I maintain that the remarks from Gibbs were pretty damned stupid and unhelpful, but after a day of reading my twitter feed, I’ve had it up to here with the wailing and gnashing of teeth from, well, the professional left. Is there anything more pathetic than a group of people who so desperately need validation that any remark from the WH that seems to diss them will start a multi-day pity party? Even crazier, most of these people are bloggers- OH NOES! SOMEONE SAID SOMETHING MEAN ON THE INTERNET! Grow up.
At any rate, as I sit here waiting for special Ed to douse himself with gasoline and set himself on fire in a teary farewell to his MSNBC audience to protest the remarks by Gibbs, I’m wondering what exactly would have made the very vocal few happy. And I mean vocal few, as this PPP piece points out:
I feel like I write the ‘most liberals still like Obama’ blog post every few months but stuff keeps on happening to necessitate writing it again so I will:
On the national poll we’ll release this week 85% of liberals approve of the job Obama is doing to 12% disapproving. 88% support his health care plan looking back with only 7% opposed.
Not only are those numbers good, but they’re steady. Obama’s favor with liberals hasn’t been on the decline. In May his approval with liberals was 87/10. In February it was 81/15. In November it was 87/4. Even as his ratings have declined overall he’s stayed in that sort of mid-80s range with liberal voters.
So what would it take for the few to be happy? Personally, I’m not satisfied with the job they are doing (unemployment is horrible, they’ve spent too much time negotiating with Republicans, the drone wars, the civil liberties issues, Lloyd Blankfein is still a free man, etc.), and think there have been some real failings and some real let-downs. But I will belly crawl over broken glass while someone pours lemon juice and rubbing alcohol on me to vote for the Democrats in November.
The 10-percenters will continue to whine until Obama delivers the socialist revolution he never promised.
I will belly crawl over broken glass while someone pours lemon juice and rubbing alcohol on me to vote for the Democrats in November.
Maybe not for the Democrats, but definitely just to vote against Republicans.
Jay in Oregon
Is he really having that much of a cow over this?
I used to not have much of an opinion about “Big Eddie”, but he’s seriously starting to piss me off.
Just Some Fuckhead
Based on those numbers, Gibbs remarks are incredibly stupid. A tiny percentage of liberals are unhappy with you so you take a big steaming dump on the so-called professional left, whatever the fuck that means, guaranteeing even more anguish?
You are missing the point. YOU may as well be the “professional Left” he’s ragin against – you’re against the same things “they” are. By dissing some non-existent “pro Left” – much like dissing the “Liberal Elite” who don’t Live in the Heartland!*! – he dismisses you, too.
That’s what Gibbs dismissed today, and it should bug you. And the overwhelming majority of us “gnashing our teeth” about the comments are going to vote Dem this November, too.
Here’s my concern: every issue gets framed by the media as a heads or tails. Instead of framing it as “why one side is for it and the other is against it” they’re now able to frame it as “why the left hates it and why the right hates it.” By there being very little in the way of sticking up for the administration going on, moderates get the impression the president’s a complete failure.
Me three. I’d even do it if the broken glass were placed in a salt vat.
The only part I hated was the need to be drug tested part. If professional liberals were on drugs they would whine less.
I like Obama and I think he gets the best bill that he can get the idiot corp to vote on. He never had 60 Senators with Mary Outlandish, Special Ben Nelson, and Traitor Joe. Byrd and Kennedy were permanantly out sick during the honeymoon period.
I will only be happy when we have Canada Care and no Pentagon. Who can get that for me? You have my vote.
Yes, but the stimulus could/should have been bigger. Why????
@Just Some Fuckhead:
pretty sure the other 85% agrees with him
Just Some Fuckhead
@Yeggo: Everyone must believe or Tinkerbell dies.
Nothing would make the “professional left” happy, because in order to get booked on TV shows and to generate blog hits they have to push the Obama sucks narrative. And the “progressive left” is one big giant echo chamber. The same 30 people tweeting each other’s comments and echoing one another. All of them ignoring actual progressive gains.
Actually, Chris Bowers does a pretty good job of taking down that PPP poll.
First, he discusses the results of a large gallup poll showing a massive decline among liberals in general:
Then he takes down the PPP poll:
Read the whole thing here:
When you respond to them with pretty much the same emotional content as they have to him, it tends to undercut your position. People have emotions, they respond to things emotionally often without thinking things through, and maybe you do too. I know I have and will do so again. And I am grown up, as much as I will at 56.
calling all toasters
The official spokesperson of the administration is not “someone on the internet.”
I understand why liberals are disappointed right now. I really do.
That said, it’s useful to realize that conservatives were in a very similar state in 2005-6, when the war was really going south, social security reform failed, and the president actually defied them on his immigration reform attempt. They felt betrayed and angry, and took it out by sitting out at the polls.
The difference is that comparatively speaking, Obama has been far more successful at fulfilling a liberal agenda, than Bush was at fulfilling the conservative agenda after his re-election.
Just Some Fuckhead
@Nick: You’re pretty sure of a lot of things you can’t prove.
So what would it take for the few to be happy?
What gets people excited about supporting the Obama administration is when a high ranking official from this administration delivers a windmill-style fankick to the seat of the pants of the people who oppose their agenda. Instead, the high road gets taken. Rarely does the intellectual dishonesty of this president’s opponents come into the sort of mocking that would drive it back underground.
So far, the high road isn’t working. Why isn’t someone trumpeting the fact that the American auto industry is coming back? Why isn’t someone explaining how a draw down in Iraq is going to help the military? Why isn’t someone going after the obstructionism of the Republican caucus in the Senate?
When you are beholden to money, you worship it like a slave. This administration rarely does anything of substance that will cost them the support of the people who really write the checks. Ironically, this was an administration swept into power by the small donors who gave $25 or so. They must be counting on the loss of that money. They are playing for a 50-49 win in November 2012. They are not doing anything to make a liberal swoon with approval or love.
The only thing better than a group of bloggers saying, OH NOES! SOMEONE SAID SOMETHING MEAN ON THE INTERNET!, is another group of bloggers getting bent out of shape about it.
Sorry, resume your game of electronic Red Rover.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Violet: And I’ll be right behind you guys. Because you’ll have worn down the glass and absorbed most of the lemon juice.
But this was an incredibly stupid and gratuitous thing for Gibbs to say and do. This is one of those days when I just have to avoid most of the blogosphere for a week.
@Arclite: Wow Chris Bowers knows nothing about polls. The 74% exists because Gallup does not include those who think he’s doing a Fair job, whereas PPP does the wording differently. If you added Fair to the Gallup poll, the number goes to 87%. He also isn’t aware that PPP releases their MoE, and it isn’t +/- 9%.
But I suspect he knows that, but needs to manipulate to defend his point of view, which is if Obama had a 100% approval from Liberals in the Gallup poll (who, of course, only represent like 20% of the sample), his approval rating will be MUCH higher…like 3 points higher.
I don’t know. Atrios, slinkerwink, kos, Digby, and Robert Borosage all have pretty good posts up on why the WH shouldn’t give such short shrift to the concerns of liberals. And slinkerwink goes on to use her argument as a call to action for the coming elections.
Of course all of their criticisms are predicated on the notion that “the professional left” isn’t restricted to the professional journalists but is a dig at the kind of criticisms coming from the blogosphere (hence the reference to eliminating the Penatgon, Canadian Healthcare, etc). And to characterize all criticism coming from the left as the strawman arguments that Gibbs laid out is pretty telling.
But if the tiny percentage is tiny, wouldn’t the more anguish be also too. And I propose, a well deployed big steaming pile could well vanquish the anguish altogether, it being tiny from tiny leftists and all. We could declare victory and bring the troops home.
@Arclite: Approval rating and percent-voted-for are completely different numbers. Subtracting one from the other is as valid and worthwhile as trying to evaluate:
25 – [picture of an orange] = ?
Gibbs’ remarks were not stupid. Making them in public was stupid, but the remarks are spot on as far as I am concerned.
What the WATB left doesn’t get is that we are not in a contest between different flavors of more progressive or less progressive policy.
We are in a contest between anything resembling sane and rational government, and government by goddam fucking lunatics and morons and sociopaths — the so called right — and that this little sport is played with real bullets. Peoples’ lives and health and safety are at stake, and while Barack Obama is certainly not up pleasing the professional left and the WATB left, he and the scotch-taped-together Democrat party are the only thing standing between you and a government run by the likes of John Boehner and Darrell Issa.
Therefore, act accordingly. For example, “umemployment is horrible?” Are you fucking kidding me? We said two years ago that it would take years for employment to recover from the shitstorm that was about the hit the fan. What part of that reasonable prediction don’t people understand now? Employment is never a v-shaped dynamic. Is it? So WTF?
and here I thought Goldman Sachs financed his campaign, The liberal blogsphere lies again!
Just Some Fuckhead
But he didn’t call them retards, so there’s that.
There are a couple of things missing from this analysis:
First, there is the implication that the left should be good soldiers regardless of how poor the Admin performance can be. HRC is better than nothing, but it is far from what most on the left wanted. Same for financial regulations. The Admin hasn’t stopped many of the war on terror policies that they inherited from the Bush Administration. If the left doesn’t raise hell about these things, then what good are they? And if the left is quiet, then why would the admin move toward the left’s solutions?
Second: Gibbs attached the left in the exact same fashion as the right does. We are all Dennis Kucinich supporting, drug addled losers who are dumb enough to think the Pentagon can be shut down. So now any attempt to push for more comprehensive public health reform, for a lower, less wasteful defensive budget, etc are looney left nonsense. Even the Administration says so! Overton windows are mostly bs, but it doesn’t take a genius to see that attacking an idea as loony leftism from the supposed left severely limits the number of serious options available in public discourse. And Gibbs did it for no other reason than he was feeling pissy.
During the Salem witch hunt (the original) They used a technique called ‘pressing’ to garner confessions from the unwilling. You were staked out on the ground and a box was placed on your chest. The box was loaded with rocks. The strain of lifting that weight with each breath meant you would eventually suffocate.
One of the stories of bravery in the face of that abuse was a man, left pressed for days. He signaled the investigators to come close – he obviously could not speak above a whisper. They thought they would hear a confession but instead he issued a simple request “MORE ROCKS”.
I may break down & vote for Dems but at the moment I think the choice is dieing slowly or dieing faster. Since both sides seem intent on killing us all . . . MORE REPUBLICANS!
@Just Some Fuckhead:
Pretty much. I mean…even if you recognize there’s a problem with that percentage, you have to realize, not only is it a small one, but it’s one without the kind of voice compared to the Teabaggers and the Bachmanns and the Becks. Whatever hysteria you’re getting from the left, it pales in comparison to the bullshit that you get from the right, and yet that bullshit from the right gets kowtowed to.
The hysterics from the ‘Professional Left’ is not the #1 problem here, so why go out of your way to gratuitously shinkick them and throw sand in their face when you’re getting assaulted with 10 tons of right-wing diarrhea on a daily basis?
This. The Democrats are a bunch of screw ups who can’t deliver on their promises, but the Republicans are actively evil and have proven all too capable of delivering on their promises. I’d like to elect a real left wing party, but there isn’t one that stands a chance of winning so I’ll vote for the Democrats as the least bad option.
The Administration supporters here are easily as whiny and emo as the “Professional Left”. I think some of you have been reduced to tears because a “tiny percentage” that you continually dismiss thinks Obama hasn’t done enough. The [email protected]!!!
And this it total bullshit by the way:
The Administration’s OWN forecasts said unemployment would be 7.5% without stimulus by now.
@Just Some Fuckhead:
Not really. This tiny percentage are the loud ones that get coverage in the media. Take Jane Hamsher for example with her idiotic call for primarying Sanders. When you say controversial things, you get media coverage. Gibbs had to respond.
These complainers on the left are no different than the tea baggers. They get media coverage because also say controversial and stupid things.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
[email protected]Jay B.:
Can’t really disagree with that, either. With the rest of your comment, I can, but not with that. Somebody tell Gibbs he was going to a cotillon, FF’sS?
If these polls show there aren’t any hippies, why do you have to punch them so much?
Talk about purity…
Also, too, maybe you can find some Flag Burners.
Shorter Jay B: SEE, I’M IMPORTANT, YOU KNOW I EXIST
I feel like both sides are screaming at each other “Hey why are you yelling at ME?! You should be focusing on the real enemy!” It’s kind of surreal and it makes my brain hurt.
@Just Some Fuckhead:
Agreed. And the UE is under 10% so that’s something else to be thankful for.
…yeah. I’ll have to call bullshit on that. Compare coverage of the teabaggers to coverage of the firebaggers and…hell, any sort of progressive activists.
However vocal the “professional left” is, the teabaggers are 10x louder, and get 100x more coverage and credibility extended toward them.
Just Some Fuckhead
Really? Gibbs was responding to Hamsher’s call to primary Sanders from like a year ago with a rightwing attack on the so-called left TODAY?
Do tell me more.
Depends, firebaggers get TV time when they attack the President, but not when they’re fighting for an agenda item.
I’m not talking about what the “administration” said. I am talking about what other people said. I am pretty much a subscriber to the Krugman “we need more stimulus” chant.
Where did you get “what the administration said” from what I said? That’s quite a leap.
First of all the “administration” two years ago was the administration of George Fucking Bush. In case you lost your calendar.
For legislation, there’s some truth to that, although for healthcare for example, he signed away both single payer and the public option before the fight had even begun. One could argue he didn’t really try.
On the other hand, there are a lot of things that he has direct executive branch control over that he doesn’t need the legislature for that he hasn’t scored well on “liberally”: closing Guantanamo, Bush administration investigations, Afghan war escalations, DADT, government transparency, civil liberties issues, etc.
Exactly so. They’re able to mainline their crazy straight into the GOP. And were these the people organizing GOTV efforts in the last campaign, donating time and money? I’m gonna guess: no.
Case in point.
Have any more disastrous advice for the Democrats Nick? Or do you think things are going well for the Party? They’re following the “we concede that the Republicans really run things and we’re afraid” strategy you’ve been puking out here to a T, with a few tin-eared meltdowns thrown in for good measure. How is the “center-right” capitulation coming, big guy? Psyched for November?
To me, it’s stupid to piss on a chunk of your base in a way which gains you nothing. From what I’ve seen, the people who think it’s no big deal are the the ones who are sure he was talking about “those people over there” and we all know that they deserve it. Considering the enthusiasm gap we’re working against, I’m glad you’re confident that that when a broad insult is thrown out at a vague chunk of “teh Left,” everyone out there will understand it’s not directed at them. Especially when a lot of us, for example, are trying to stay focused on the long haul and believe we could one day have a health care system like Canada, even if we didn’t get everything we wanted now.
Personally, I do a lot of canvassing for local campaigns. I know damn well that things will really really suck if Republicans take control over any part of government. I also know that it’s hard to motivate anyone but hardcore Democrats with “support us because the other guys are really awful.” I’d appreciate administration officials not make my job (the unpaid one, trying to help them) more difficult just because a small number of idiots are making their job more difficult.
Here’s a better question for you all. Name one time the “professional left” has had the administration’s back on… anything.
Since the inauguration, it has nothing but attacking from the left, calling them failures, adding to the cacophony of outrage to the right, all while pretending they were moving the overton window. We’ve heard calls for every administration member’s head, from the left, since day one. All the while, the same folks pretend to be the base (they weren’t- the ones I have in mind were in large part Hillary supporters) and babble about the Overton Window.
Christ- Ed Schultz and the usual poutrage crew spent the last five months of HCR trying to kill it dead, with Ed switching at the last moment when it was clear it would pass. If you were Robert Gibbs, you’d tell these people to shut the fuck up, too.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
I wonder if Nero’s opponents were swinging swords at each other while he was fiddling? I’m pretty sure they all meant to save Rome, but were they busy?
@Just Some Fuckhead:
HILL REPORTER: So Robert, how do you feel about the anger on the left?
GIBBS: You mean like on the blogs?
HILL REPORTER: Yeah, you got Jane Hamsher wanting to primary Sanders, you got David Sirota saying you’re not better than Bush
GIBBS: Oh, those guys.“I hear these people saying he’s like George Bush. Those people ought to be drug tested, I mean it’s crazy
HILL REPORTER: Is there anything you can do to satisfy them?
GIBBS: They will be satisfied when we have Canadian healthcare and we’ve eliminated the Pentagon. That’s not reality.
It’s not about being dissed. I could not care less what anyone thinks of me, or hippies, or Bolsheviks generally. I don’t care. What I do care about is that the Obama administration has been so tepid in its reforms, so willing to accommodate Wall Street and the Republicans (and Fox News for that matter), so willing to keep any but the most milque-toast measures off the table, before compromising even begins, so willing to stick with failed Bush policies and failed Bush philosophies. I’ve consoled myself with the old Bismarckian adage that “politics is the art of the possible.” What Gibbs’ remarks indicate, however, is that the administration is not progressive and settling for what it can get; rather the administration is the barely moderate wing of the Republican party, where Republicans who haven’t totally rejected science, empiricism, logic, and attempts to save capitalism for another generation or so, where those Republicans can go.
This isn’t about being dissed. It’s about mourning the disappearance from power of any real progressives. In full-blown hippie-speak, this is bullshit, man.
Down the road, I think Obama’s biggest mistake will be that he failed to stand up to the previous administration’s lawlessness.
We’ve been going down a bad road there, ever since Nixon. Every Republican president shits on the Constitution and pushes the bar a little further, and, with the exception of Nixon, nobody pays a price. What that means is, we’ve reached the point as a nation where we condone torture. That is wrong. And Obama’s failure to do anything about it will provide political cover to the next Republican president to do something even more repulsive. I’m thinking torturing Americans, genocide (intentional, not the sort Bush II blundered into), that sort of thing. The way the Republicans have been braying about the menace of the “mosque” I could totally see a nice rosy future where, sure, Muslims are totally welcome here, as long as, oh, I dunno, they’re castrated or something.
There’s a shitload of things I think Obama has done inadequately, including most of his accomplishments. But it’s a sad day when the only choice in the voter booth is “the lesser than two evils” and that’s the way it is now.
Well, the Obama Administration didn’t agree with you. Maybe that’s why the “we knew things would be this bad” thing struck me as off. Since they were the ones claiming that even without stimulus, unemployment would peak at 9 or so percent then go down by 2010, I’m not sure why I’m not supposed to hold them accountable. I mean you were defending their economic policies against all the mean critics, right?
Run a labor-backed primary challenger to an Arkansas Demcoratic Senator.
I still think this is the distinction between liberals and progressives. Progressives typically don’t have ideologies that they are trying to support. Their focus is on making things better for the public and it doesn’t much matter how you get there. That appears to be Obama’s focus.
The ‘professional left’ have the same need for ideological reassurance that the professional right do. Tony Perkins is absolutely certain that gays harm families and children. You can give him all the progress in the world on making families stronger, but it’ll never be enough if the gays aren’t shoved out of society, and if you enact real progress on making families stronger but show support for gays, you’ll become a pariah. Substitute anti-tax, gun rights, abortion, etc.
The professional left may talk about wanting to fix healthcare, and to a decent degree they really do want to, but if you don’t sign onto their vision of healthcare, whether it’s doctors working for the government, or single payer, or whatever, then you’re useless, and if they have a taste of what they think is the ‘one true way’, some of them are willing to sell everyone out in order to get it. Hamsher said many times she’d rather have no healthcare reform than her version of healthcare reform.
That’s not a progressive view. Yes, I agree it can be frustrating to spend all of this energy and get half of what you think is needed, but that doesn’t mean that the half you got is worthless. They seem intent on making the point that it is worthless because they wanted all of it.
I don’t mean to overly denigrate, by my daughter pulls this stunt all the time. Either she gets the kind of ice cream that she wants, or she wants nothing. That’s what she claims – she thinks that running to the absolute position will get us to negotiate. (If I can’t have single payer, then I want nothing!) And because we’re supposed to recognize how important she is (like all of the professional left who will so quickly remind you how hard they worked for Obama – they are owed) we’re supposed to negotiate to a position between what we can do and what she wants. She’s betting that throwing a fit will be more painful than us doing what is needed to give her what she wants (more stimulus or I won’t vote in November!)
You simply can’t reinforce that kind of behavior or else that’s ALL you’ll ever get (and that’s a lot of what Democrats do, to be honest, from all manner of interest groups). Unfortunately, Obama can’t do what is needed which is to simply cut them off. He can’t say ‘Fine, you only want single payer – fuck you, you get nothing. Let’s do energy policy instead.’
Like a bunch of whiny fucking little girls, they are.
when did that power exist in the first place?
You know, when I read the rumor about Elizabeth Warren possibly being nominated next week on the twitters last night, and realized that the House vote for funding was today, I swear to god I thought “You know, I bet some stupid petty shit will happen that the blogs will focus on”, and whaddaya know, Gibbsy delivered. Then again, with me he was pretty much preaching to the choir. And I thank him for giving me a nifty new label for the many asshats on “my” side who most emphatically NEVER speak for me.
Save some lemon juice for me.
Damn straight. And in private, I would be tearing those people new assholes on a daily basis.
At some point the Democratic Party needs to decide whether it wants to grow up and be a real party, or not. If the morons and the lunatics can kick the country around with 40% of congress and a shrinking base, sure the Democrats with all their education and smarts can find the sense to act like a real political party once in a while. And if it is a real party, then the people in the White House are in charge of that party right now, and ought to act like it. Kick ass and take names.
I remember a lot of the professional left keeping up to bat with the Administration, right up until the health care talks really started to get underway, at least from my admittedly problematic memory.
The turning point, from where I can remember, was the public option being tabled, and the Gang of Six getting full reign of the HCR negotiations. Before that, it was mostly PUMAs and the fledgling teabaggers, and the mockery of them was pretty damn thick up until the health care talks started to stall.
Sometimes I think you do this shit just to troll for comments.
It has nothing to do with receiving validation. But it does validate what many on the left have suspected (and evidence has borne out) that the WH could give a shit about the so-called base of the Democratic party.
But yeah, Cole, no big woop you know. It’s only the White House that doesn’t give a fuck about, well, us.
I guarantee you could poll all the Professional Left and they could give two fucking squirts what comes out of Gibb’s mouth. But to know that the this Administration that so many of us believed in is shitting on us for criticizing them is a crock of shit. It’s a big crock of shit.
And I think it’s a crock of shit that you think it’s no big deal.
Seriously, what did we on the left do to deserve this type of crap?
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
@J.W. Hamner: Remember the Simpson’s episode where Bart becomes Catholic for a while, and at the end there are the two warring factions that both claim to be representing Bart?
Just Some Fuckhead
Gibbs: That Hamsher thing was like a year ago, right? Frankly, the administration would be happier with a blue dog Democrat holding the Senate seat from Vermont. I don’t recognize the name of the other person you named.
Name one time the “professional left” has had the administration’s back on… anything.
They had his back on FISA, card check, the public option, strong Wall St. reform, DADT repeal, cramdown, Dawn Johnsen, closing Gitmo…
THIS is why hippies get punched, stupid shit like this
What LT said. Also, too.
Let’s see here. Blanche Lincoln was going to lose. Thanks to that union-backed campaign, Lincoln is still going to lose and we got a decent amendment into the FinReg bill that will cost the banks hundreds of millions of dollars. Win-Win.
I think there are two big reasons to be angry with Gibbs:
1. Substantively, he insulted the outspoken people who represent and reflect the views of the people who are quiet and / or can’t get their voices heard.
2. Politically, it was … horribly stupid, making these very same people (#1) wonder who the fuck is running the White House right now. Gomer Pyle? George W. Bush? I mean, really? Did he really, really come out and say that shit?
I personally can’t stand Olbermann, and I probably wouldn’t care for Schultz much if I could stomach watching his beet red head for more than 2 seconds. So I totally get where you’re coming from Cole.
But wow. I mean, wow. WTF is happening to Obama’s team?
@John Cole: Maddow routinely gets Obama’s back. Can’t name too many bloggers that do consistently, however.
Honest question: am I supposed to believe that anyone who wasn’t already going to vote has even heard about these comments? I don’t have a TV set up right now; I have no idea to what degree the MSM is milking this non-story.
I mean, seriously? People will be enthused about getting to the polls (or not) based on some mid-August offhand remark by somebody whose name they don’t quite remember?
They didn’t and wouldn’t say so in public. I suspect that behind closed doors their assessments were a little closer to reality.
I don’t think they calculated that Republicans would deliberately fuck the country in order to give themselves something to bitch about in the midterm elections, but that is what happened, and it’s way past time for the WATB left to twig to these realities. People here on these pages figured it out a long time ago. Even allowing for a six-month tin ear factor inside the White House, it’s past time.
I just have one question: Why did Obama have Ted Stevens killed to try and bury this story? #snark
Who’s the professional left? Name me one person on cable news who espoused any of the views Gibbs described: Dennis Kucinich as perpetual president, eliminating the Pentagon? Any of that. And haven’t Maddow and Oblermann had the administration’s back numerous times? Though Olbermann’s gotten really weird lately.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
I’ll grant you that a large number of Clinton supporters (B&H) are either bitter, delusional about the Clintons’ politics and abilities, or both, but that doesn’t meant that some of them, maybe a lot, arent’ long-time, donating, volunteering, GOTVing yellow dog Democrats. The Lady Lynns and Haim Sabrans are a tiny but (because they’re rich and connected) visible and vocal minority
Why do you need to “swoon?” (Or do you also believe that there is a “soulmate” out there somewhere?) And why is something as simple as “voting for people who are not insane bastards intent on setting the country on fire” so difficult to decide upon? Getting my teeth cleaned at the dentist’s doesn’t make me “swoon,” and unlike voting, a good dental cleaning actually requires time, money, and pain.
It’s an opportunity to exercise your franchise for the greater good (or the lesser evil, as has been the case since, um, forever) — not an invitation to get your rocks off or find a political soulmate.
He’s a poor example. Mr. Schultz is more miffed that President Obama went on Fox News and appeared on a program that competes for the same handful of viewers that he cannot hold on his own. It’s about preserving the access Schultz has with a small group of viewers. The issues? The issues do not matter when you’re trying to keep from getting fired.
There is a larger issue here–how does supporting the administration translate into blog traffic and ratings? Does your business model work if you appear to be the outraged outsider or the cheerful cheerleader? The numbers would appear to be higher for expressing outrage, opposition, and disgust than they would be for expressing support, but I have no evidence of that. If you could make money and earn support by being a staunch supporter of the administration, why wouldn’t you sign up for that gig?
Is there a wildly successful liberal blogger out there who regularly praises the administration and receives a massive amount of support in terms of ad revenue? Or do those individuals suffer from neglect, abuse, and low “click rates” from their advertisers?
If so, why aren’t more bloggers copying that business model?
OK, and unemployment’s still at 9.5% percent. You want to lecture people without jobs how good they have it? Jobs are non-existent to elusive. We still don’t have an energy policy. Health care doesn’t kick in for another four years. The stimulus was too small. And our infrastructure still sucks. The Senate is a monstrosity, run by the President’s own party. You still want to blame lefties? Every single unambiguously good policy was gutted by Democrats.
Whose ass you gonna kick?
More crock of shittery. Many on the left gave Obama his due for HCR. We applauded when he set the date to shut down Gitmo. But this isn’t some frat-house where you “have someone’s back” Seriously. We are not water carriers. Ultimately we will have his back come Nov. 2012 when we vote for him (or against Palin/Pawlenty).
Here’s a better question for YOU: Name one thing Obama has done that a true liberal/progressive would be ecstatic about?
(Make it the same kind of ecstasy Republicans felt when they got their massive tax cuts under Bush. Name ONE truly liberal/progressive thing Obama has done.)
You’ve had the administrations back many times.
As soon as I heard Ed’s intro that he was going to have a big segment on Gibbs, I turned off the TV. When is people like Ed going to realize that if I want to hear bashing of our Democratic President, I can get that 24/7 from FoxNews. Why in the world would I want to waste my time on Ed and listen to him whine?
I despise the whole “this” thing, but THIS, fuckers.
I feel quite confident in saying that 99% of the voting public will seriously not give a shit what the press secretary said about the professional left in August and that it will have no impact on the vote they are or aren’t going to cast, as most of them have no idea who he even is. It’s going to be all about what Congress and the White House has or hasn’t delivered, and bullshit like this means nothing.
And that’s why you’re paid the big bucks to comment on blog boards. What does it matter that Bush left this country in smoking ruins? It’s not “politically feasible”, it’s too scary, too hard. The rule of law is for chumps.
Every utterance you make is a complete sell out, completely devoid of principle. Maybe that’s why Democrats are so despised.
Getting my teeth cleaned at the dentist’s doesn’t make me “swoon,” and unlike voting, a good dental cleaning actually requires time, money, and pain.
Do you regularly walk through strange neighborhoods in cities where you do not live asking people to support your dentist’s efforts to fight plaque, fix what is wrong with Delta Dental, and bring an end to the demonization of fluoridated water? Do you take the last $14 in your PayPal and send it to your dentist when he’s trying to win a tough battle against gingivitis?
I don’t think people get that yes, you should try to make your base swoon for you once in a while. It tends to keep the bastards in line when you need them.
Keith has a special comment about it.
Im just disgusted.
Get a life and go work to elect Democrats
Are you not paying attention? That’s why the left is so pissed off. Obama is governing, in a lot of circumstances, that are WORSE than Bush. It is US policy now to kill American citizens just like that. The list goes on and on. Oh, forgot, he did get that Lily Ledbetter act through. Way to go Obama!
You people act like many on the left are yelling just to see their lips flap in the wind.
Okay, so Obama ain’t the progressive/liberal we had all hoped for. But does he have to do shit worse than Bush?
@RinaX: I think 99% is an underestimate, but yeah. I just can’t imagine people giving a microscopic goddamn about this makenews.
@Bob L: Can a brother get an “Amen”
Oh, and as far as “having someone’s back” – I walked in scary cracked up neighborhoods and knocked on doors for him. Does that count? Or is it only after he won because of fuckers like me?
@RinaX: Don’t worry- when they nominate Warren, the usual suspects will say it is only because they ginned up so much outrage over the Gibbs remarks that the WH felt they had to nominate her. Then they will congratulate each other for being relevant for a few days ( FAP FAP FAP) and the overton window will be mentioned.
Then, in a couple months, when the GOP and the blue dogs in the Senate cockblock Warren like they have 50% of Obama’s nominees, one of the rocket scientists will claim that Obama did not fight hard enough and that this was 11 dimensional chess to slap progressives just like they did with Dawn Johnsen.
Anyone want to bet me?
Do you live a totally straw world, asshole? Who is lecturing anybody about how good they have it?
I personally predicted an unemployment peak of 15%, but I underestimated the forces countering the plunge. I said from day one that employment was going to be the last thing to come back from the plunge, and it is, and will continue to be.
The president is not responsible for the senate. Just cut the crap on that score. The senate is a broken institution. Any damned fool can see that.
“We still don’t have an energy policy.” So what? What strategy would have produced a bill by now, in this political climate? I have my own energy policy. I drive a car that gets 41 measured mpg on the highway, so kiss my ass.
The stimulus was what we could get out of this chickenshit congress and its band of fuckheads.
And I am not BLAMING lefties. So again, cut the straw bullshit. I am CRITICIZING lefties for being politically deaf and blind, and for acting like babies. The main effect of which is going to be loss of seats in November, which hurts my causes. Maybe I will be proved wrong in November. Good, then the beers are on me. Until then, fuck the professional left, fuck it very much, and with prejudice. And that is exactly the message I would send from the White House — behind closed doors — every hour of every day. I would tell those assholes, either get on board, or you can spend at least the next two years wishing you had the Bush years back, you stupid pimples on the ass of humanity.
Perhaps you could tell us what “a true liberal/progressive” looks like, oh Holy Prophet.
If your name isn’t Jane Hamsher or David Sirota I don’t know why you would be upset a single whit by what Gibbs said. He’s right. These people make their living by being publicly and loudly displeased with anything the administration does. They aren’t pushing the Overton Window, they are making a living punditizing. If Obama could give them what they insist they want tomorrow, they’d find something else to say he failed on. They are the mirror image of the right wing freaks from hell at this point, i.e. NOTHING Obama does is right for them. NOTHING. Because that’s the side their bread is buttered on.
I am a lefty, liberal, progressive freak from hell but Sirota and Hamsher don’t speak for me. And my fee-fees are just fine.
Sometimes I get the impression that if Obama announced that he was going to drop a plutonium bomb on Jamaica – and then did – some people on the intertubes would say “Yeah, I don’t agree with it, but those firebaggers will just not shut up about it!”
That’s just nonsense. It’s your opinion, you are welcome to it, but it’s nonsense. And it’s that kind of nonsense that makes what Gibbs said the truth, regrettable only for the fact that he chose a dumb place to say it.
Do you really think that the 90% of Democrats who are happy with Obama get same media coverage as the 10% who are not? Why is someone like Jane Hamsher getting as much publicity on TV compared to his real base who are quite happy with Obama?
It has to do with ratings and they get ratings by having people on that say dumb and controversial things. Jane Hamsher doesn’t speak for many Dems and I dare say Ed Schultz doesn’t either when he behaves the way he did today.
@John Cole: Gee, Ezra Klein, Greg Sargent, Steve Benen, …
And since the article specifically mentions cable news, Olbermann is supportive of the administration a lot of the time, and Rachel Maddow is supportive enough that Obama used a clip from her show in his NN address!
This is what I was talking about. As long as you assume that “professional left” means “firebaggers/whoever else pisses me off,” then of course you see no problem with his statement, but that’s solipsistic.
The question is, what useful purpose did this serve, and why is the uproar the fault of people who reacted to an obnoxious statement rather than the person who made the obnoxious statement?
Really? Do you really? You actually get that impression?
Or do you just think it is clever to say so here?
Nope. But I did most of that for Obama. And for every other Democratic presidential candidate since 1984. Yet somehow I’ve forgotten to get outraged because presidents of an imperialist/capitalist/corporatist nation act like imperialists, capitalists, and corporatists more often than not — and those who buck the trend by, say, passing healthcare and financial regulation reform in the face of insane opposition should be applauded before they’re slapped for not bringing me flowers or singing me love songs.
And I don’t expect to “swoon,” because I was awake during U.S. history classes and so am aware that “true progressives” NEVER get elected president. And yes, that includes Lincoln, FDR, and LBJ.
Unless suspension of habeas corpus, internment camps for innocent American citizens, and expansion of a needless war in Southeast Asia somehow fit the progressive bill.
The ACLU disagrees with you. You probably will have a pithy comeback – but could you put that one somewhere else and respond on substance?
No, but I’d like to get some of that action.
We were right about “Trickle Away” economics. We were right about the destruction of the Public Good would lead to no good. We were right about NAFTA. We were right about banking and finance de-regulation. We were right about Iraq. We were right about Alan “Bubbles” Greenspan’s shoveling money out the door to the banks. We were right about the Real Estate bubble. We were right you can’t keep shipping jobs overseas and expect a working economy … & so forth and so on.
So, by GOD!, we deserve to be lambasted for being WATB RIGHT all the time.
Sorry, but on the way to that comment you dropped some of it. Here’s the whole thing:
It served no point. It was destructive and it was exceedingly stupid of Gibbs, and I think I’ve stated that repeatedly. I’d slap him upside the head if I could.
And I have no problem with people reacting. The problem is going to be the multi-week OVER-reaction. Really, Keith? A special comment?
Gibbs said what he said, it was stupid, and he tried to walk it back. Now the poutrage crowd will keep the story alive forever. Looking forward to the multiple “Obama has a problem with the left” that will start up again tomorrow.
You see. This is the crux of the problem. It demonstrates a complete lack of knowledge, or caring, that Presidential politics is about perceived power, mostly with his counterparts in congress, who pass his/her initiatives, but also largely with the public at large. The election and voting for a president isn’t the end to this eternal power struggle of left v right in this country or any democracy, even with big majorities. Everything is democratically processed in real time and is largely subject to a presnits perceived power at any point in time during his term.
It doesn’t mean that the majority elected doesn’t have an advantage of getting their way, but also doesn’t mean it’s guaranteed either. Each congresscritter is answerable first to their voters they represent, this is how the founders designed it. Those of a same party do have an incentive to support their own party, because the machinery of that party supports them. But there is a failsafe point when public approval starts to ride against a presnit on any particular issue, or in general, that will over ride party loyalty in service to electoral viability in any given district or state.
This is why, if you want the president you say you support to have that power to do the things you want, you had damn well better be a water carrier, or supporter, Because the most important type of support for a potus are his most active supporters. It doesn’t mean you can’t dissent and agitate for what you want. But you have to continue that unbroken support, if you want to hope for getting the right things done. Or else, you become part of the problem, and not the solution.
It is not nonsense. From warrantless wiretapping to detention policies for detainees and on and on. And these are not just my opinions, but the opinions of many people a lot smart than me.
So, what you are saying, is that there are no circumstances where Obama’s policies are worse than Bush’s? Is this corrrect? This is YOUR opinion?
@John Cole: You don’t have to worry. Summers doesn’t like her, and she’d probably do better with the Republicans than Summer’s nominee. Of course, that means Summers and Timmy get to choose.
Gibbs is just setting up next weeks face slap of her not getting nominated.
Can you imagine how long any of these outraged leftist frustrati would last in the actual political arena? Gibbs observes a constant outpouring of rage from the “progressives” day in and day out and he makes a few emotional comments about it, and the soi-disant “progressives” go wild. Good lord, if they are this “sensitive”, how do they get through their workday? By the way, as a pacifist, I would like to see the Pentagon dissolved, or better yet, turned into an aggressively-humanitarian agency, and I would like to not only see universal healthcare such as they have in Canada, but an enlightened healthcare system that opened itself to proven alternative treatments as well as traditional medicine and took into account each patient’s personal emotional and physical make-up as part of the treatment, and yet, I did not take offense at all at Gibbs’ remarks. I don’t expect the top of our government to take account of these things until the groundwork is done at the local and personal levels to lay a foundation, and I guarantee that work is not being done by the blogosphere. Most Americans are oblivious to the computer brigade.
Gibbs was, quite literally, talking about the PROFESSIONAL Left.
You are not the professional left. Gibbs wasn’t even fucking talking about you. You can think and feel that he was talking about you, but specifically speaking, he was talking about professional “left-wing” pundits.
He’s not talking about people who went out and cavassed neighborhoods or phone banked or put in whatever effort they could to get President Obama elected. Fucking A, how hard is that to understand?
That’s what I don’t get. You go after the “firebaggers” all the time, just like on this, while admitting that the real problem is something else. People act like the angry response of Ed and FDL and whatever is more important to point to than the fucking unbelievable detention policies and the war and DADT – you can’t think they are. Why do you focus so much on them, in the meantime hurting the rather rational part of their argument?
Sheila, I’m not sure if this is something that could be legal under the 14th amendment, but I would like to marry your comment.
Sheeples, why don’t all of you swap sides so the Progs vs. Obots game will be interesting again?
No it doesn’t. The ACLU says that he is continuing many troubling Bush era policies… not that he is WORSE than Bush… which was El Tiburon’s argument… which is objectively false.
Only because it is though. Why does Gibbs hate the truth?
Uncomprehendible. First, let’s hear digby:
He was talking about everyone who agrees with many most or all of the criticisms. Including me.
And who the hell is Gibbs talking about? A right-wing cable host? Because I really doubt a Lefty host called the bill a “teacher bailout,” or, if one did, didn’t say it as criticism. And that makes Gibbs’ statement make no sense.
That would make sense because in a poll the DNC sent out regarding the job Obama has been doing I rated him fair to good. I didn’t give him an excellent except in foreign policy. (independent of the wars) While I think he’s doing fair to good in most things, I think he can do much better. Hamstrung by the Senate, I can appreciate what he has done under those constraints.
Of course, I also told the DNC to fuck off about money. Tim Kaine is no where to be seen, and he has no call asking me for money. I want to see some engagement by the DNC and some leadership. I then asked “Please bring back Howard Dean”. That guy is the shit. We need him back.
@Makewi: Hi Scarlett, you come to rescue us libtards from ourselves? It may be too late, but have at it.
“The ACLU disagrees with you”
They said this:
What the ACLU said, to my reading, is that Obama has done some things ACLU doesn’t like.
This does not translate into “Obama governing worse than Bush.” Not even close. In fact, any matter of fact reading of the text you cited would support “Obama governing better than Bush, but not better enough.”
Of course, people can read the citation and decide for themselves what it says. But “Obama governing worse than Bush” is not a reasonable summary. It’s bullshit.
And just because I maintain an ACLU card and give money to them does not mean I have to agree with every position they take. Or subscribe to their rhetoric. I send money to Justin Raimondo too, and I strongly disagree with some of his stated positions WRT Obama.
Obama did not create the US War Machine, and he is not going to be able to dismantle it. Even if he wanted to. Obama appears to be a guy who errs on the side of caution, and I might not always like it, but I do always respect it.
Stuck in the Funhouse
The Funhouse has officially reopened till the election. Free admission till further notice.
Teddy Roosevelt would fit the category of “progressive” if that were applied properly. To date, no one has ever taken that gamble again.
I think there is substantive anger at what’s happening in this country. I also think there will be a serious primary challenge to President Obama. It may not look like Pat Buchanan kneecapping Bush in 1992, but it will look like something out of the worst nightmares of Gibbs, et al.
Should that happen? I do not have a dog in this fight. I’m trying to figure out how to transfer enough of my wealth to help Newt Gingrich beat back Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin.
What’s to rescue? You know who the villains are, and as such have things well in hand.
Good one. Consider it stolen.
edit — okay that was poorly worded. What I mean is, I will steal it, and take credit for it when you are not looking.
Y’know, I am completely, utterly serious when I say that it is things like this that make me fear that Perlstein was serious-as-a-heart-attack right: we are all living in Nixonland.
Stuck in the Funhouse
Obama is WORSE than Nixon!!
Bruce (formerly Steve S.)
PPP aren’t the only pollster and others have Obama’s approval with “liberals” in the upper 70s to low 80s. Point being, Obama has bled 10-15% support in this group any way you slice it, and that could be the difference between moderate midterm losses and large ones.
You mean short of dismantling the Pentagon and elevating Dennis Kucinich to Emperor? Not calling them “fucking retarded” and drug addicts would be a start. Recognizing that some portion of your supporters aren’t the clap-your-hands-for-Tinker-Bell type and respecting that. Every time you post something like this, John, I tell you that the disaffected left are like the poor, always with us. You can either toss them a few bones and try to keep them on your side, or you can do what Gibbs did. Just don’t do what Gibbs did and then get pissy when some of them bolt for Ralph Nader.
I think it looks like a majority of Americans who want us out of Iraq and Afghanistan. Who wanted a strong public option. I think they look like a majority of Americans who want the government to work for WE the people, not Corporate America.
I think we Liberals/Progressives wanted an administration who would really live up to their campaign promises to the best of their ability. I think we wanted someone who would run from Bush’s failed military and economic policies.
We look like millions of people who voted for Obama.
Don’t hold me to accuracy when I’m pissed off. I ain’t getting paid what Gibbs makes. Heh.
I may have misunderapprehended what you meant. If I did, then I stand c
Hey, is that a jackalope?
The definition of “worse”:
Come on now, no one is arguing that Obama is worse than Bush. Not even close. MANY of his policies are worse than Bush. And that’s not just my argument, many of the Big Kids are saying that.
Look, I know some libs (including myself) love to complain, but if Obama’s always telling us to “force” him to do things, it seems insincere to have his press secretary call libs whiny for doing so.
Stuck in the Funhouse
@John Cole: I hope you see where this is all headed. You can’t fight an angry nihilistic mob this large. They want your blog, and that is that. Pretty soon it will be the G8 in Seattle all the time around here.
Just a link or two to the campaign promises about getting out of Afghanistan? My recollection is that Obama’s mention of Afghanistan was mostly in the vein of “We are wasting resources in Iraq that should have been focussed on Afghanistan.”
Whatever we think of Afghanistan now, Obama appears to be quite consistent with what he said in the campaign.
Yep. On everything but his relief valve of “civil liberties” which will continue to erode with nothing but a little tut-tut from Cole. Lilly Ledbetter!!
And like El T said – not worse as a whole! Of course not.
Just Some Fuckhead
Those issues have been debated here at length, I have nothing to add to those discussions.
I don’t necessarily agree with the policies, but I don’t have any fantasies about an administration that only does what I want it to.
I see the war with the opposition, the sociopaths on the right, more important than the war with the administration over policy agreement with the left. Even if the left’s consensus view is congruent with my own.
First things first. Let’s keep the crazy people out of there.
Ahhh, it’s now obvious why you invited E.D. Kain to blog here. You didn’t want to be the only sad clown anymore.
@DickSpudCouchPotatoDetective: Well, it’s important, but is it more important than pointing out what your own side is doing wrong? I don’t think so.
Because they can’t un-drink the koolaid.
Then we just don’t agree. Obama is going to be wrong on this policy or that one, but he will never be stupid and crazy.
That’s far more important to me.
The sooner Nick and Frank and people like them go back to the Republican party the better.
“No better enemy, no worse friend.”
1. Gallup has it as 10% less.
2. A conversation between Drum and Yglesias Explains this very well.
MY: I think you’re right about this in general, but not in particular. You don’t do an interview with The Hill to communicate with a mass public of squeamish centrists. Talking smack about your base in an inside baseball publication just seems like a straight fuck-up to me.
KD: I agree. Gibbs is a smart enough guy not to do this, though, and I wonder what he intended? Must have been something. I don’t think he just suddenly lost his temper in the middle of a sleepy interview with The Hill.
Just to be argumentative, though, maybe The Hill is a fine place to do this because Gibbs knows everyone will go berserk and it will get wider play? It’s certainly safer than doing it on CNN, where it would be completely uncontainable if it went badly awry.
MY: I think they’re genuinely pissed. There’s a real dialogue of the deaf happening inside DC between issue advocates and the Obama administration. I sympathize with a lot of the White House’s analytical view of the situation, but they really need to consider the emotional state of organizations that pulled out all the stops to get Obama elected and are now facing the reality that he’s not going to deliver cap and trade or labor law reform or immigration reform. You need to be able to tell people “if you go to this and that, then the following policy results you want will happen.” Right now they’re not offering any credible path forward.
KD: You’re more plugged into this stuff than I am, but I think I only half agree. Even activists are well aware that political realities interfere in ways that a president can’t always control. So I don’t think they demand results on every single issue (though certainly some do). My sense, though, is that Obama doesn’t even give them the rhetoric they want, even in private. If they felt like he was really on their side, but stymied by the Senate, maybe they’d cut him more slack. For some reason, though, he doesn’t seem willing to do this.
MY: I think we’re basically agreeing. I think people do generally understand the idea of objective political constraints. But activists want political leaders to articulate some kind of theory of how to get from Point A to Point B. I don’t think the White House is offering that.
So to conclude, even if you don’t feel that way, you’re an outlier. Very basic human psychology is at work here and if you can’t do anything and I mean ANYTHING except disparage people with it, then what fucking good are you?
@John Cole: And when that happens how many erections will you get gloating about it?
If these Big Kids are arguing, as LT is, that continuing Bush’s policies is “worse” than enacting them in the first place because it makes these policies less likely to be reversed in the future… then… ok… that’s not a very compelling argument to me, but whatever.
Who are these people and what Obama policies are they alleging are worse than Bush? The only thing I can think of would be escalation in Afghanistan.
on the day when Republicans en masse voted to lay off teachers and firefighters, Olbermann is running a special comment on Gibbs.
and then we wonder why the messaging sucks
@LT: Those fucking corn row ganja boys deserved to get punched!
What does that even mean John?
Are you really arguing that pressure is meaningless? That in fact there has been no pressure regarding Warren?
Full disclosure: I do not give 2 shits if Warren is picked – the whole contraption is a joke.
Honestly, you make it sound like the actual concept of activism offends you.
Hey, do you bitch about people who tell you they knocked on doors during elections?
@Stuck in the Funhouse: Have you actually read Nixonland?
And yer fight ain’t with me. I would never say that Obama is worse than Bush or Nixon in any category, except maybe vacation. He fails to go on vacation far more than Bush did.
@Corner Stone: I try to ignore that.
We can agree on that, but it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t point out the wrong ones.
The misunderstood concept of activism offends hordes of people on the Left. I won’t be so silly to say that’s John Cole’s problem, but he sure hates a bunch of them in a way I can’t understand.
Yep. Thank you.
“Make me do it.”
“Hold me accountable.”
“STFU you god damn whiny bitch motherfuckers!”
One of these things is not like the others.
I agree more or less, but it’s the manner, amount, and context of the pointing out that we are wrestling over here.
White Houses don’t tend to be examples of a big friendly suggestion box.
Here’s a real honest to gosh criticism of this administration I will give you: They seem to have tin ears in there at times, and it’s puzzling. These are not stupid people.
Says the guy in the middle of his hippie punching post he had to put up because all the mean things people were saying about the president interfered with his Obamerection.
Look, Obama has done a lot of good stuff, but he’s doing some crappy stuff.
If a man works hard, brings home a good salary, does a good job raising his kids and works around the house, it’s hard to praise him for those things if he’s also beating his wife. It’s hard to focus on the good things he’s done when there’s so much out there that progressives are opposed to: innocent people in Guantanamo, Bush criminals remain at large, the Afghan war has been escalated, DADT is ongoing, promised gov’t transparency remains a dream, Bush-era civil liberties abuses are being expanded, etc. Negative behaviors and reviews carry much more weight than positive ones. It may not be fair, but it’s human nature.
The reason Bush was so popular for so long was that he tried to do almost everything the base wanted: tax cuts, looser enforcement of regulations, No Child Left Behind, ignoring global warming, privatizing social security, started wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, Roberts & Alito, signed the Patriot Act into law, got money for abstinence programs, etc. The few times he bucked the base, he got a s#!tstorm: Harriet Myers, for example.
Christ! This is getting old. The left talks shit about the administration all the time. They hit back…and you’re offended? How small are your dicks?
I think the “professional left” are galactically delusional. They’re mad because Obama didn’t fight hard enough for single payer? That wasn’t going to pass. No matter how hard he fought. Why fight for something that ain’t gonna happen? This isn’t a middle school track meet. You don’t get a ribbon for hustle.
@Arclite: You forgot execution of American citizens at a whim.
Maybe it would help if someone just served Gibbs with an interrogatory asking him to identify each and every person who comprises the “Professional Left.” If he doesn’t answer we can get his whole case thrown out.
And I called KO’s Special Comment this morning! Also too.
And this is the problem, you’re implying that whatever Obama is doing week is equal to domestic violence?
I mean WTF?
9/11 was the reason Bush was popular for so long (the two and a half years he was ACTUALLY popular at all), lets stop creating history where there isn’t.
Because they’ll get credit for fighting and losing, just like how everyone loves Democrats because they fought the good fight on the 9/11 bill that didn’t pass…they kept the Republicans from weakening it. Right? Right?
Americans don’t know American history! Or else choose the most idealistic, simplistic version of it!! Film @ 11!!!
To the question @ hand:
Cole needs to stop trolling his own blog.
I’m not sure why so many people are scared to death to try.
It’s like they have the most superficial belief in themselves and if that cracks they will shatter and run down the drain in pieces.
I blame it on liberals giving everyone in t-ball a trophy.
Given the current climate, I figured Gibbs’ bout of hippie-punching was just a sop to save some blue dog’s skin this fall.
No, he was not. His comments were geared specifically towards pundits and know-nothing bloviators on the Left. I understand that you may agree with their position, but you are not them. You do not have the same dynamic or relationship with the White House that they do, you do not produce anywhere near the “journalistic” work that they do, and you do not have the access and ability to ratfuck like they do. Gibbs was talking about the David Sirotas and Ed Schultzs of the world.
Again, you may agree with their positions, but until you are actually of a status that you have a daily television program where you can tell millions of people not to participate or vote in upcoming elections because of egregiously specious reasons, you are not the subject of Robert Gibbs’ ire.
Newflash: John Cole isn’t a part of the PROFESSIONAL Left either.
I think you’ve got that wrong though, John. They’re not wailing, they’re cackling with joy, cuz this totally PROVES they were right about the administration dissing them. I mean Greenwald and Hamsher were like Starbursts today.
It’s not like one of our most “popular” left wing voices had anything else to do a special comment on today, like the Republicans voting against teachers. I mean that’s not the job of someone we trust on TV. Obama has to do that, by himself
I think many generations of Latin Americans who have suffered and died from the “big stick” of American imperialism enshrined by the Roosevelt Corollary would beg to differ with your assessment. Yes, TR was ahead of his time in many respects. He was also an unapologetic imperialist.
Which serves my point: we never get a president who is absolutely 100 percent right on the issues. Our nation, founded as it was on genocide and slavery, isn’t really hardwired to be “progressive” except by dint of lots and lots of hard work, stretching over generations of triumphs and setbacks. And I do remember hearing Obama say in Grant Park on election night that “We won’t get there in one year, or even one term.” So the desire to write him off as a failure and a sell-out, when he’s managed to pass more substantive legislation in a progressive direction than any other Dem president in my lifetime (I’m 45), is mystifying to me.
He’s targeting Americans for death without due process. We report, you decide.
Sorry, I meant popular with his base. That’s what this conversation is about. He remained popular with his base for years and years, almost all the way to the end.
Ahh Lord, here comes the bullshit. Keith is on.
And if Keith Ellison is so progressive, where the hell was he on the Mosque shit going on in New York and the Republicans. Don’t show your ass when its safe, speak out.
There’s the rub. Different POV’s about that “best of their ability” thing.
Stuck in the Funhouse
LOL, at a whim? some dude on a battlefield with AQ, when he isn’t making jihadi videos calling for his fellow American citizens to die in large numbers. Did I mention on a battlefield aligned with our enemy, sworn by them. Obama’s mistake was even mentioning it. The fucker needs to die before he can kill innocent civilians. ON PURPOSE.
So stuff that whim shit.
Did Bill Burton just say “Pirates”?
I don’t know, but if you are going to quote me on that third one, you should at least give me attribution.
Stuck in the Funhouse
Here is my special message to firebagging asshats claiming they support Obama even though never mentioning good things when they happen. You can’t come be here now and do an obligatory, “oh yea, he done some good stuff, but not good enough”
You have to do it in real time, day after day, WHEN IT HAPPENS.
Otherwise, you alls can suck by big Obot Dick
You are 100% correct. This is the professional left demonstrating that, at least in their connection with the broad left in the country, they have no clue.
Bush was always popular with his base…ALWAYS…that’s the 28% we always mocked.
@Stuck in the Funhouse:
Well, well. Who died and made you queen and chief stupid rule-maker? Is this your blog?
In his forthcoming booklet, JayB explains why Republicans are so beloved.
It did start to fall at the end. But the reason he remained so popular with his base throughout is that he did things they agreed with and rarely did things they disagreed with. Now, a leader can’t lead by just doing what polls say is popular, but when you go counter to your base as much as Obama has, you can’t be surprised when there’s pushback.
Stuck in the Funhouse
@TuiMel: What rule? I didn’t make any rule. You even make that up. If it was my blog I would convert it immediately to a pet and social blog because it is about lost to the netroot sewer.
It’s amazing to me at this late date people still don’t seem to understand what the AUMF is. The fact that this country abandoned a law enforcement approach to terrorism in the wake of 9/11 is regrettable, but the executive branch has had every legal right to “…use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.” This was true as of September the 18th 2001 and has nothing to do with Obama, due process, or American citizenship.
Opposition to this means campaigning for the repeal of the AUMF… not complaining about Obama on an internet forum.
you didn’t know any Republican base supporters during the Bush years, did you?
They hated his spending, they hated John Roberts, they hated that he proposed immigration reform and they hated that Social Security privatization failed, and they also hated Medicare Part D because it was the expansion of an entitlement, but they defended him till the very end because he was all they had and generally, they were happy he prevented the “socialization” of America and kept liberals out of power.
Maybe if the commentariat would actually, y’know, acknowledge that the Obama Admin has done some important shit (like the biggest health care reform in four decades, financial reform and the rest) with a dysfunctional Senate that had multiple Democrats looking out for themselves instead of getting shit done, and spent less time bitching that nothing is good enough and asking where their magic ponies are, then maybe Gibbs wouldn’t have had any reason to do something as stupid as complain about it.
I mean, shit, Ed Schultz does a better job of slagging Obama than a lot of Republicans. How is that useful or beneficial?
Shit. You haven’t said anything that coherent or relevant in months.
Just Some Fuckhead
Listen to Nick on this. He was part of the Republican base.
I know, but I add color.
@Just Some Fuckhead:
There’s no doubt that dude is a ratfucking ratfucker.
if i were obama i’d be almost as pissed at the liberal pony-worshippers as i’d be at conservative fuckjobs, and that’s saying a lot.
the liberal blogger and pundit class has gotten this stupid idea up their ass that people outside of the the liberal blogger and pundit class actually give a fuck about them, and if their delicate fee-fee’s are hurt that a pointy reckoning will push back in october. guess what, nobody fuckin cares about you or your fuckin blog.
liberal bloggers: shut the hell up and stop demanding that everyone else pay attention to you. you’re worthless. nobody cares. your voice is average.
The AUMF is good point, but can it override the constitution? Is it as simple as saying, he’s not charged with a crime, so the sixth amendment doesn’t apply?
Speaking of which, this song has been running through my head all day.
If you’re going to make blanket statements, you need to provide evidence. John Roberts polled as the most popular supreme court nominee in the last 30 years. And yes, the base was upset that Bush failed to privatize Social Security, but he attempted it. Obama signed away single payer and the public option at the outset. Sorry, but I call BS. You don’t give people high marks in anonymous polling when you don’t like their policies. The republicans did, poll after poll, year after year.
I hate coming in to a thread so late. Just becomes too much to read after comment 125
We understand you’re mentally challenged. Just check Gibbs’ website for what you should think and it’ll all be better.
All the fuzz will clear away and you’ll be a repurposed bot.
Nobody told me you were the slow one here. The insult “professional” does not mean what you think it does.
Who said it was an insult? I’m saying it was a specific word choice, because as witty as it is to link to a google search for “professional complainer,” that in no way is the same as being a member of the Professional Left.
Unless you are seriously trying to contend that John Cole is a part of the Professional Left.
Is that your contention?
pay no mind. When the lights go off, the roaches come out.
True. Can you pass the shorty, please?
and brush your fuckin teeth once in a while. they’re turning brown.
It’s Congress’s right to authorize military force against the Easter Bunny if they want to. Due process and citizenship would be moot for said bunny.
On the other hand, how Obama handles national security is where he should be subjected to the strictest scrutiny since it’s where he has the most power and least institutional barriers… so I think activist outrage on that score is just fine… I just don’t think this “murdering American citizens” construct of Greenwald’s is honest.
that’s because everybody thought he was jim perdue the chicken guy.
I guess that if I took a large percentage of this commentariate seriously I’d just take my immateriality home and let the important serious people take care of this election.
It is tempting to see if a walk off of the WATB would crash the mid-terms. If that happened the meme would be about the failure of the left to support the failures who despise them. You see, if you really are so right then you’d do fine without the WATB.
I reckon the spector of a win of the craptastic right will keep me in the fight. Fear as a motivator wears out after awhile, though.
Well then. Asked for it. What else could he say? And he wasn’t even saying that the stuff they want is necessarily bad, just unrealistic.
Wooden teeth are supposed to be brown, duh.
with the exception of florida 2000, i’m trying to remember the last time 2000 morons made a difference in a national election.
Well, I’m certainly glad that Obama’s team seems to think they’ve done enough about the Republicans that they have time to police their own side. Good thing, too, people were starting to talk about a Republican landslide, but that obviously can’t be happening if Obama feels that he’s got time to slag on his own voters.
And John, please marry me.
@chopper: Actually, there are many close elections each year. The outcome for down-ticket races can really be affected by up-ticket turnout. Enthusiasm and turnout is the name of the game, and any politician who says that there are votes he doesn’t need will quickly find that he doesn’t have them.
Every story that needlessly antagonizes allies has to be viewed as a political loss.
And obviously, the “Professional Left” must think the Republicans are all done with since they devote most of their time to slagging Obama and bitching about how he’s no better than Bush and hasn’t made the sun shine 24/7 yet.
The only thing Gibbs said that I take issue with was that progressives were grateful for what Obama has accomplished so far. Near as I can tell, the people who call themselves progressives are the ones on the left who are the least happy with Obama thus far. And I think I’ve finally figured out why: many, if not most, of these people aren’t really progressives, they’re left-wing ideologues and idealists.
Well, so were many, if not most, of the Soviets. And look how that turned out…
You’re missing the point, John.
The Democrats are about to get obliterated in the November elections. And it’s because of the political ineptitude of the president and his staff.
I did not expect Obama to work miracles. I did not expect him to get every single thing I wanted passed.
What I DID expect was that, if he had to compromise, he would do so after fighting like hell for the best possible policies FIRST. If he tried his hardest and failed, I and many other people would not be complaining right now. We would understand that he did his best for us and it wasn’t his fault that he couldn’t get more.
Furthermore, I am absolutely convinced that had Obama fought harder, the bills that did get passed would be better. Not ideal. Not perfect. But substantially better than the ones we got.
And finally, had Obama fought and the bills been better, the Dems would not be looking at a political apocalypse this November. They would probably still have a rough year, but there would be no realistic chance that the GOP could take back the House or the Senate.
If Obama and his staff had attacked the Republicans with as much energy as they’re attacking the left, they’d be in much better shape. Instead, they capitulated to them over and over and over again. And they’ll soon reap the rewards of that strategy.
I’m gonna post this link to remind people how open and welcoming the Congress Democratic caucus was, with a strong promise to work closely with Barack Obama. http://spectator.org/archives/2009/01/16/loyal-opposition
And, I will also remind people, that the persons under discussion were not “those progressives or those on the extreme left” but those who have gone out into the world and said Obama is just like Bush.
The longer this goes on, the more I feel like rescinding my criticism that Gibbs had no tact and saying instead that there weren’t enough f-bombs.
@chopper: I’m glad to see this post. I want more people putting it on the record that they’re not going to blame the left for the coming disaster in November, because they don’t mean anything.
@Dave: Obama’s in the position of power relative to this artificial construction of Gibbs’s, and he’s the one who insists that if we want something done, we have to make him do it.
What Gibbs said was essentially a higher language version of ‘Presidentin’ is hard work!’
Oh yeah, how about the North Pole, in June?
I cannot stop laughing.
Why would they do that?
How nice that you’re “convinced.” Now convince us where the votes were and what deals Obama could have cut to get the votes he needed, without watering down the legislation. It takes more than words. It takes work. And a godawful amount of time (at least 100 years between the end of the Civil War and the passage of the Civil Rights Act, with more betrayals and compromises suffered by African Americans than any white leftie not named Eugene Debs has ever endured or could imagine.)
This is why I have little patience with whatever “the professional left” is. They claim to have all these great ideas for how to win battles — but they never develop a coherent fucking strategy for winning them other than “Bully Pulpit!’ and “Messaging!’ and “Perceptions!” or whatever other crap they half-listened to in Marketing 101. Even MoveOn.org was founded to “censure and move on” — in other words, to stop the impeachment of Clinton. Their first big initiative out of the box came up FAIL.
But here’s the thing: I don’t blame Move On for that — I blame the insane GOPers and the Blue Dogs for that impeachment. Same people I blame now for the inability to get more progressive legislation passed. Oh, and the people who vote for them. Golly, instead of screaming at Obama, maybe some of the professional left could have another “Freedom Summer” and spend their time in red states explaining to the people there why single-payer healthcare is the way to go, why gay marriage won’t threaten their way of life, why another stimulus is needed to create jobs for their friends and neighbors, if not themselves, etc. You know — grassroots shit.
And no, “We’ll stay home and bite our pillows and that will show everybody how much they need us TRUE progressives (who live down the street from Real Americans, I guess) neener neener neener” doesn’t count as a strategy.
Not only that, but had Obama and his staff spent 10% of the time they spent chasing the GOP senators to try to understand and address the “professional left” complaints, we wouldn’t be that angry
Truth is we are sheep. Gibbs knows we can’t vote on insane people so he offends us thinking there will be no consequences.
But he is wrong. As his policies that were implemented get evaluated for their real results – economy in the crapper, wall street wheeling and dealing, insurance mandate with no cheap insurance – the democrats, perfect lockstep marching, fluffing Obama pillow democrats, lose popularity and votes. As they did since 2008.
Obama and his staff will have no one to blame but themselves. But I bet he will try to blame the “professional left”.
Yes, it’s terrible the way that the Dems have lost all those special elections since the inauguration.
I fully expect the Dems to lose seats in November. Absent a fresh war, that is what usually happens in midterms, particularly with Dems who are burdened or blessed, depending on one’s point of view, with a much more diverse constituency than the GOP. (For the record, I think it’s a great strength, but it’s also why any Dem-generated legislation is going to be a lot harder to get off the ground within the caucus.) But the Dem losses will be because the Bush economic disaster can’t be turned around in less than two years, and because most Americans, left and right, are WATBs with overweening senses of entitlement who want what they want RIGHT. THE. FUCK. NOW!!! Or we’ll all be sorry!
Again, I say that those on the left who are unhappy about Obama and his messaging are perfectly free to take up the challenge and try to change hearts and minds on the right themselves. Civil rights activists didn’t go into drugstores where they knew they’d be welcomed at the counter. They walked into the lion’s den — and they didn’t wait for a president to give them permission or tell them what to do, and they sure as shit weren’t going to wilt if somebody told them (as many people did) that what they were doing was (no pun intended) counterproductive.
If you want to be an “activist,” then get active. If you want better legislation, elect better legislators, and if you want better legislators, work to get better voters. On the ground. Where they live. Everywhere they live. Which means going to red districts and working to change voters’ minds.
Can’t be done? Well, if you just say the right words and “fight” hard enough, it can be, right? I mean, that’s all Obama had to do to get enough senators on board with the public option, if I’m hearing some of you correctly.
Some people might consider it shameful and counterproductive to boast that their vote can be taken for granted. Is that Tammy Wynette I hear in the background?
Too funny. Or too sad. I’m not sure which.
Amen John. And not just because the other side is certifiably, should-be-receiving-medical-care insane, either. Obama’s not perfect, but he’s doing a reasonably good job, and that’s the most you can hope for from any politician.
Both. Chopper is actually my mom.
To get fired if I get someone on the right making a fake video about me ?
Because I’m so excited to be called a drug addict that wants to destroy the Pentagon ?
Hey if Gibbs and his ilk want me to act like a rightwinger and clap harder, then I will. I’ve got mine, fuck the rest.
Thank god, you’re coming back to your senses, Cole. I thought you were going full firebagger for a minute. Say what you will about the left, but we produce many world class WATB’s.
HEY CORNER!!! WHAT’S UP?
OH AND GO FUCK YOURSELF.
LOL! oh man, so true.
Bill E Pilgrim
Never mind. Not worth it.
Well said, Cole. The dkos crowd is having a collective fit over Gibbs.
A true progressive would never say that
But someone who doesn’t care about policy or other people, and just wants their ego stroked would.
Go over to greenwalds site, he has a nice rundown of just a few of the big kids.
Clinton tried his hardest and failed and liberals beat the shit out of him for failing. I don’t see anyone singing the praises of the Democratic majority of trying hard and failing to pass 9/11 victim benefits without allowing Republicans to muck it up. Instead I see Jon Stewart calling them pussies.
That’s bullshit, sorry.
Look at the Rec List on Daily Kos right now. Every diary on it is about Gibbs’. Only two (blackwaterdog and onanyes) defends Gibbs’ position. The rest are whining about it, including resident concern troll Cenk Uygur.
Man, I’m in the mood to punch some dirty fuckin’ hippies today.
This. All this.
they aren’t so close that 2000 morons spread out across the whole country taking their ball and going home is going to make any difference.
i’m not talking about ‘the left’, i’m talking about left wing bloggers and pundits. which is pretty clear from my post, which calls out left wing bloggers and pundits.
This is such bullshit. Believing in and fighting for a set of beliefs, like say a strong and rational healthcare system or not locking people in cages for the rest of their lives is not the same as fighting for tax cuts or a boondoggle rest stop.
And when our elected leaders say they are going to do some of these things, then do the opposite or much less than they could, speaking up and criticizing is NOT being a WATB.
I too will exert every effort for Democrats in Nov. I hope there’s no broken glass, though.
Are you the professional left? If not, then don’t worry about it.
And you know what? Many more supporters did the same shit you did, and they haven’t bit at the President’s heels like some of you so-called supporters.
I like to say “this” in response to those I agree with, so I’m gonna say: THIS.
Dammit, Cole, fix your blog. The sentences are stretching all the way to the right again.
I bet FDL doesn’t have this problem.
*runs away before he gets jumped*
LOL, I swear, you can’t make this shit.
Tell ya what–you lefty mothafuckas go ahead and primary this President. Go ahead.
Then watch the REAL base of the Democratic Party–African-Americans–leave your asses in droves. Try beating the GOP without the real base.
The man is working his fuckin’ ASS off to fix this country, and all he has is armchair quarterbacks bitchin’ at him from the sidelines.
Yeah, the Dems don’t march lockstep with the President like the GOP does when they hold the White House, but then you bitches wonder why they kick your asses time and again.
Three fuckin’ Democratic Presidents in the last 42 years.
Chew on that shit.
The problem is that we have three broad interests seeking representation in a two party oligopoly, and one of the interests dominates both parties when the chips are down.
1. The corporatists: they dominate both when it really counts for them. Some are relatively far sighted, like Summers and Geithner, and are Democrats, some are closer to true sociopaths, like Blankenship, and are Republicans.
2. The loony right/NeoConfederate traitors/theocrats/and general nut cases of the teabaggers.
3. “Progressives” – since believing in the Bill of Rights is now considered “Left.” Most are pro-market but do not worship the damn thing. To call this the “professional left” like Gibbs is to move all debate to the right – for the benefit of corporatist shills and servants like him and his boss. There is almost no “professional left” because it doesn’t pay and there is hardly a left here. By using that term Givbs proves himself an unprincipled liar or ignorant – take your pick.
Real conservatives have no party, though they fantasize they do.
Obama deliberately sought progressive votes to beat Clinton. We did take his lies about transparency in government and civil liberties pretty seriously – and on those he has 100% failed to deliver. He did not need Congress to deliver. Ditto DADT, and a most unimpressive lack of leadership on issues where he needed Congress – although with Harry Reid maybe even Lyndon Johnson’s style would have failed.
Progressives will still vote for the jerk and I, like John Cole, will crawl on my belly to do so, because Banksters with a thin veneer of civility are preferable to the obscenity that is today’s Republican Party.
But do not expect us to admire Obama’s lyin’ ways. He’s had too many chances to keep his word and done the opposite. He’s a unprincipled con man, but still better than the alternatives.
@Stuck in the Funhouse:
Seriously. I can’t believe some folks are worried about this Jihadist mothafucka’s rights when he’s aligned himself with assholes who want to kill innocent Americans. Dude’s on tape calling for murdering Americans and they’re worried about his rights?
Man, fuck him and his rights.
He’s had even more chances to keep his word AND HE HAS.
Seriously, the man kept 80% of his promises, and you say he didn’t, this is why Robert Gibbs thinks you need to be tested for drugs, because some of us don’t know what fucking planet you’re on.
Please tell me the winning numbers for Powerball. You seem to know what the future holds, so I might as well play the lottery.
Where were these so-called progressives last summer when the Tea Party was out in full force? Why weren’t there counter-protest wherever the Tea Party showed up? Why let the Tea Party force the media to write the narrative in their favor?
Nah, it’s just easier to blame Obama and the Democrats.
The two cases I mentioned are very important. First is transparency- regarding whistleblowers he is apparently worse than Bush
and apparently now research regarding the Gulf oil spill is being concealed by our government.
These are not minor examples because citizens need to know what is happening if we are to have any sort of free society over the long run.
Second is civil liberties, which were savaged under Bush and have not fared any better under Obama. The criminals who broke the law under Bush’s patronage have been let off scott free – not even a public investigation – while as the links above show, whistleblowers that even Bush did not prosecute have been prosecuted.
This man is not a friend of civil liberties or truth.
John Cole, 9:29 am, 8/10:
John Cole, 5:54 pm, 8/10:
Less than 12 hours to go from “they are justifiably upset” to “I am so fed up with their complaining that I can’t think of anything more pathetic.”
Typical Cole. Despite his best efforts he can’t persuade himself to accept criticism of the administration for even half a day. His heart’s in the right place but he will always gravitate to authoritarianism in the end.
@chopper: That’s cute: not only do you somehow possess the mystical ability to divine precisely how many liberals are fed up with Obama, but it just so happens to line up with your preconceived notions of the level of support for him (and foolishness of his detractors.) What an amazing coincidence. Now, like others have pointed out: maybe you can ask your crystal ball why you’re getting so worked up over the negative opinions of “only 2000” imaginary people. EITHER the disgruntled left is causing the President a significant problem OR they are irrelevant. You can’t have both.
Behold the consequences of a two-party system rigged to keep out any serious (and un-controlled) competition.
We used to feel all superior to the Soviets. It turns out that their system was more amenable to change than ours is.
Oh ok! So Gibbs wasn’t shitting on me, just on ideas I believe in. That’s a very significant difference, I am now more willing to vote for Democrats than I was before I read that Gibbs said this, this is an effective GOTV technique, etc.
I mean, seriously? You: “I understand that Gibbs took a dump on the ideas of people you agree with, but that’s not the same as Gibbs taking a dump on your own ideas!”
I believe that 1+1=2, and I’m at a loss to understand how you think I should be happy to see Gibbs shitting on the idea that 1+1=2 as long as he isn’t attacking me personally for saying so. I think 1+1=2 because when you add one to one it adds up to fucking two, not because Ed Fucking Schultz was the one who told me it did. Is this really that hard?
Exactly. White progressives have never had a problem with taking the black vote for granted, no matter how many betrayals African Americans suffered (not being included in the original Social Security Act, segregated armed forces, shelving of anti-lynching legislation in order to get Southern Dems on board with the New Deal — but FDR was SO much more “progressive” than Obama, doncha know?), but when it comes to their own pwecious-wecious votes, they play these childish “maybe I will, maybe I won’t” games.
Pretty much, if that is the hyperbolic perspective you have. Unless you are a professional left-wing pundit, you were not the subject of Robert Gibbs’ ire.
You seem really big on this notion that Gibbs was acting some set of ideas in general, as opposed to a very specific group of individuals. A group of individuals whose position you agree with, no doubt, but to which you do not belong.
I really do not understand why people are going out of their way to be outraged by comments that were aimed at an incredibly specific target.
Maybe because those targets were saying what many of us were thinking?
Oh poor fucking babies. And criticizing what deserves criticizing is not “biting heels.” Not if you’re mature anyway.
This is what is so impossible to get. People actually write things like that. He wasn’t talking about you (who says the same thing as X) he was talking about X!
LT- Ideas don’t matter- just personalities?
Some of us actually voted for policies and values. And on important ones Obama lied (see links above).
Then you have identified yourself with their position, not Robert Gibbs.
@Gus diZerega: Are you fucking kidding? That’s the whole point. Saying Gibbs wasn’t shitting on most of the Left in general – just the Pro Left – is exactly about personalities and NOT ideas.
I can’t believe you just said that.
I guess you just got mixed up. You said this:
That’s what I’ve been saying. You must have meant that comment for marauder.
At some point I guess one has to realize that they’re arguing with a mental midget and leave.
And I can’t believe you think he was NOT attacking the ideas.
He was describing a caricature – and let’s face it, the Obama administration has done a pretty poor job tossing its progressive supporters significant bones while doing a great job making life easier for Republicans – remember ol’ Mr. Bipartisan? I wouldn’t be critical if the flexibility went to the Progressives as well, but it doesn’t.
Again – look at the links I provided.
Transparency and civil liberties are not peripheral issues and did NOT depend on Congress.
Sorry for not being clear – Gibbs was attacking ideas, not just personalities. His boss’s record proves it.
It helps Obama look more centrist. I imagine Obama will be gradually playing the centrist from now until the 2012. If the Dems in congress lose power in the House, they might try to pass more sweeping legislation, but Obama has his main legislation set with healthcare and finance, and now the regulations can be written.