of time.
But oddly entertaining.
Likewise I see the poll is 6 years old and a small 2,000 doctor sample considering the actual number of doctors.
And yes many doctors will be advantaged by more government run health care, especially if they are in lower income communities. But many will not and it is guaranteed that things will be limited in short order.
As an aside, when Britain stopped letting their national healthcare cover circumcision the practice largely stopped over time in Britain. Not to use circumcision as something I support or oppose, but just as all government run things get poorly run, costs will be cut, and higher-end and alternative healthcare will be cut from the allowed services real quick. This will cost us all money in the end and take away the number of health care choices, making the doctor patient relationship even more hostage to 3rdparty payer systems which dictate care plans and limit options.
QuickRob is clearly arguing in good faith here, but the brownshirt thought police enforcers of the echo chamber feel compelled to beat him down at all costs. Must not debate, must not debate. Is this what it means to be “reality based?”
Keep up the fight, Rob.
Brachiator, touche, I actually find your willingness to at least address what I am saying refreshing. Unsurprisingly, though, I disagree completely that I am committing logical fallacies, but I recognize that I’m not about to convince anyone of that, although reading back on my comments I am unable to find a single instance of these fallacies spoken of. Like John Kerry, it looks like I am too nuanced for some voters.
For once so far SoylentGreen I agree with you. This is getting old.
Jeez can the Obama supporters lighten up a little bit?
My vote and my money are going to the MUP, but I’m not afraid to admit that his remarks in SF were a gaffe, as much for where and to whom they were said as in what he said.
Can you honestly say, as a matter purely of campaign strategy, that if you had a time machine and could go back and whisper in Obama’s ear before that SF speech that he should ix-nay the itter-bay and ing-clay part, you wouldn’t do it?
I’m not freaking out about it, because Obama has already done an admirable job of pivoting off this controversy to talk about deindustrialization, while walking back from the most poorly chosen of his words. I think this will probably cost him several points in the PA primary, but in the long run this fire will burn itself out.
Stop freaking out over Hillary, too. If she is just being evil about this then people will have enough common sense to figure that out for themselves. If you don’t have enough confidence in the voters being able to do this, why are you supporting Obama anyway?
Ditto with the MSM. Let the wolves howl. They just make more clearly every day what a bunch of worthless ball-licking jackals they really are.
Oh and one last thing: enough with the QuickRob pile on already. This already excellent blog could only improve if more GOPers would show up, but that isn’t going to happen if our idea of a friendly welcome is to metaphorically cold-cock every newcomer with a baseball bat and then feed them feet first into the chipper-shredder. Logic-chopping is fine, but a little bit goes a long way.
You are all still making arguments with lots of words and this makes you all elitists.
Thank god the voice of reason.
[sticks non-elite tongue out]
Ok, we can now ridicule you based on your obvious lack of reading comprehension.
The previous poll was in 2002. The article I referenced was posted less than 2 weeks ago and refers to a poll conducted this year. And a 2000 sample isn’t small. Sample sizes have no bearing on the size of the actual population. They depend on the size of the confidence interval you are after and the degree of variability in the response set. 2000 is extremely reasonable (and probably overkill) assuming the internals are correct.
So far we’ve caught you not understanding logic, statistics, and not being able to understand what you read.
But you have not established any basis for why your opinion is valid, yet you’ve stated that it is. Physicians have a built-in basis, they are the ones affected so it is in their self interest to have a rational opinion. BTW, this is elitism – discounting the opinions of the people affected in favor of your own opinion – especially when your own opinion has no more factual validity than theirs.
BTW, I’m dragging out your wingnuttery. You’ve asserted opinion without basis and when provided contradictory evidence, you’ve attacked the evidence as being invalid even though it is clear you don’t understand what you’ve read or statistics. Through all of this, you’ve offered no basis for why your opinion on healthcare is any more valid than that of my 7 year old daughters.
This is classic wingnuttery. You have your opinion apparently without basis in fact and you will vote your opinion even in the face of opposing evidence, which you will deny exists.
I’m curious how this blog would “improve” if something like Michelle Malkin or Confederate Wankee crawled in here because those assclowns are the spokesmodels for the remnants of the GOP. However, I’m an obnoxious dick and don’t really get the whole “Be nice merely for the sake of diversity,” thing, even when it was employed by Dems who thought we should make nice with other Dems no matter how FULL CAPS loony they were in their defense of Hillary/attacks on Obama. Fuck it, I can barely keep from smashing out the windows of cars sporting W stickers.
But if it makes you feel any better QuickRobot isn’t a GOPer:
So on with the cold-cocking. [Brrr!]
Fooey. QuickRob is a blemish on the face of humanity. If he wants to come here as a serious commenter, great. If he wants to come here as an honest concern troll — like Soj does — that’s fine too. She doesn’t get the treatment because *she’s HONEST about what she is*
QuickBlob is not, and so gets savaged. He wants to set the terms of conversation because HE’S A FUCKING REPUBICAN AND HE DOESN’T HAVE OUR BEST INTERESTS AT HEART BUT HE WANTS TO SET THE TERMS OF DISCUSSION.
Isn’t his candidate stupid and out of touch, though?
Wow, what an elitist snob! No wonder you worship at the altar of SNOBama.
Likewise I see the poll is 6 years old and a small 2,000 doctor sample considering the actual number of doctors.
Er, in 2004 there were only about 300,000 practicing doctors in the United States. 2,000 out of 300,000 is a sample of .66 percent, which any statistician will tell you is more than reasonably large as samples go.
Most American political polls, by way of contrast, have a sample of 5,000-10,000 for 300 million people (or .00033 percent), and their margin of error is only about three to four percent.
Martin, what kind of doctors were polled? If they are general practice MD’s they could be advantaged, if they are other kinds of doctors they could be seriously disadvantaged. Wal-mart’s inexpensive clinics would probably be well off because people reliant on government healthcare, who probably shop at Wal-mart regularly, will use their insurance to get treated on the cheap at the Wal-mart “minute clinic” or whatever it’s called. Experimental medicine, non-necessary treatments (like massage therapists or nutritionists or chiropractors or cosmetic surgeons and dentists etc), and other medical fields will be adversely affected by this, though, because forcing people to pay for healthcare will very likely have the result that those people will comply with their new healthcare rules rather than spend even more money having to go to a non-covered practicioner.
A poll does not prove anything. This is a very complex issue which affects different doctors differently. I stand by completely my statement that if you talk to doctors about the hoops they jump through with medicare and medicaid (systems whereby the government has set rules about care protocols – as an example by limiting number of office visits) you will see that many doctors are hit hard with compliance costs and simultaneously short-changed for their services by the government.
I must have missed the class where you could get polling data from people without talking to them.
I will quote something now to illustrate my point:
Let’s see. Suppose I wanted to know what a particular subset of the population thought about an issue, but I didn’t have the time or resources to ask each of them individually.
What do you think might be a good way to go about gathering that information? I’ll take my answer off the air.
Heh. Didn’t you link us to the group that thinks the earth is standing still? You wanna lecture us about willful ignorance some more?
America is spending 50% more per capita on health care than any other industrialized national and out performance is a low 37th in quality health care. Managed Care appeared to be a well-intended concept of organized cost-cutting for an out-of-control indemnity system. It seemed like a good idea in the 1980’s. Health insurance inflation reached 18.6% in the 1980’s and Managed Care helped to bring it down to 2% by 1994 when it controlled 77% of the covered lives in the US. Since 1998, though, premium increases jumped 7-30%/year as Managed Care insurance attempted to regain profits lost by underpricing benefits meant to penetrate the marketplace.
Demands on provider time and administrative costs in dealing with managed care controls have dug deeply into provider profits by raising overhead.
And when these companies go back to shortchanging themselves in order to get on the government payroll they will probably become insolvent in due time and require a costly government bailout.
dslak, that is funny, ill give you that. But polls still “prove” nothing, that being the key word.
Welp, I gotta go (for today)! See you guys on the flip-side, new friends!
They all got a liberal bias. Especially logic.
Also, thanks to QuickRob I don’t miss the Senator as much as I used to.
Your welcome, and I am back for another moment because Marc Danziger said something which is very true, that I am trying to impress also:
That’s the point that only ThatLeftTurnInABQ seems to be able to take away from this.
Everyone else is shooting the messenger
Speaking as someone who does talk to doctors you can either stop talking about Medicare or continue to make an ass of yourself. Doctors aren’t crazy about anything that restricts their ability to practice but they like traditional Medicare a lot more than private insurance or Medicare Advantage for a number of reasons including the fact that the rules are all out there, they get a chance to comment on the rules and if they don’t like the rules they can usually thumbscrew their legislators into changing the rules. Another thing you haven’t bothered to learn is that private insurance companies base their rates on what Medicare pays and tend to follow Medicare’s billing rules.
I also invite you to cough up a link to this: Physician Payment Review Commission’s Annual Report to Congress.
Can’t find the link? Just give us the date.
I don’t know the internals, but I did qualify my answer based on that lack of knowledge.
Don’t deny mathematics please. We don’t need that brand of wingnuttery. The poll proves that if every doctor was polled, there’s a 95% chance that the entire population would respond within 1 standard deviation of the mean. Polls are one of the best tools that we have to work out social issues. Denying statistics will get you nowhere.
But again, you reinforce my point by attacking the evidence.
Explain how the statement you quoted supports your point. It offers no evidence that the private model is addressing the social need, only that it is serving it’s own interests in a different manner – and that manner may have problems down the road. That’s not an argument against single payer. Arguably, it’s an argument in favor of it.
And one reason why they are attempting to overcome those historical barriers is because laws like HIPAA are forcing them to. Show me some evidence that the private model will address the social need.
Why, yes I would! Thank you.
Ahem. You are a wilfully ignorant elitist snob.
Tonight, there’s a “compassion forum” at “Messiah College” for Hillabama. And it’s the Republicans who pander to the fundies?
Ah, less than 5 minutes in, and I’ve heard more “God talk” from Hillary than I wish to hear from any candidate for any PUBLIC office. And I fear this will go on from Obama, also. One last look at the Dem candidates, and it’s all pandering to the most fairy tale believing of the constituency. Both will walk in the Light and be near Him with every step and every thought. Hallelujah, Hossana, and Praise Jayzus!
What a waist of time, but it does expose the worst of politics… baring the basest of pandering and empty rhetoric from the Ass Party.
Could be a waste of time, too. But I’m eating dinner, so it could affect the waistline…
Your understanding of basic statistics marks you as an elitist.
Why don’t you just come out and call all 2000 doctors bitter for clinging to the notions of modern medicine?
Concern troll? WTF is that?
I am not a troll and yes, I have gotten “the treatment.” I consider it a badge of honor for those of us who choose not to be an echo chamber.
Not true, Soj — you have not gotten the treatment. You haven’t had me and TOS simply respond to you by calling you names and talking about how stupid you are, and ignoring the things you say to talk about the weather. Jake hasn’t discussed the kinds of pie you resemble. We’ve disagreed with you, and we’ve certainly not been respectful — c’mon, you didn’t expect *that*, did you? — but we have tried to respond to your arguments, and have allowed you to affect the direction of discourse, giving you roughly as much slack as we’d give any other honored member of the community.
We’ve given you the respect due to someone with whom we disagree, but whose motives are genuine. You are concerned that the ongoing arguments by Obamaniacs are alienating people. I don’t think I agree, but I understand where you’re coming from, and I think your case is worth considering and debating.
I also think you’re misidentifying the issue which bothers you a bit — I think you’re bothered by the naked sexism of some of the attacks on Senator Clinton, not by the tone of the debate. It could be that I’m mistaking things, but I feel you’re honestly confused about your concern — which would qualify you as an honest concern troll in my book.
The Other Steve
echo chamber? What the fuck?
I have never been a big fan of attacks on Hillary, but when Hillary stepped off the wagon and started attacking fellow Democrats with the same rhetoric, she lost my vote.
It’s one thing to see rabid stupid people on internet forums playing these games. It’s quite another to see a candidate themselves. As such, it’s not that I wish to join in Clinton bashing, but I sure as hell ain’t gonna try to stop it.
That was a terrible mistake on her part. You ask anyone, and six months ago I was divided between Hillary and Obama. I didn’t make up my mind to lean Obama until late January, and even then I would have been ok with Hillary.
But she just couldn’t let it go. You know, maybe it’s a sensitivity to being talked down upon that I’ve gained from GW Bush, but god it’s fucking annoying. My state went nearly 70% for Obama, and to be told that we don’t count is astounding. It was the largest turnout I’ve seen in my entire life, and we don’t count?
I think it’s you who live in the echo chamber, because you sure aren’t hearing our arguments.
The Other Steve
That’s really sad. That you spent the entire day arguing something that you just really didn’t understand.
Pot, meet kettle.