We’ve apparently got a blizzard on the way, so since my car is dead, I stocked up on necessities and decided to throw a pork shoulder in the crock pot with some sauerkraut and munch on that for the next few days.
I’m taking the rest of the day off. I don’t know if you realize how draining it is, no matter what I write, having the same four to five shitheads come into the comments and go all emo and tell us how everything is Barack Obama’s fault. I write that Bernie Sanders did something cool, and the usual suspects start in with their crap- “If only Obama cared! How’s that hope and change working out.” Beyond the fact that Obama is out stumping for what he wants every day and no one covers it because they are too busy examining Sarah Palin’s facebook page, the simple fact of the matter is Obama has precisely ZERO votes in the Senate, and the Republicans are intent on letting the country go to hell in order to destroy the President.
And therein lies the question- what is more annoying? That our manic progressive commenters can’t figure out who the problem is (Pro-tip- Not Obama or the majority of the Democrats), or that I have to read about the same whinging from these jackasses in every thread? Can’t they all just go to FDL or No Quarter? They clearly hate Obama, because this is beyond policy differences. This isn’t about a desire to discuss issues, or differences in opinion, or wanting to engage with other commenters. It is an obsessive need to tear down this administration, the Democratic party, or anyone who doesn’t think Obama is ZOMG THE WORSTEST PRESIDENT EVER. I’m to the point I think a lot of them are on the Freedom Works payroll.
Seriously, just fuck off. Go somewhere else. You won’t be missed.
*** Update ***
And of course I am aware that the same idiots will come in here slinging “Dear Leader” and “O-bot” and say we can’t handle any criticism of Obama. Bullshit. My problem is you morons can’t tell the difference between holding someone’s feet to the fire and burning someone at the stake.
Violet
This is the John Cole I love.
Sorry about your car, but being stuck with a crock-potted pork shoulder and sauerkraut doesn’t sound half bad. Enjoy.
Bill H.
Well, you can’t really have it both ways, John. Free speech is free speech. You get a lot of really, really good stuff here, and the price of that is a little bit of chaff in with the wheat. Suck it up.
Omnes Omnibus
@Bill H.: It doesn’t mean they aren’t annoying.
JMC_in_the_ATL
I can only imagine how annoying they are to you. To me, they make me check out of thread and/or the site for a bit, once their whinging reaches critical mass. Obviously when it is your work that they are shitting all over, its worse by a mulitplier.
JimK
How long do you cook that? Doesn’t the kraut turn to mush?
Odie Hugh Manatee
They know that if they keep blaming Obama for everything that sooner or later they might be right about something.
Besides, they have to earn their Elephant Points so they can cash in when their party regains control! McCain points aren’t worth anything any more.
gogol's wife
@JMC_in_the_ATL:
This. This has nothing to do with “free speech.” An interesting, complex community has been built here, a place of truly open discussion and lots of different approaches, and I’m afraid it’s now being destroyed by a few egomaniacs.
LosGatosCA
Plus there are no football games today ?
See Obama can’t get anything right.
BGinCHI
Those fucking Mary Landrieu rants are still getting my goat. Wailing about how she’s been betrayed and that “she doesn’t know what to do with herself.”
So, there you go. Even a Dem Senator, who has been mucking up the works at every opportunity, blames Obama. That ought to give us a clue that, even if Obama is lacking in some quarters, what he’s up against is FAR worse.
Plus, does Mary have short arms or something? She looked freakish on the tv yesterday.
Oh, and fuck Blanche Lincoln too.
PS
On the one hand, Bill H. (2), you have a point. On the other hand, the point you have, while doubtless a good and valid point in its way, is not exactly on point or should I say to the point. Making the whole point rather pointless. An occasional chaff is not the same as multiple repeats of the same sentiment.
Ajay
I am not sure how anyone can claim that Obama is the worstest president ever. Moron before him set the bar so low that its going to be hard for anyone to cross it. Obama is not even close. You cant even compare the two.
I think people are upset at Obama because he is coming across as weak in dealings with the Retard party.
Mike S
Steve Benen shows why we are where we are: If the GOP fucks over the country and no one covers it, is that Obama’s fault?
Omnes Omnibus
@LosGatosCA: Army-Navy is about to start. Go Army, beat Navy!
tkogrumpy
I for one would miss them. What do you want, a freakin’ echo chamber? Like the man said wheat, chaff.
Baud
You tell them to fuck off, but when you write stuff like this, it’s like moths to a flame.
The problem with fighting firebaggers is that they want to fight you. If they wanted spend their time fighting Republicans, they would fight Republicans. And each time you respond, that’s one fewer blog post on the Internets that could be used to call out Republicans. The only ones who benefit are the firebaggers and the Republicans.
It’s an intractable problem. If I had a good solution, I’d probably have my own blog.
Jules
This.
thisthisthisthis
Is what drives me crazy.
The constant whining of “if only Obama would do xyz” and “if only Obama would say xyz” when Obama has been saying and doing xyz but no one of the professional left or whiners or here in the internet tubes seem to be paying any. fucking. attention.
And the Republicans do. not. care.
They do not care about this country.
They only care about winning.
You CAN’T shame them into doing anything.
Hint folks: The Senate could not pass the House bill last Saturday…that is when the President (showing leadership you all seems to think he never shows) stepped up and made a deal.
agrippa
Understood.
Someone has to be blamed. Obama is a good target.
There is little that is logical or factual, in many cases, about hatred. It may, in some convoluted way, have something to do with the object of the hatred. Sometimes, there is a discernable reason for the hatred: the Poles had reason to hate and fear the Germans and the Russians.
In the case of Obama – I see no such reason. But, I am not the one who is hating.
People want to blame someone? Blame those 535 members of Congress who did not do what needed to be done. Blame them for their lack of political and moral courage, blame them their lack of a proper sense of urgency.
By the way — Obama has to work with those people. He cannot issue a decree and exile them to Kolyma.
Jewish Steel
Seconded. Quit clunking up this site w/the same monotonous, droning, bullshit.
You’re ideologically pure. We get it. Congratulations. Now fuck off.
Mnemosyne
A big part of the problem is the cultural difference between Republican Congresses and Democratic ones. Republicans pride themselves on sticking as close to a Republican president’s agenda as possible and squashing any dissent. Democrats pride themselves on opposing a Democratic president’s agenda as much as possible, which makes it fucking hard to get anything done.
TooManyJens
EXACTLY.
Obama wants health care reform, but can’t get everything we all want (him included), so Firebaggers treat him like he’s every bit as much an enemy on health care reform as the Republicans. Same with FinReg, same with the tax cut deal. That’s not holding his feet to the fire, that’s refusing to deal with reality. And while I’m sad to report that Republicans can get away with refusing to deal with reality and still have leverage, you can’t.
I think we need a 2010 version of Sinead O’Connor ripping up a picture of Mitch McConnell and saying “fight the real enemy.”
stuckinred
Great morning running around doing chores. Went to Trader Joe’s an stocked up with goodies including chocolate covered raisins. Went to swim and left the pups in the van putting an extra bag over the food. Now they are both in the doggie ER getting IV, charcoal and bloodwork. The second time in 2 weeks I have done something I thought about first and went ahead and did the wrong thing. The best case in this will be $1300 and a swift kick in my own ass.
Mike S
@Mnemosyne:
Too true. The last time the Democrats fought against something as hard as they are fighting right now was when Clinton took office.
Bush the younger? Not so much.
quaint irene
A blizzard? I know the Midwest is getting smacked this weekend, but down in Virginia? Up here in NJ we’re just getting rain.
TooManyJens
@Mike S: Progressives fought hard against Bush the Lesser. We didn’t get very far, but we did fight.
Comrade Mary
If web commenting supported sig files, this would be mine.
shirt
I think you hit on something regarding the attention being paid to the Grifter from Wassilly.
The good that Obama does is buried in her distraction. A distraction that we used to refer to as “look, another white woman…” And I think it’s deliberate.
Sarah once said that “Only dead fish go with the flow”. They usually do a lot of flopping before hand though. She is sucking up so much media that no one is paying attention to the biggest flopper of them all: McCain, also.
BGinCHI
@stuckinred: Dude, that sucks. If it helps, I also would have chewed through the bag to get that stuff.
Glad to hear there’s a TJs in Athens.
CynDee
Hi, John,
Thanks for all you do for people and animals.
Best of luck with your car, and I think the pork shoulder thing is absolutely the correct response to today’s conditions. I guess that the YouKnowWhos will want some . . . Mmm, wish I were there.
JPL
John, They are calling for snow flurries in Atlanta. The stores were packed this morning with the local citizens preparing just in case they get snowed in.
I went to the store simply because I forgot to pick up some pancetta. Not your normal snowy day fare, but I wanted a few slices to crisp up for a soup I’m making. I also needed a baby gate for a five pound pup that I’m taking care.
I was told it’s the best dog evah
. That might be true but since she was causing havoc with my xmas decorations at five this morning, I decided to protect my belongings and block her in a bathroom tonight.
Mnemosyne
@agrippa:
People keep trying to compare Obama to the CEO of a company, but it’s a bogus comparison because Congress is not comprised of Obama’s employees. They’re a co-equal branch of government. The CEO of your company can make your life hell or fire you, but how much control does he have over you if you don’t work for his company? It’s like saying that the CEO of McDonald’s is responsible for the actions of a VP at Coca-Cola because they’re in business together.
TooManyJens
I just want to add that I think Obama is one of the ones we need to fight on issues like state secrets and civil liberties. I’m tremendously saddened by that fact, but it’s undeniable. But most of the fuckery of the last two years is squarely the fault of Republicans in Congress.
Mike S
@TooManyJens:
I’m talking about our elected Democrats. They fought Clinton every step of the way, like Obama now, but gave Bush what he wanted.
stuckinred
@BGinCHI: They put it across the river in Oconee County just to spit in the anti-business Athens City Council.
Raisins: If I hadn’t seen a poster at the vet yesterday that listed them as toxic I would have never given this a second thought. The next question is, “why did you leave them in the van you dumb-ass motherfucker”?
Suck It Up!
@tkogrumpy:
how would it be an echo chamber to exclude people who can’t have serious policy discussions? John’s not saying we all have to agree but bring something to the table other than:
and less of:
stuckinred
@JPL: The radar looks like it’s raining inside the loop!
Bruce (formerly Steve S.)
I really have to believe that this post is pure BS, because it stretches credulity to the breaking point to think that someone who blogs for a living can’t take a little bit of dissent. I don’t think you’re genuinely fed up, I think this post was designed purely to generate some “This!” commentary. You’ll get a bit of validation, then downthread a ways the Obots and Firebaggers will go at it like they always do and keep the traffic up to acceptable levels. Well played.
MJ
Thank you John. Enjoy your time off. Although your are entertaining when you are tired and cranky, we need you rested, refreshed & ready to lead the charge against the 101st Brigade of Fighting Emoboardists!
BGinCHI
@stuckinred: You need to get a bear canister. That ought to do it.
Funny about the location. Prolly lower taxes too.
You Don't Say
@BGinCHI: I’m not much of a name caller, but Landrieu really is the scum of the earth.
I read a Usenet group on tennis and a couple years back some idiot from Finland, of all places, started relentlessly posting such virulent crap that the newsgroup has dwindled down to a handful of posters. It just wears ya down.
Edit: Yes, I know one can filter posters in a newsreader, but that has probably only slowed the departures of decent posters.
GregB
So Cole, I take it you won’t be front paging the writings of Harriet Christian or Lady DeForrester Rothschild any time soon?
Gustopher
I think Obama has been a pretty much constant disappointment, but he’s better than George W. Bush, he’s better than McCain would be, and he might be better than Poppy Bush.
I’d rather be disappointed that the President doesn’t go far enough, and sometimes makes bad compromises, than be appalled that the President is actively working to destroy America.
Mnemosyne
@stuckinred:
Ugh. That sounds like the time G brought a lily home and I suddenly remembered when I saw the kitty tooth marks the next morning that they’re extremely poisonous to cats. (He had no idea because he never had cats before he met me.)
So, yes, the cats had a weekend stay at Club Vet getting fluids and all kinds of fun stuff done to them to the tune of about $1800.
ETA: Did I mention that Keaton will howl incessantly and chew at the bars of any cage he’s put in? He actually has a scar on his nose from rubbing it against the cage trying to get out. Good times, good times.
gbear
The pooh flingers (WP in particular) think their pooh smells sweet. Everyone must know how uncommonly sweet their pooh smells.
Everyone enjoy the coming blizzard. This is the ugliest storm I’ve seen since I moved into my house 15 years ago. There is 2′ of snow pressed up against my back door and it’s still coming down like crazy. I fucking hate it.
licensed to kill time
Obama-punching seems to be an obsession for a certain handful here, and I agree that it is boring, repetitive and exhausting. I wish that energy was expended on the god-damned Republicans instead, who are infinitely more worthy of the effort.
stuckinred
@BGinCHI: Oh yea. The University System built a big building out there after people in town started with “we need to tax the university”. Now there are medical buildings and all kinds of retail to help the lilly-white tax base out.
stuckinred
@Mnemosyne: They came out ok though?
DickSpudCouchPotatoDetective
Aside from always bitching about the spam filter, I don’t ask for much … but did we find out what was wrong with the car?
Anal mechanics such as myself always need to know these things. Just a one sentence description of the problem will do.
stuckinred
@DickSpudCouchPotatoDetective: Head gasket I think.
BGinCHI
For those who haven’t seen this, the student is like what Cole describes above: idealist, naive, and hard to talk down.
http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/7451115/
blahblahgurgleblegblah
Why don’t you just ban us then, John? I mean, we’re saying things you don’t like, and it is your blog. Go ahead, stifle dissent and go build a yourself groupthink utopia like over a dkos and Redstate.
inflector
Right on John. You don’t really want to fill this site with the crap and idiots who spew it that killed so many other places.
People who don’t understand strategy and reality aren’t very useful in discussions of strategy and reality.
@Bill H.:
John can have it any way he wants. It’s his site.
Free speech means you can say what you want. It doesn’t mean that others have to listen or care about what you say. It certainly doesn’t mean that we must all invite assholes into our livingrooms to rant. There are plenty of blogs where whining about Obama seems much more popular. They can go there.
If one can’t tell the difference between criticism and pathological disconnection from reality, then perhaps John’s rant was directed their way.
The Dangerman
Sad to say, but welcome to the next 2 years; until the election, the republicans will do nothing but blow shit up and Obama will get the blame somehow.
Meet the new boss; same as the old boss.
Same as it ever was (great, now I need to cue up some Talking Heads).
Oh, add me to the “just fuck off” list.
BGinCHI
@You Don’t Say: Are you suggesting my post was virulent?
If so, thanks.
I am a bit of a name-caller, but then again I’m from the wrong side of the tracks, and the tracks were rusty.
Mnemosyne
@Bruce (formerly Steve S.):
I don’t know that it’s the dissent so much as the repetitiveness and the absolute inability to talk about anything else. They even come into the Thursday Night Menu thread to complain about Obama, FFS. Every single thread, no matter what the topic is, has to be turned into Obots vs. Firebaggers.
It gets very tiresome.
You Don't Say
@BGinCHI: Sorry, no.
John Cole
@Bruce (formerly Steve S.):
A.) Who blogs for a living?
B.) If I didn’t like dissent, I’d ban people.
C.) Count yourself as one who doesn’t understand the difference between dissent and the manic progressive wailing you do.
BGinCHI
@You Don’t Say: Damn. No respect.
John Cole
@DickSpudCouchPotatoDetective: They think it is either a head gasket or the engine. I didn’t run it while it was overheating, and it still starts and runs, so I’m thinking head gasket. Let you know when they start breaking it down to replace.
ThatLeftTurnInABQ
@stuckinred:
“Well known pro-Obama blogger John Cole blows a head gasket.”
Sounds about right for a news teaser.
Mnemosyne
@stuckinred:
Perfectly healthy. I still get Keaton’s kidneys checked every couple of years because he had the lily incident and he got poisoned by melamine-laced cat food (which also affects the kidneys) but he seems to have pulled through both with no problems.
birthmarker
@Jules: Yes!
They care about their corporate overlords, who coincidently pay for the propaganda machine and own the elected officials.
In all things, follow the money.
As far as the trolls-I think it is orchestrated. My God-they have attacked BlackWaterDog for posting a few pictures. Even such a small part of the conversation–must be attacked and destroyed. Jeez. I look to BWD to tell me about the President’s day, since this is not covered in the corporate media AT ALL.
BGinCHI
@ThatLeftTurnInABQ: FTW. You beat me to it.
Mine was “…literally blows head gasket.”
Villago Delenda Est
The fact of the matter is, the corporations that control the media have a convenient diversion in Obama. Obama gets blamed for not communicating, and the media’s role in this is utterly ignored.
The media (particularly the three major networks) are doing their darndest to ignore the real problems, because their parasite Ferengi masters tell them to.
You Don't Say
@ThatLeftTurnInABQ: It’s already up at HuffPo.
Raoul
Hey maroon: this has nothing to do with O and everything to do with bankrupting the government. And BTW- you are correct that liberals are not the enemy of O- maybe someone should tell him.
Nanette
Oh how I love that last line. And that is exactly it. Kinda reminds me of the frothing-at-the-mouth right wing during the Clinton years. There was simply no way to have a rational discussion with them, so I would wind up clapping louder (for Clinton) just to drown them out. Even though I had my own issues with him.
Same with Obama. There are definitely substantive critiques to be made of some of his actions and policies (like the civil liberties stuff mentioned up above,) but very little room to make them without seeming to be aligned with the “He’s destroying the country, we have to get rid of him at any cost!” faction – both on the right and left.
Besides, the rhetoric is getting far too freaky for me – for now I’ll just clap louder (for Obama) and hope the Secret Service has firmed up its protection.
TooManyJens
@Mike S: Ah. Yeah, I can’t argue with you on that.
birthmarker
@blahblahgurgleblegblah: God, I wish I could find some groupthink over at DKos…
srv
Hey, I don’t think Obama is evil. But it would be inconsistent to make fun of GW for doing stupid shit and then give this Citi guy a pass.
But Trader Joe’s? There’s some evil. Act like a big progressive/liberal enviro-friendly supermarket… Except nothing is recyclable. At least Fat Al Gore is trying to save the planet when he jets around in that G-V.
Suck It Up!
@blahblahgurgleblegblah:
I believe John is complaining because the comment threads are starting to look like those sites.
debit
I have shoveled twice now and you can’t tell. And it’s blowing with gusts of 40 MPH. And the temp is about to drop to 0, if we’re lucky.
I would like the people who like snow and gleefully exclaim in delight at the prospect of it to come shovel my fucking driveway.
cckids
@Mike S: This !!!!! This kind of shit goes on every day. I’m not President Obama’s biggest cheerleader by any means, but those who complain that if he only did/said X, Y, Z & used the “bully pulpit” more apparently are not paying attention to what is happening in the media world. I am not a Conspiracy Theory type of thinker, but the level of incompetence in the MSM has risen so high that it would seem it has to be deliberate.
DickSpudCouchPotatoDetective
@John Cole:
Ah, I was afraid of that. It’s one of the more expensive diagnoses for an overheating car. The leaky gasket slowly lets your coolant boil away and the overheating pops up at unexpected times. Last one I had cost me $1500 to fix.
Most head gasket probs are caused by …. overheating. Somebody ignores the engine light, lets the car get way too hot, warps a head, blows a gasket …. money. And then chronic overheating that comes and goes. Not uncommon out here in the desert where overheating is easy to do.
Hope that’s not it. Good luck.
Suck It Up!
I’m in NY, I wore my spring jacket to the store. tomorrow its 50 degrees.
ThatLeftTurnInABQ
@Suck It Up!:
I have no problem with folks posting comments criticizing, even attacking the President. But it would be a nice little bonus for the reader if they could at least pass a Turing test while doing so.
DickSpudCouchPotatoDetective
@cckids:
MSM thinks that they have to make all explanations simple.
Republicans fucked it up? Blame Obama. There’s only one name to remember that way.
Allan
I tend to agree. Among other pernicious influences, the relentless regurgitation of cheap shots and RW memes repurposed as lefty jabs at Obama makes it harder to talk about the issues where it’s possible to disagree rationally with the administration. Anything John writes lately is instantly interpreted to mean finally, he’s come over to the other side at last or no, he’s reverting to mindless Obot.
At that Orange place, if someone posts a diary noting a positive achievement of the administration, commenters respond with these exhaustive indictments of every single fucking thing the administration has ever done (or been incorrectly accused of having done) that didn’t satisfy someone somewhere. I marvel at them, and hope they have saved some of these screeds as macros so they don’t have to give themselves CTS retyping them over and over and over.
HRA
I agree with you, John. There have been too any times when I have to stop reading and leave the thread.
As for Sanders, why did he did he have to repeat for hours what we all have heard before anyway? Could not that time have been spent getting business done for the country?
debbie
@stuckinred:
Isn’t it the chocolate that made the dogs sick?
iriedc
Dear John Cole:
I. Co. Sign.
Cheers!
kindness
I was over at a friend of mine’s house last night and he’s a bit more liberal than me & well, he was on fire shredding Obama. Everything’s fault was all Obama no matter what it was. He said he hoped Nader would run so he could vote for him. He promised to never again vote for ‘that closet republican’.
It puts me in a tough position. I’m not happy with many of Obama’s negotiating tactics (giving up the big prize before the other side agrees to anything) but if it’s between Barak & Sarah Palin, well there’s no two ways about it, I’d be votin’ for Obama. He said he wouldn’t. And he doesn’t even read firedoglake…go figure.
ThatLeftTurnInABQ
@cckids:
The use of this phrase in particular is a pet peeve of mine, seeing as how it was originally coined by TR. And what did TR do while he was in office? Let’s check the historical record – oh that’s right, he regularly worked with more conservative members of his party in the Senate in order to get something out of an otherwise gridlocked Congress, signed a lot of watered down legislation (especially in his 1st term – Elkins Act, look it up folks), gave the progressive press of his era fits with his lack of ideological firmness and willingness to abandon allies at the drop of a hat, and gave some firebrand speeches about the evils of capitalism mostly after he was safely out of office.
Not that we have anybody around today who sounds like that…
Bruce (formerly Steve S.)
@John Cole:
So I was correct? You didn’t really mean it when you said, “Seriously, just fuck off. Go somewhere else. You won’t be missed”?
You’re correct, I don’t understand the difference between a commonly understood English word and adolescent insider jargon. Christ.
Maude
Richard Hollbrook had sugery for a torn aorta. He’s in critical condition.
Most “left” blogs have been filled with the haters. They are full of poison and spewing like the Exocist. They sit at their keyboards and have tappin’ tizzies.
It’s sad they came here and will be nice when they go.
At the other places, it is tolerated and the front pagers don’t speak up.
Scott Supak
I left the safe confines of my Google reader to say more of this please:
“…the difference between holding someone’s feet to the fire and burning someone at the stake…”
What part of President Mittens don’t you understand, people?
Suck It Up!
@kindness:
He doesn’t read FDL but he’s getting his info from somewhere otherwise why make a desperate decision to vote for Nader?
alwhite
I do not hate Obama but I like coming here because it is a place where people who actually care about this shit can come and complain about what he is doing. I much prefer this to the “everything he does is super-duper wonderful” followed by “he was never a conservative” bullshit of the right.
It is obvious that the Blew Dogs are a major problem and that they take advantage of the relaxed structure of the Democratic Party. It is equally obvious that the entire conversation has turned into lather-rinse-repeat ad infinitum. It is tedious but the alternative would be to go 100% pet photos and recipes.
CT Voter
I’m going to quote you:
My problem is you morons can’t tell the difference between holding someone’s feet to the fire and burning someone at the stake.
What a succinct summary of current affairs. Nicely done.
And enjoy the pork.
Nora Carrington
John,
Love your blog. You don’t know me because I’ve commented here, I dunno, twice?
Don’t read the comments. Srsly. You’ll be happier and they don’t care.
I can’t remember a comments thread here where there was a discussion. Too Clever by Half folks pontificating and posing. No one is listening to anyone else.
You can get that on the Screaming Heads shows. Who wants it in their living room?
So keep saying what you think, comment on other people’s blogs if you’d like, but for your own mental health and continued well being, just don’t read the comments here.
Fondly,
Nora
Tonal Crow
Hornets generally quit stinging when you stop kicking their nest. I thought most people knew that.
PanAmerican
@ThatLeftTurnInABQ:
In thirty years the ones still breathing will be complaining that the current President is a sellout and not a ballbuster like Obama.
Suck It Up!
@ThatLeftTurnInABQ:
It doesn’t help though when high profile pundits/historians/experts contribute to the whitewashing and romanticizing of past presidents.
Citizen_X
@You Don’t Say:
See, that sort of pathological behavior leaves me utterly flabbergasted. For example, I read over at Salon a lot, but only the articles. A few years ago, the comment threads were pretty good. But nowadays the same collection of nutjobs must show up on every thread, most of them posting several times each. What level of obsession is necessary to drive that lunacy? Don’t these people have jobs?
I don’t think the comment threads here are anywhere near that bad, but it’s a subtle tipping point, and once you’ve passed it, can good thread commentary ever be recovered? I’ve never seen it.
CT Voter
@Mnemosyne: The thread for Elizabeth Edwards almost turned into a discussion about how Elizabeth Edwards, by covering for her husband, could have betrayed the progressive left.
Yowser.
South of I-10
Still waiting on the weather here. It’s 75 now, and the low tonight is in the 30’s. Dressing for the party we are going to should be fun. I guess I’ll leave a coat in the car.
I understand your frustration, and I still think Obama beats the hell out of the alternative.
Mark S.
@HRA:
You do realize this was on the floor of the Senate. No business ever gets done there.
And I disagree that this is all stuff we’ve heard before. Well, maybe not for the commentators here, but the average American, no, they don’t know that nearly a quarter of this country’s income goes to the top 1%. They certainly don’t learn this from our dipshit beltway media.
Speaking of dipshit beltway media, I watched the McLaughlin Group last night for the first time in years. Tax cuts good, Assange is a traitor, liberals are stupid. DC conventional wisdom.
NR
Do you still want to put this down to a few malcontents, or are you ready to admit that something is going wrong with the base?
Poll: Obama’s losing support; Romney would beat him now.
You can keep blaming this on bloggers and blog commenters if you want, or you can start to put the blame where it belongs: On a White House whose strategy is alienating the party base while gaining nothing with independents.
phantomist
Well, there’s 110,000 people watching an outdoor hockey game in Ann Arbor right now. It’s on FSD for those in the viewing area. 0-0 half way through the first.
Mnemosyne
@Nanette:
This. I know it drives the firebaggers crazy, but seriously, who is the more liberal alternative in 2012? Russ Feingold, who couldn’t win his own state? Not to mention that I can guaran-damn-tee you that Obama will be challenged from his right with someone like Evan Bayh, so the people starting the “anyone but Obama” chant had better be careful what they wish for, or they just might get it.
It’s so creepy to me to see people who are supposedly on the left recycling the same memes for Obama that were used on Bush (he’s lazy, he spends all of his time watching ESPN, he’s in over his head, etc.) or quoting the New York Times as an authority. Hello, didn’t we just spend 8 years pointing out that the media is completely co-opted by corporations? That didn’t change with Obama’s election.
debit
@NR: Well, if the election was being held right now, I might worry. Polls mean nothing 2 years out.
eemom
meh. Always the same old rerun on this channel. I’m going back to the Church-bashing thread.
Matt McIrvin
Well, that’s his own damn fault, isn’t it? He HAD one until he went and got himself elected President!
(I am only partly joking here. He sure vacated a lot of Democratic Senate seats populating his administration.)
moops
I think the hyperbole is a bit thick in this.
I haven’t seen any “Worst.President.Evar” posts in BJ.
Perhaps you should be a bit more accurate in your complaints and people will start listening to them.
When you go off on posters burning Obama at the stake, I look to my left and right and wonder who you are talking about, then just tune the complaint out.
It makes for nice dramatic (melodramatic) writing, but it doesn’t bring you any improvements.
eemom
…..but I will leave you with this “promise” from Colbert King, which echoes what a lot of folks have been saying:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/10/AR2010121005182.html
Suck It Up!
@NR:
IOW: Obama’s polls numbers amongst Democrats is still ridiculously high.
NR
@debit: Yes, I know. A lot can happen in two years.
But something is going wrong with the base, no matter how much some people may want to put their heads in the sand about it.
South of I-10
@stuckinred: Hope your pups are okay.
You Don't Say
@moops: You haven’t been paying attention then.
Omnes Omnibus
@moops: Do you generally read the comments?
Shade Tail
@Bruce (formerly Steve S.):
Oh come on, stop pretending(?) to be so dumb. There is a blindingly obvious difference between “Feel free to leave, you childish shithead,” and “I’m going to force you to leave, you childish shithead.” Mr. Cole quite clearly wrote the first, not the second.
Bruce (formerly Steve S.)
@Tonal Crow:
Most people do know that, which is why I think the original post was BS. It really is amusing to tell some subgroup to “fuck off” knowing full well that the “core commentariat”, as Greenwald put it, enjoy nothing more than responding to each and every “manic progressive” with dozens upon dozens of responses.
wes g
is there just a slight possibility those 4-5 guys are trolls?
Uncle Clarence Thomas
.
.
@John Cole:
I thought it was an obsessive need to prop up this administration, the center-right Democratic party, or anyone who thinks Obama is ZOMG THE BESTEST PRESIDENT EVER. I’m to the point I think a lot of them are on the Obama-McConnell Administration payroll.
Firebaggers are not the enemy. The Republicans and their plutarchical policies are the enemy, and also anyone who enables them rather than actively resisting, neutering or destroying these rabid dogs.
“I believe Obama is a good man” is not a policy discussion.
.
.
NR
@Suck It Up!: 74% is not “ridiculously high” for a president’s approval rating with his own party. And the trend isn’t good, no matter how you try to spin it.
Denial of what’s happening helps no one.
Suck It Up!
@NR:
maybe you ought to look at the liberal bloggers/pundits riling up the “base”. You guys are being played by your own. And no I’m not talking about Obama and the Democrats.
CT Voter
@moops: So, this comment (from yesterday’s post about Bernie Sanders) is not in that category:
This, combined with Orszag’s recent attacks on Social Security, demonstrate that Obama is at best fully captured, at worst incompetent and captured.
Sarah in Brooklyn
Everyone who is making JC post less should just get the fuck out of here. I like when he posts.
Suck It Up!
@moops:
yeah, you don’t come here often do you? and it seems like you don’t visit many liberal blogs or watch cable news.
JPL
@stuckinred: I took the dogs for a walk hoping that I can wear out the pup so she will not get into anything that she shouldn’t.
You fortunately are close to very good vets and I’m sure that your dogs are in good hands. You discovered the problem early and that can only help.
For all the I hate Obama folks in blog land, I gotta say that I’m disappointed that he was not able to lower the unemployment rate or make the tax rate more progressive but I’m also thankful that he’s our President. I don’t think my views are hypocritical.
geg6
The same storm is bearing down on W.PA but it’s lovely outside right now. I just loaded my laundry into my car as I am hunkering down at my John’s for the weekend. Pens game tonight with pizza from a local place with a wood oven and beer and Steelers game tomorrow with John making some lamb and a nice, inexpensive Pinot noir. Already told the boss that if the weather reports are correct, I’ll be taking a personal day Monday if the campus isn’t closed.
As for commenters criticizing the president too stridently lately, I plead guilty. He has deserved every bit of it, IMHO. And this tax cut thing was just the last straw for me and my many frustrations with him. He pissed me off with how he left Pelosi out of the discussions, with how much he’s willing to give away, and his temper tantrum during the presser. What with my other bitches with him, it all came to a head.
That said, he will, I’m sure, do something I love soon. He’s my president, I worked to put him there, and I’m glad it’s him in the White House over the alternatives. My enthusiasm for him is gone, but he’ll still get my vote and I won’t regret that one either.
NR
@Suck It Up!: Right. Obama is losing support because of liberal bloggers, not because of his policy decisions.
Just keep your head in the sand and nothing bad will happen. Really.
Gus
Wonder if you’ll get the blizzard we’re getting in Minneapolis? It’s a beauty. It was up to my knees when I shoveled, and there was a good half inch covering the spot where i started by the time I finished. Thank god the liquor store is only a block away.
debit
Oh dear. The plane with the Giants has been diverted to Kansas City. The MSP airport is shut down and bus service has been suspended.
ChrisNBama
I’ve been hitting all the blogs lately defending Obama’s Tax Compromise decision, and without exception, the most violent feedback and flames come from fellow “liberals” or “progressives” or, in Cole’s astute framing “manic progressives”. The “Think Progress” site is a complete mess. Daily Kos is a DISASTER. There are folks even creating their own blogs in response to KOS just to put forward positive stories about Obama which are getting flamed by Greenwald as Nazi propaganda. Yes, even Greenwald has gone the Full Godwin.
The democratic base has complete lost its fucking mind!
John Cole
@NR: No one is making that argument and I didn’t say that in the god damned post. I said I was tired of the unending bullshit from a few cranks who have an obsessive need to drag everything down no matter what the thread. For fuck’s sake, as has been noted, there were people flaming Elizabeth Edwards in her obit thread as hurting progressives.
Your response? To come in and validate your right to be pissy- “Look here is data to support the straw man I am making that does not address anything John Cole said in this post! I reserve my right to be a malcontent and make everyone around me miserable.”
@Shade Tail: He isn’t pretending.
TooManyJens
It is draining. What is the point of proclaiming over and over that we’re doomed, and that any progress we make isn’t worth shit because we can’t get everything we want right now? How does that help anyone but the plutocrats?
moops
I read BJ almost every day, including the comments.
so, yes, I’m here a lot.
despite predictions of massive firebagging, all we have is someone worried about poll numbers….and pearl-clutching angst from the BJ regulars.
Suck It Up!
@NR:
why should your poll get more attention than the one that shows Obama’s base or coalition is doing just fine?
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/12/06/5596757-obama-core-coalition-hardly-shattered
Sorry, but if there is any spin going on its happening from disgruntled parts of the left. Not long ago a poll showing Romney beating Obama would have been laughed at, If the MSM had presented the poll you cited as a reason to panic it would have been laughed at by the left. Lately you guys have been desperately hanging to anyone or anything that confirms their beliefs about Obama – Mary Landrieu, this poll, Republicans, etc.
fasteddie9318
@HRA:
I’m sorry, you must be new around here. Let me introduce you to the United States Senate. Senate, HRA. HRA, Senate. And the answer to your question is no, it couldn’t.
@Mark S.:
I disagree that no business ever gets done there. It’s just that none of the business that ever gets done there is “for the country.”
Bruce (formerly Steve S.)
@Shade Tail:
You did read what John wrote right before, didn’t you? “If I didn’t like dissent I’d ban people.” The obvious implication is that he likes dissent, since he doesn’t generally ban people. But liking dissent is obviously inconsistent with telling people to “fuck off.” Again, I think he’s just BSing us, he must know full well the simple principle enunciated by Tonal Crow up at #90. It’s all good. John will forget all about this thread in a few minutes, the usual suspects will keep it going for a few hundred posts (even though they think dissenters should “fuck off,” wink-wink), and the world will be back in equilibrium.
Svensker
@kindness:
Were you in my closet listening to my husband?
Oy.
Suck It Up!
@ChrisNBama:
I love ThinkProgress but I rarely go into their threads. I hope it doesn’t ruin that site. Its posts are fact filled and not shrill even when critical of the president. Its one of the few places that I trust for info.
c u n d gulag
Thanks John – needed to be said.
I don’t mind it much, it’s just the lack of originality. It’s the same comment by the same people over and over.
I used to read all, or most, of the comments here. Now, if I write one, I just look to see if anyone responded without blasting me.
I can’t be bothered to read people behaving like totally rude assholes. That’s MY act!
Angela
And it’s this kinda stuff that makes me love John Cole.
jl
Public Service Announcement. Sirens! Strobe Lights!
From krugman, we have a link to an interesting report of what happens with a Teabagger candidate takes over a local government.
Nice receivership you made there, fella. You oughtta be proud.
Krugman post
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/11/lawn-guyland-is-americas-future/
linked NY Times story
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/11/nyregion/11nassau.html?_r=1&hp
Now, you kids settle down. I don’t want to see any fighting when I get back, or some of you people will have Time Outs!
Edit: Before I leave, my main concern about Cole’s post is this: how many here trust him to be able to tell the difference between holding your feet to the fire and burning you at the stake. He means well even if he don’t look it, but still, I have some concerns.
Suck It Up!
@NR:
Honey, you keep living in that bubble.
Gus
What geg6 said. I’m not particularly disappointed in Obama, because he didn’t run as a liberal. He did campaign on ending tax cuts for the rich an closing Gitmo, but I recognize it’s not all his fault. I’d love a more liberal president, but I don’t think it’s likely any time soon. I’ll take what I can get in this political climate.
moops
I don’t believe ThinkProgress will be dragged down by the quality of it’s comments. YouTube would have imploded by now if comments were the real content.
BJ is somewhat unique in that the comment section is a significant part of the site’s value. Perhaps that explains the (in my opinion) skewed perspective of the abuse that is being received.
Davis X. Machina
@fasteddie9318: No business gets done on the floor of any deliberative assembly, save, perhaps, in Ancient Athens.
It’s a probouleutic world. Let me pick committee chairs, and committee staff, and I’ll give you the gavel in the chamber itself forever.
James K Polk, Esq.
@Bruce (formerly Steve S.): What he is saying = dissent is good
What you are doing is not dissent, it’s constant bitching. That’s why *you* get told to fuck off, when other people pointing out Obama’s failings with respect to Afghanistan, torture, etc, don’t get posts to them telling them to FOAD.
Jody
Dammit, late to the game again. As usual.
Not for nothing John, but the lefty blogosphere has always had a few contrarian douchebags Some people have nothing better to do than to try and show off how much smarter they are than everyone else by trashing other people’s forums.
You think this is bad, check out Digby’s forums. She has some of the most astute political commentary in the blogosphere, so naturally her comments are filled with assholes telling her how dumb she is and how smart they are.
Omnes Omnibus
@Bruce (formerly Steve S.):
That is simply not true unless you live in a binary, black/white world.
ChrisNBama
@Suck It Up!:
My experience recently is that the Think Progress threads are an undercover PUMA convention. You’re right about the site, in general, being a great place for information.
Van
I used to be a leftist and go to protests in the 70s and 80s until I realized that all those people wanted to do was whine. I think it’s the same people taking over the liberal blogs and writing headlines for the Huffington Post. They’re outrage junkies who just want to whine and scream about the latest injustice. the same people who populate the stage at those ANSWER sponsored protests. All I can say is they’re not helping.
srv
@John Cole:
So when did this become a living? I don’t remember the post announcing the change from academic life to career political blogging. Not that there’s any problem with that, but it does change the dynamic some.
I see a breaking point in the future for this blog. The political drama is really just beginning, and it’s going to get a lot worse before it gets better.
Given there is no social solution for this as hippies don’t work, perhaps technology can help – too late for the cutoff, but might I suggest integrating cleek’s script (with per-post, daily, weekly or forever filtering options) into the website itself might aid both commenters and posters.
west coast
John: “My problem is you morons can’t tell the difference between holding someone’s feet to the fire and burning someone at the stake.”
Bruce who used to be Steve: “But liking dissent is obviously inconsistent with telling people to ‘fuck off.'”
I’m trying to figure out what’s inconsistent about saying “I like an informed debate; I hate when ignorant idiots try to dominate a debate.”
“It’s got electrolytes” isn’t a particularly well-informed or insightful addition to a discussion about 99.9999% of things.
Jules
@geg6:
And that is what i don’t get.
“Temper tantrum”?
I just did not see it.
wmd
John,
this open letter seems to match a lot of my frustration with Obama.
I worked for Obama during the 2008 primaries. Stopped after the FISA cloture vote – blogged at mybarackobama.com about why I stopped. Then worked again after Labor Day through the general election.
I’ll likely be working to reelect Obama in 2012 and to try to make his coat tails strong enough to carry some non blue dogs back into Congress. I hope for a House split of about 225D/210R and a Lieberman free Senate of 53D/47R.
jeffreyw
::grouchy old white haired fart shakes fist at sky, yells at hughes.net satellite::
wait…
::grouchy old confused white haired fart shakes fist in general direction of cell tower, yells at verizon wireless::
“No sir, we won’t hook up that new mifi 2200 of yours to our nice 10 gig/month plan. We will, however, give you a brand new mifi 2200 for free and hook you up to that same plan. Same price.”
FormerSwingVoter
We are all firebaggers now.
It’s pretty awesome how so much of the progressive blogosphere has turned into RedState.com overnight. I thought we were the ones who used information to make decisions. How foolish of me.
Bruce (formerly Steve S.)
@Omnes Omnibus:
John likes dissent, as he doesn’t ban people.
However, John tells these people to “fuck off” and not post on BJ anymore.
There are only two choices; either telling people to “fuck off” and leave the blog is consistent with liking what they are doing, or John is just pulling our collective leg. You have chosen the former. Feel free to explain your reasoning, binary or otherwise.
Raoul
JC: You say you wanted an economic analysis on the tax cut extension? Read Bruce Barlett NOW- I read him through DeLong.
rob in dc
John,
I read your site regularly but never comment. I like your passion and willingness to listen and change your mind.
With that said, I think you are wrong on this issue, and i’ll show you that “firebaggers” can be eminently reasonable while still hating Obama’s guts.
Lets start with the fact that you have admitted that all your previously held beliefs about effective policy were wrong back when you left the Republican Party. You have slowly changed your policies over time going more and more leftward. Why is it so hard to imagine then that those people more to the left than you are… right? Taking two one step left from the center might not be enough. You have disparaged tax cuts before on this website is ineffective policy and now here you are defending Obama for this travesty of a “stimulus” “deal”?
When have tax cuts proven effective for stimulus or growth? Tax cuts encourage the divestment of capital from companies for asset bubble investment which has faster short run rates of return. I would argue that at this point where we are on marginal rates and tax cuts on the high end will have a negative effect, not a positive one. But even if they do have a positive one, Obama campaigned on repealing these cuts and for breaking that promise the only thing he got to throw progressives a bone was a mediocre extension of UI. Everything else is straight republican policy and the payroll tax holiday is going to give people even more talking points for defending social security. I get it, Republicans are assholes, then just don’t do anything and let the cuts expire. Better the cuts expire and no UI then this travesty.
More broadly here is why we progressives hate Obama and think he is a disaster that deserves to be primaries.
a) He betrayed his own stated principles when he voted to immunize telecoms for illegal activity retroactively. This was a sign of things to come.
b) He passed a crap initial stimulus without even trying to get anything better and sold half the pie by making half of it tax cuts before even getting to the negotiating table with republicans (a sign of things to come with Obama’s “negotiation strategy”)
c) THIS IS THE NUMBER ONE THING! He is a wall street democrat enamored with the idea that our economy, as it is with wall street sucking out productive gains and raping everybody else, just needs to be tweaked. This is why he has supported and enabled rapacious Wall street banks every step along the way since taking office. And guess what Mr. Cole, he does not need any goddamn congressional support to investigate and prosecute these asshole fraudsters. That is a power entirely in the hands of the executive branch of our government.
c2) Obama looked forward not backward regarding the rampant criminal action of the Bush years. Another thing that was entirely up to him that was sacrificed on the alter of bipartisanship (or was it?)
d) While enabling banks his treasury has simultaneously been screwing their victims left right and center with a garbage underfunded HAMP program which has led plenty of people who appealed to help to even worse situations as it let the banks do basically anything they wanted with foreclosures.
e) He has thoroughly betrayed civil liberties partisans. I don’t need to go into this, except to say this is another area where congress has minimal intrusion. I could forgive GITMO with an intractable congress, but overusing state secrets and ordering due process free assassinations? Maybe it hasn’t occurred to you, but for a lot of us in this country we would rather live free and poor then wealthy in chains. Its nice to see our government continue to slide up the totalitarian gradient under our constitutional law professor president. This is another issue which alone could justify abandoning support for Obama and it does for plenty of people.
f) Health care bill, lets not pretend for even one second that Obama got the best he could have. He did not even try. Greenwald called it right when he said that Obama sold the public option for corporate support. And after all that he still did not get shit all for republican votes and had to go to reconciliation to pass the bill. So why not have gone for some gold when he only needed 50 votes in the senate to pass it anyway. Maybe Obama is not simply dealing with an intractable opposition, maybe just maybe, he actually does not want these progressive things because he is not a progressive, just another standard blue dog conservadem who is completely owned by his the same corporate masters as 95% of the rest of the politicians in our country.
g) Afghanistan is an issue which progressives hate. On the other hand Obama was pretty clear about his intentions with this issue. Its not a betrayal or anything like that, but nonetheless your going to ask progressives to be nice and support a president who escalates war and runs stealth wars in two other countries with drones and covert ops? Good luck.
h) Part and parcel of Obama’s being owned by wall st. is the crap financial reform bill, with treasury officials helping neuter some of the mildly effective reforms that were in the first iterations of the bill. On the other hand i’ll let this go for Obama because he couldn’t have saved them even if he tried, our congress is as branded as he is.
A lot of people are frustrated about Obama’s lack of speechifying and such. Progressives are not. We never expected it from him because we saw exactly what he was from the moment he voted for FISA and staffed his treasury with Rubinites and Clinton retreads. We knew that he wasn’t our political stripe, didn’t believe in the things we believe in and never expected him to advocate our view, because they are not his.
What Obama is going to do that will damage us is associate our politics with his. Progressives aren’t going to get a fair shot in politics until shit really hits the wall next time conservatives fuck things up. Obama has cost us years by associating his lukewarm bluedog politics with the progressive movement. How could we not hate him for that?
Anyway this is getting crazy long, but I want to explain that there are legitimate reasons for the rabid hate you encounter John and I think the next 3 to 4 years down the line will prove we more right then wrong on this. Obama is taking us down the wrong path in this country, he shifted 15 degrees to the left from where Bush was taking us but we needed to make a left turn get off the road that was taking us off the cliff. Anything less than that was a failure that we are going to regret eventually.
And one more thing for everyone who loves to talk about political realities and pragmatic thinking and strategizing. The best defense, is a good offense. Republicans get away promoting bat shit crazy ideas and bull shit because they understand this. They advocate passionately for there nonsense and make facts up along the way to support it. We don’t even need to make up facts! But no one in the democratic party (well a few exceptions) is even advocating to begin with! We didn’t expect Obama to because we saw him for what he was but I guarantee you if he had tried we would have had better outcomes on every major bill. The corporate media is disgusting but its not totally owned by right wing interests and would give airtime to democrats who sounded like they actually gave a shit about what they were talking about.
But they don’t, the whole party leadership (Pelosi excluded) is as subservient to corporate interests as republicans, and that culture emanates down to the bottom.
So finally a last word on the tax cut deal. Given all we progressives have seen from Obama, I don’t think its unreasonable for us to attribute the deal not to some sort of last desperate attempt by Obama, and to call it a valiant effort, but to call it for what it is, Obama selling out another progressive idea for what he really believes in, which is tax cuts for the rich.
StacyMN
I mock your WV “blizzard”.
Love,
~ Minneapolis
Yutsano
@JPL:
I have to be honest, the fact that he kept the unemployment rate even and even got some job growth with all the headwinds he’s had to face is pretty remarkable to me. Also keep in mind unemployment rates can rise even when businesses are hiring because discouraged workers jump back into the fray and get counted again, so it can be a meaningless statistic. It’s better to look around and see how your neighbors are doing than anything else.
As far as the tax thing: that fight may not yet be over. This deal is a setback, but if he keeps 2 million people from starving in the winter I’m okay with a setback.
Omnes Omnibus
@Bruce (formerly Steve S.): Take a look at this comment from west coast at 143 above.
ETA: When I was in law school, my least favorite aunt asked my why I had chosen to go. One part of my answer was that I enjoyed argument. She replied with a torrent of abuse about how it stupid an answer that was. I was taken aback and and it obviously showed on my face. She replied, “well, you said you liked arguing, didn’t you?”
Suck It Up!
@NR:
you should read The Daily Howler sometime.
http://www.dailyhowler.com/
Obama is not infallible, but neither are the people we rely on for news or commentary.
scav
I’d say the bulk of us have disagreed with John and told him so and failed to provoke anything more than his usually cuddly fuck off once a quarter or so. Some people just apparently just run on the same model that bipartisanship-is doing-what-I-want-100%-of-the-time, c’est-á-dire, allowing-dissent-is-immediatly-agreeing-with-me-and-being-abjectly-polite-while-you’re-at-it.
ETA, Damn it all, I don’t think I’ve ever merited a personal fuck off myself. Sigh. Must go work on technique.
agrippa
I agree with John Cole.
Emerald
@Suck It Up!:
They are. And this is the low point in his presidency (low point in everybody’s presidency). Reagan fell to 31% in January of ’83, and the purist right were on fire about primarying him (http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/12/08/obama_silent_majority/index.html):
The point of this Salon article is that Obama, in terms of personal popularity in his party, is rather like Reagan was. The purist elites hated him but the rank-and-file never deserted him.
SBJules
@South of I-10:
It’s 75 in Santa Barbara too. I’d like to know about how the pork turns out. I still have my postcard from Michelle & Barak on my refrigerator; they’re fine with me.
Bruce (formerly Steve S.)
@west coast:
He told them to “fuck off” and “go somewhere else.” You did read those words, right? Or are we in another quantum universe where plainly written words can be ignored? What does “Seriously, just fuck off. Go somewhere else. You won’t be missed,” mean in your universe?
beulahmo
Hi, John. I hope you have a nice, relaxing day.
I’m sad to hear that it affects you so deeply. If you’ve tried to ignore them but find it impossible, and if they really are shitting up the place and adding nothing to the community, I think you’d be justified in banning them. Look, you tolerate such a wide range of viewpoints on your front page, that no fair-minded person could conclude that you’re simply looking to build an echo chamber and a supply of sycophants to build up your ego.
Look, I think everybody needs to tie a knot and hang on. Unfortunately, the Obama-hate-fest was/is really inevitable, imo. So many people, admittedly sincerely and with understandable reason, blame Obama (and the Dems in general) for a lack of toughness and a failure of “messaging;” but I think the real villain (if you absolutely have to have a villain to project your frustration on) is just the timing of the Wall Street disaster and the nature of the opposition party.
It really is remarkable, when you think about it, that during the 2008 campaign, Obama had greased the skids for repealing the upper bracket tax cuts — and he got broad support from the public for it. Think about how hard it is for Democratic candidates to successfully campaign to raise taxes (even if it is just on the richest 2% of Americans) and avoid having the Republicans squelch it by casting them as “tax and spend” Democrats. Nonetheless, the Republicans were beaten on this issue until the Wall Street melt-down and subsequent wrangling with Republicans over real stimulus spending (i.e., stuff like unemployment benefits and NOT tax cuts for millionaires). Republicans took advantage of the situation to scare the public and make it politically dangerous for Congressional Democrats to campaign, ahead of the 2010 midterms, for sunsetting the tax cuts on the rich. In fact, Republicans and the right-wing noise machine succeeded in distorting reality so much that Congressional Democrats were actually having to fight back against the widespread lie that most Americans’ taxes had gone up over the last two years, instead of down.
The stimulus spending was absolutely necessary, and Republicans exploited the inherent economic anxiety of the time, along with Americans’ alarm at the huge amounts of spending required to stave off a full-blown depression, in order to protect the one and only domestic priority of the Republican Party — protection and expansion of privilege for the very wealthy.
No amount of excellent messaging was going to overcome the timing of economic policy necessities or the scorched-earth, single-minded, unified focus of the opposition party. The Democrats’ agenda, being complex and involving so many “seats at the table,” didn’t have the simplicity of focus, and they simply could not adequately compete, message-wise with the Republicans. Therefore the agenda was hugely hobbled, the end.
Of course, if we’re patient and keep our eyes on the goal, the season will change again. The situation for Democrats, heading in to 2012, will be greatly helped if the economy improves. The tax “compromise” contains a lot of “stealth stimulus” to help make that happen. If Democrats can manage to keep from blowing it (by letting Republicans take control of the House before a deal is struck), it’ll set the stage for driving home their message during the 2012 campaign season. I think by that time, Democrats can win the messaging on sunsetting those tax cuts for the rich, like they did in 2008.
Tim
Wow, JC.
If four or five Internet commenters inside your computer, and I think it’s a lot more than that actually and I am occasionally one of them, who don’t toe the Obama line, can actually ruin your day or days and put you into a depression, you seriously need to look at a major life change.
But then I’ve said before that you seem to drink a shit load of alcohol, which has a MAJOR depressant after-effect. So maybe you should lay off, JC.
Also/too maybe you should stop hero-worshiping individual political leaders (first Bush, now Obama), as opposed to establishing and operating from a consistent political world-view that doesn’t rely on a cult of personality to sustain itself.
Also/also/too/too maybe you should stop accusing others of being overly “emo” since of late you have been posting a shit load of pouty pants emo front page rants.
But then, if you stopped all of the above, your thread comment counts might go back down to a reasonable level, and all the page hits would decrease, so…hmmm….
stuckinred
Back from the vet, I was sure it was Lil Bit the voracious cocker but it looks like it was the Bohdisattva. Things look ok but it’s still too soon to tell. RE: chocolate. This time yesterday that’s what I thought but grape/raisin toxicity is a stone bitch and they don’t really know why. It causes renal failure in some dogs.
thanks for all the kind words
scav
@Bruce (formerly Steve S.): Sweetheart, work out the logical difference involved in what you say and you’re being able to post it here at all.
Cat Lady
This is the first last and pretty much only place I can stand to read about politics anymore, and the past couple of weeks here have been too much for me too. The relentless whining of certain commenters says WAY more about them than Obama. I enjoy a discussion/argument more than the average person, but I want to learn something, not feel like if the person was sitting in the same room with me I’d have to hit them with something to make them shut. the. fuck. up. Seriously. Some of you need to get a life, or get some help, and you know who you are.
brendancalling
@Nora Carrington:
but having comments is half the point of having a blog! it’s the whole back and forth between writer and reader that makes blogs what they are.
Personally, I am more irritated with Obama than usual today, but because the thread is clearly meant for som fell-good time, i”ll keep those thoughts to myself.
But I’m really fucking pissed.
handy
Speaking of blizzards, anybody playing Cata? I shut my account down months ago but am thinking of reactivating it, except I’m hearing that leveling is butt-easy and that the Guild XP thing is all f’d up.
Bruce (formerly Steve S.)
@Omnes Omnibus:
Already responded to that one.
What do these words mean? “Seriously, just fuck off. Go somewhere else. You won’t be missed.” You seem to have a sophisticated interpretation, so please share it.
Dennis SGMM
Doesn’t a blizzard have something to do with snow?
It’s 75° here in the San Gabriel foothills. There is some snow on top of Mt. San Antonio, though, and it’s only twenty miles away.
/ducks, runs out of the room
JPL
Maybe John should open another open thread. I’d rather receive updates about Stuckinred’s dogs than read about Obama the failure. He gave a speech and had two lines about the left and several about Republicans. Gee, he said the Republicans were holding us hostage. You would think that would be important news.
El Tiburon
Wait a minute, why is Bernie Sanders doing something cool?
Oh, is he filibustering President McCain’s odious proposal to continue the disastrous tax-cuts for the rich that is decimating this country?
For fuck’s sake, how can you discuss what Sanders is doing without discussing why he is doing it?
So you have a socialist Senator, along with a liberal Democrat and conservative Democrat basically filibustering their own President; you have near unanimity from lefty-pundits and blogs across the spectrum saying that Obama has finally crossed the line-in-the-sand, yet it’s the ‘cranks’ around here who are the problem.
Sanders is receiving such high praise for standing up and doing what’s right. Not sitting back saying, “it’s the best we could do.”
Sanders is putting up a fight. Something apparently Obama will not do.
Tom Q
@Matt McIrvin: For the record, though it seemed he was putting alot of seats in jeopardy, the only seat lost in the process was his own — Biden’s, Hillary’s and Salazar’s were all held. You could maybe argue he cost solid challenges in AZ and KS by taking Napolitano and Sebellius, but I doubt the electoral environment would have enabled them to take seats this year. (Both might do better just ahead, esp. Napolitano vs. Kyl, should she choose)
As to the general point: I’m sending that “feet to the fire/burn at the stake” quote to everyone I know. It sums things up perfectly.
Admiral_Komack
@John Cole:
Damn.
I’m sorry to hear that.
jeffreyw
Mmm…pork roast
Davis X. Machina
@agrippa:
Well, I stand with CoCo, so there!
I come to these things late…
TR
@NR:
Yes, something is wrong with the base. Some of them clearly need to get their hearing checked, because when the president gave a press conference denouncing Republicans as “hostage takers” all they heard was “liberals are worse than Hitler!”
taylormattd
@Bruce (formerly Steve S.): How fucking dumb do you have to be to be unable to see that non-stop hysterical screeching from firebaggers might be annoying to John?
JPL
@stuckinred: Phew… You posted as I was typing. I’m pleased that Lil Bit is okay and I’ll keep the Bohdisattva in my thoughts.
Must be good news for McCain though.
trollhattan
I’m less concerned about the chronic annoying comment handwringing then the clear health dangers arising from living sealed up in a house eating nothing but pork and sauerkraut for several days.
For one thing, no open flames.
Bmaccnm
@NR:
I think there’s a difference between midterm discontent and actually voting for Mitt Romney over Barack Obama. I whine about my job, but I’m not actually leaving to work at a donut shop, not matter how often I say I will.
Tim Spence
I appreciate what you write about, John. I’ve noticed the same few asshats that do their whiny thing on your site.
I consistently enjoy your posting and those of your contributors. Keep it up. (I comment infrequently).
taylormattd
@blahblahgurgleblegblah: omg you fucking moron, Daily Kos is dominated by you people! Jesus you are stupid.
TR
@Uncle Clarence Thomas:
So the Jane Hamsher-Grover Norquist summit meeting fits into your worldview … how?
Bruce (formerly Steve S.)
@scav:
What’s John’s latest catchphrase? Oh yes, “Pro Tip.” Pro Tip: Never take advice from a stranger who calls you “sweetheart.”
agrippa
@Davis X. Machina:
cocoa?
I dont want no dang cocoa
yuk
Bruce (formerly Steve S.)
@taylormattd:
And another datapoint for my thesis. Thanks. See you in fifty comments.
Keith G
@Bruce (formerly Steve S.):
Or are you pulling legs, as it were?
It has been made clear that Cole was not complaining about dissent, he was was telling those who purposefully/continually engage in vituperative excess (removed from any logical context) to stop it. Many here agree.
Since you can’t be so thick as to not be able to discern his meaning, you must be on a mission of bull shit.
I hope.
El Tiburon
Only slightly off topic, but maybe someone can help me here.
Back to the HCR debate, especially vis-a-vis the public option portion.
Wasn’t the big divide between the Hamsher/Greenwald camp and Balloon Juice, et al camp that Obama didn’t have the votes?
Didn’t Hamsher claim that the votes were and the others that he did not? And that the votes were not there, Obama was not going to pursue it? Am I close to being right here?
Isn’t that the same dynamic happening here? Obama does not have the votes, so Biden, along with others, are twisting arms to get the votes?
What gives? Where was all the arm-twisting in the HCR debate for the public-option?
Or am I missing something?
Yutsano
@agrippa: What if it had peppermint schnapps or Bailey’s in it? There are sweeteners to the pot.
MikeJ
@Cat Lady:
Sadly, the ones who most need it probably don’t know it.
scav
@Bruce (formerly Steve S.): Cool! You can pick up on nuance — bravo.
stuckinred
@JPL: Thanks, he’s a Wiley Coyote.
Omnes Omnibus
@Bruce (formerly Steve S.): Fine, dissent does not have to equal shouting down a discussion. Having thread after thread usurped by people proclaiming that Obama is nothing but a liar and his intention has always been to privatize Social Security and use old people as Soylent Green does not actually create an informed debate on the issues. Having someone appear on the same thread and state that this deal was terrible, should not have been made, and then listing three reasons to support the premise does create an informed debate. If people drop the f-bomb or call one another stupid during the course of it, it is not a big deal. Does this make sense to you?
sparky
okie-dokie. i’d certainly rather have the pile-on on the folks like yours truly than say inadvertent collisions with bloggers that cannot be named. and yes, i mean that seriously.
i cannot speak for anyone else, but i think part of the communication breakdown here that “Obama” can mean too many different concepts here. personally, i have no feelings about him one way or the other, as i am concerned with his acts rather than his persona.*
here is a short (ha!) explanation of what it looks like to me is going on here.
the Obama supporters seem for the most part, to think that the problem is within the system, so to speak, and consequently the solutions are within the system. once i also thought that, but no longer. the process model of governance in this country has always had its flaws, but it usually also bore some rough relationship to reality. there are a few times when that was not true, and those times tend to have labels like “Civil War” or “Great Depression”. i don’t know if this time will be like those times, but i do believe that the gap has become a chasm, and that the usual process manouvers cannot work, because the process has been pulled off its axis by the all-powerful FIRE sector* and its colleague the National Security State.
in other words, some people here are acting as if the model of governance you know both explains and provides a solution to these problems. i don’t. i think at some post WWII point, the reality and the perceptions started to diverge. now, after decades of misleading propaganda, attacks and all manner of bashing, the republic you think is still there is gone. evidence, you say? fair enough. how about this: every single time, when the smoke clears on a major issue under this administration, the oligarchy has emerged with enhanced power.
i, at least, sometimes find it difficult to convey this well without sounding like either a crazy conspiracy theorist or a crank (and no i have no problem with being labeled both). on this blog the openness facilitates conflict: someone like me will come along and say something like “if you look at the big picture, the US is still headed in exactly the same direction it was in under Jr.” six Obama/D supporters will then say something along the lines of “Obama inherited all these problems, can’t turn the ship of state,” etc. the point a crazy crank like me is trying to make is that none of those statements matter because they are not the reasons for the action. like other forms of propaganda, they act to paper over a gap between rhetoric and reality, and to give comfort to those who may need it. they are excuses rather than explanations.
i think it’s difficult to look at the directions the US is taking, internally and externally, and not be shocked and saddened. this is difficult both for people who (wrongly in my opinion) think that the problem is “just the GOP” or some variant, and for people who are alarmed by what they see as the slow-motion capture of a flawed but functioning republic. from my perspective, it looks like the former group of people here sometimes prefer to shoot the messenger, so to speak. the messenger, in turn becomes frustrated and angry. this clash is exacerbated by the dissonance between the free-wheelingness of the place and the more conventional views held by a sizeable number of the commenters.
none of this is to make an excuse for intemperate assaults. unless the snark level is fabu :)
last note–to me it doesn’t necessarily follow from any of the above that the US is doomed, at least not immediately. it does follow for me that actual, substantive change in the direction of the US will not come from either major political party as currently constituted.
*not saying persona etc don’t matter, but from my perspective none of that is relevant for this comment.
**in 1929 the FIRE sector was only 13% of the US economy.
General Stuck
Some come here to sit and think,
some come here to shit and stink,
but I come here to itch my balls,
and read the writing on the walls.
beulahmo
@Tim:
Since JC readily admits his
flawsquirks and errors, we cut him slack and see those things as endearing JC features.PurpleGirl
@Suck It Up!: Tomorrow it is going to rain, all day, heavy too.
WyldPirate
@NR:
Precisely, NR.
There are a bunch of people here who think that those that point out the blindingly obvious have the power to swing a poll like that in less than a week. There are even dumbasses that think that we are paid by the Koch brothers to come here and post just to hurt your little feefees. Not one “crank” that is that deranged but multiple cranks.
That is the same poll that, btw, said Obama’s disapproval among his base rose 10%. That is not even an entire week out from this “deal” that he cut with the Rethugs. Sure it’s one poll, but it is a fucking trend if a boat load of them come out with the same thing. It is a trend that reinforces what I have heard from my friends that I worked with on the Obama campaign. It is a “trend” that I have heard from my four dyed-in-the-wool liberal aunts who haven’t voted for a Republican in their lives. They are pissed over this deal and the capitulation it represents and the piss poor planning by the entire Democratic Party that painted them into this corner.
The people that criticize Obama here didn’t do that. We didn’t influence that poll. Obama’s actions did. I would almost bet money when you get polls coming out that were taken completely AFTER this deal, that the numbers will be as bad or worse.
You can talk all the shit in the world about the black portion of the electorate not abandoning Obama. That’s fine, but do the math. Ten percent of the Dem base is damn near the totality of the black electorate. Of course this doesn’t mean that those people won’t vote for him in the end, but he can’t afford to be pissing anyone off–particularly on purpose–that voted for and worked for him.
And fuck all of ya’ll if you think that I don’t recognize this is mostly the dysfunctional Senate’s fault. Of course I recognize it. Fuck, I think we should have a Constitutional amendment abolishing the damned Senate. But I recognize the passivity of the Dems as well. The willingness to just give in–to give shit away before you even go to the damned negotiating table. To cut worse deals than you should have. Obama did that and has done it again and again.
How in the fuck is it a “good deal” to make the lowest of the wage earners end up paying more? How the fuck is it a good deal to borrow $500 per person per year just to give money to people who can’t even figure out how to spend the money they already have and whose take of the national income pie has gone up five-fold over the past 30 years while the median wage has remained stagnant and GDP has gone up and up?
What Obama did was act like a kid that gets his fucking lunch box stolen every day from him by bullies. Now he is so used to it that he just hands it over to them. On top of that, he is shouting at his friends who say “Barack, why in the hell are you just giving it away?–Stand up for yourself.”
And what do you hear from people hear mostly? “Oh. It’s not Obama’s fault.” “He can’t do anything about this.” “It’s those other guys fault.”
This teflon Obama shit is not an answer. Keep on pretending that it is and keep on kissing each others ass about how great he is. If you keep on doing that–and Obama keeps on doing what he is doing, I’ll guarantee you he won’t be president on Jan 20, 2013. The Rethuglicans in the Senate are not going to change. They completely rolled Obama and the Dems on this. They are in charge when they are not in charge with a majority in anything. If there is not a brutal and very public showdown and if it doesn’t happen very soon, this shit is going to keep on happening. Government will be reduced to total gridlock unless the Rethugs get their way. This issue of the taxes and the UI extension should have been held before the election. It should have been the central plank of the Democratic campaign–that and the inequality and the class warfare being waged against Americans by the rich and the Republicans.
Obama and the Dems cannot run from this showdown forever. If they continue to run, the electorate will call them on their weakness and stay at home or throw them the fuck out.
sparky
in the same way, i don’t think that my viewpoint entails thinking it isn’t better in some ways to have Ds in power than Rs. some of the rhetoric along that line has been not helpful or well thought-out.
johnny walker
“I don’t know if you realize how draining it is, no matter what I write, having the same four to five shitheads come into the comments and go all emo and tell us how everything is Barack Obama’s fault. I write that Bernie Sanders did something cool, and the usual suspects start in with their crap- “If only Obama cared! How’s that hope and change working out.”
Uh, Cole? That thread came immediately before this one. I was looking at it literally 5 seconds ago. One single person came into that thread with “how’s that hopey votey stuff working out?” The rest of the thread was a discussion of whether or not Sanders’ stunt was effective in its own right, with a little sidebar about Orzsag going over to Citi.
And hey guess what? You aren’t the only one who can troll on a fucking blog, so maybe you should consider to what degree your propensity for 1) hyperbolic emo tantrums and 2) trolling your own blog might have brought you to this juncture. The issue of you turning 1 guy into “4-5 shitheads” aside, I get it: in your mind you only troll the blog because other people are mean and say snarky things and disagree with you in ways you don’t like. What I’m wondering is whether you realize what a line of self-serving bullshit that justification is. If you want to act like trolling is a capital offense then here’s a crazy idea: take your own advice and don’t fuckin’ troll your own readers. Say shit that you mean, and if at that point people are going overboard deal with it calmly.
Here you are playing the victim, but your own trolling has gotten so bad that people can’t even figure out who you’re stringing along with this sudden about-face on the tax compromise — the only thing most people feel certain about is that you’re fucking with somebody. I don’t believe you’re sincere either, but if you are consider what it means about your recent behavior that you’re (allegedly) having an honest change of heart on an important issue and your readers don’t even buy that you’re doing it for any other reason than to wind them up and get hits.
And gee, amazingly enough the first “leave Obama alone!” post in 2-3 days suddenly has 200+ comments, after the last few from “reasonable Cole” topped out around 75. What a shocking, amazing coincidence that I totally don’t consider suspicious at all.
El Tiburon
@sparky:
I think this is a fair assessment.
Now, this goes without saying, but I will say it: This is not Obama’s fault, at least not entirely. But he is, naturally, a very big part of this.
This has been my point all along. Did not health insurance companies stocks rise after the dust settled? Are they not guaranteed of millions more customers?
Is Wall Street not handing out record bonuses as the working class continue to lose their jobs and their homes?
The estate tax limits continue to move in favor of the wealthy.
You know, whatever. Go Obama. Fight, fight fight. Sis-boom-bah.
Yutsano
@WyldPirate: You’ll forgive me for not losing my shit over Obama’s impending doom over one poll two years away from his next election.
El Tiburon
@johnny walker:
Somebody is going to the principal’s office.
Bruce (formerly Steve S.)
@Keith G:
That’s funny, because I don’t remember the words “vituperative excess” from John’s post. I do remember this: “manic progressive…jackasses…Seriously, just fuck off. Go somewhere else. You won’t be missed.” Wouldn’t want any excess vituperation around here.
gogol's wife
@Svensker:
Too much “Sugar Sugar.”
agrippa
@Yutsano:
Baileys
works well
JPL
Since this is an open thread, the NYTimes thought this article was fit to print today ..link
johnny walker
@El Tiburon: Heh, I can’t figure out if you’re referring to me or Cole. All I’ll add is that what I’m saying here comes from almost 30 years of being an explosive, self-justifying asshole. One of the big reasons I still come here is that I identify with Cole and I see that he can sometimes take his lumps and admit he’s wrong. I hope this is one of those times.
ino shinola
Could somebody tell me what happened last weekend? I was away from the internet for three days and when I came back the whole world was suddenly just utterly miffed at Obama’s critics of the leftern persuasion. I don’t know how many times I saw the term “professional left”. I even read the phrase – are you ready for this? – “liberal establishment” on a non-winger websit.
The man is painfully centrist, we get that. The difference in tension between his butt-cheeks is undetectable with current technology. But ferchrissake, he froze federal wages. Out of the blue, he froze federal wages. When every economist in the world, including the ghost of Milton Friedman, said the economic effects would be insignificant, probably negative, he froze federal wages. As a purely symbolic gesture, as a sacrifice to a discredited right-wing graven image, in a thoroughly baffling act of preemptive political capitulation, he froze federal wages. Why did he freeze federal wages? (Only most recent last straw cited, other examples of suicidal bargaining tactics and mealy-headed centrism available on request)
I’ve never heard a progressive say he’s the worst ever. I know some (one here) who think re-establishing an activist government is our only hope of reversing 30 years of drain-circling. But we’re profoundly disappointed that the greatest motivator since St. Ronald the Inflatable believes that a corrupt political system which actively discourages popular participation is just fine with a little bipartisan tweaking thank you very much. And that the near-total collapse of the world economy didn’t appear to elicit any doubt in him about the credibility of his advisors.
Yes, I’m disappointed. I’ll continue to speak out against his actions I disagree with. I’ll give him credit for actions I consider positive. Giving the American health care system a shot at cracking the international top 20 was a remarkable achievement, I seriously mean that.
He’s not the worst ever, he’s Bill Clinton. It’s just that Clinton had enough phony money left in the economy to mask the corrosive effects of free market idolatry.
El Tiburon
@johnny walker:
Mr. Cole would be the principal.
+1
Bnut
Just to add to the heady discussion: GO NAVY FUCK ARMY
General Stuck
@Yutsano:
shorter wildythang – Take a look at the big board! [falls, rolls and gets up quickly] They’re gettin’ ready to clobber us!
NR
@John Cole: I know you weren’t blaming liberal bloggers for Obama’s drop in the polls. I was replying to another commenter who did say that.
Keith G
@Bruce (formerly Steve S.): Oh wow. That was excessive.
Omnes Omnibus
@Bruce (formerly Steve S.): At this point, I will simply conclude that you are being willfully obtuse. Good day, sir.
Mnemosyne
@Bruce (formerly Steve S.):
They mean, “If you can’t be constructive — or at least interesting — go somewhere else where your repetitive bullshit will be appreciated.”
Do you seriously see no difference between being banned and being told to fuck off if you don’t like the way things are run around here?
NR
@Suck It Up!: You’re the one saying that Obama’s problems with his base are not caused by his breaking one of his most important campaign promises, but rather by liberal bloggers complaining about him breaking one of his most important campaign promises.
Believe me, I’m not the one in the bubble.
agrippa
Well, I do not know about this.
Because I am not impressed with the performance of any of those people in Washington.
As far as I am concerned what was done did not do what I think needed to be done. Maybe I am a legend in my own mind, but that is what I think.
Now, it looks to me like people are running around yelling about how it is the other guy’s fault we all got fired. If people gotta do that, such is life.
I saw three priorities ( this is straight out triage): a big stimulus; a strong financial reform bill; expand medicare to age 55. I don’t see that was done. I think that the Dems were punished for it.
I do not give two hoots for the GOP. My cat has more sense than most of them.
That is my story and I am sticking to it.
General Stuck
like I been sayin’, some of you alls been circling Obama like a bunch of giddy buzzards waiting for an opportunity. It is so obvious as to be embarrassing, the utter lack of self control.
And the compulsive nature of it, is simply breathtaking in it’s raw energy and relentlessness. But it will not cause any rise in my blood pressure today, no more than taking a righteous dump .
here is a short list of major polls the past week or two.
Obama’s numbers have actually jumped a point or two since the election. Ever heard of outlier?
so yawn. I’m walking the dog, and then root for the wildcats to whomp indy. GO Cats!!
NR
@Bmaccnm: I doubt that many Democrats who are unhappy with Obama right now will end up voting for Romney, or any other Republican. I would even bet that most of them will end up voting for Obama in the end, rather than going third-party or staying home.
But will they donate to him the way they did in 2008? Will they get out there and canvass for him the way they did in 2008? That’s what Obama needs to worry about. If he keeps pissing on his base, the unprecedented ground game he had in 2008 is not going to be there in 2012. And that is a serious problem.
a1
I hope you have a better day, John Cole. But this paragraph of paranoid smears and hysterics on your part is not only a really weak defense of your position, but it shows how you know how weak your position is.
Someone once made a great point about the religious fanatics who were issuing death threats for drawing Mohammed. If they really, truly believed in their religion, why would they get so upset about someone drawing a picture? Even if you thought it was blasphemy or whatever, wouldn’t you just feel sad for the unbelievers for not realizing the truth (‘they know not what they do”), or at worst, have a chuckle at their expense since they’ll be going to hell and you won’t? Why get so furious?
It’s because they don’t have faith in their religion! In the back of their minds lurks a horrible thought – that the belief system they’ve invested so much emotion and tradition might be complete bullshit. And their fear of that being true is so overwhelming they’ll get hysterical, even violent, at it even getting mentioned.
Remember that great picture of Obama with the caption “Chill the fuck out – I got this!”? How many people badly wanted to believe that was the case? (I do think he “got this” on health care, BTW) And how many people believe that’s true today? (hint: if you think Obama has no ability to stop a Senate filibuster, you don’t)
Finally, that quoted paragraph reminds me of the great Crackpot Index for physics cranks – I find it fun to imagine how someone could get over 300 points on that scale.
beulahmo
@sparky:
I understand what you mean. I can easily discuss critiques of Obama’s performance, but when the discussion begins to include attacks on perceived flaws in his person, I begin to suspect that the critic has devolved into a hater, and that just annoys me. Greatly. I happen to like him, but that doesn’t mean I think he can do no wrong. On the flip side of that coin, I never liked Bill Clinton, but I enthusiastically voted for him and will defend much of his performance as president.
I think you have that right. But I don’t know if I agree with your conclusions (I’m not sure what they are). My view is that the “default setting” of the natural balance of power in this country pretty much will always be in the wealthiest hands. But I think there will always be brief windows of opportunity when the “lower” 50% to 75% gather enough political will to break the inertia and push back against the oligarchy. I think the recurring will to push back will never go away. The real danger is when, among the “lower” 50 to 75, methods of organizing are stamped out by the state (the Constitution helps protect us from that) or communication (and therefore, ability to organize) becomes so degraded that the lower 50 – 75 become persuaded that our “enemies” are each other.
This article/essay doesn’t go in the direction I was going, but it covers some of what we’re talking about. You might find it interesting.
NR
@TR: Why don’t you read what Grover Norquist had to say about Obama’s tax deal?
Giants Fan
No one’s going to respond to @Rob in DC? Seems like that’s a pretty good case for why people are disappointed in Obama. I think the best case is the one Greenwald makes (beyond the specific disappointments): (1) if you offer unconditional support to a politician, you have zero leverage and will be taken for granted; (2) Obama campaigned not merely on health, Gitmo, ending the war in Iraq, but his central theme was CHANGE, and specifically change in the way Washington works. One cannot blame Obama for the Bush economy, the deficit, etc., but Obama is certainly perpetuating business as usual with special interests (Health insurers had a back room deal, Wall Street got financial reform watered down, got 100 cents on the dollar on the AIG disaster, etc.). But the central theme of his campaign was that WE were the ones we’ve been waiting for, and since he had this massive grass roots outreach and people like me were volunteering and donating, he could sidestep the lobbyists and corporate special interests because he would not need their money to buy votes. He had the coalition and the votes and the demographic trends. But he squandered so much of that, and he’s basically stuck with a Washington that works exactly as before – perhaps more so given the disastrous decision in Citizens United (also not his fault obviously). But there was a moment after the inauguration where there was actually hope because the citizenry had been mobilized. And that’s really the only antidote to the special interests – voters who would have rallied behind their president because he wasn’t playing the Washington game. I imagine many think that’s naive, and maybe so, but it was what he explicitly campaigned on and has not delivered. That in addition to the civil rights abuses and cover-up of Bush era crimes that Rob in DC enumerated.
Anne Laurie
@stuckinred:
__
Thanks for the update — I hope your guys come through okay!
What I had been told is that chocolate, and grapes, are “bad for” dogs in much the same way that booze is “bad for” humans. Most dogs, most of the time, can scarf down a few hershey kisses with no worse outcome than a case of the runs, and if they get access to a five-pound sack, they’ll just end up puking all over themselves and everything within a five-foot radius. (Friends who lived with ‘indiscriminate eater’ dogs keep a bottle of hydrogen peroxide around to induce vomiting for just such emergencies.) But just as there’s always a few college kids who end up dead or permanently damaged when they “experiment” with booze, some dogs will succeed in killing themselves if they get access to chocolate, so the safe default is “Don’t”.
I had not heard (had the misfortune to find out) about grape toxicity as something that affects some dogs more than others, but I’m going to be a lot more careful about raisins in the future!
HRA
@fasteddie9318:
“I’m sorry, you must be new around here. Let me introduce you to the United States Senate. Senate, HRA. HRA, Senate. And the answer to your question is no, it couldn’t.”
I have been here for about a year at least.
No need to introduce me to the Senate. Part of my job is to prepare the Senate hearings for our depository library at the U. The truth is I get twice as many and more hearings from the House than I do from the Senate. That also includes committee hearings from both.
Mnemosyne
@ino shinola:
I will admit, I still don’t get what the big deal is and why people freaked the fuck out. Public employees in every state have had their wages frozen if they’re lucky — here in California, there have been a lot of involuntary furloughs and closing state offices on weekdays.
I don’t think it was a great idea, but it wasn’t the last straw for me by any means. And I think that’s a big part of the problem: the people for whom it was the last straw are getting pissed off at those of us who don’t get what the big deal is because we’re not taking their last straw seriously enough.
johnny walker
@ino shinola: After cutting the tax deal w/ the Republicans Obama gave a presser where he basically said that he did what was necessary to get the best possible scenario / lesser of (x) evils / etc. situation for the country. Described the Republicans as hostage-takers, said maybe people don’t think it was wise to negotiate with hostages, but that changes if the hostages (American people) get hurt (via lack of an unemployment extension). Went on to essentially say that people who were criticizing the bill from the left were more worried about ideological purity than getting stuff done. Used the word “sanctimonious” to describe the attitude he sees in his liberal critics, so you’ll be seeing that word pop up in liberal snark along with the classics about drug testing, “fucking retarded,” etc. Closed that section with what I guess is his idea of a pep talk, which I figure deserves to be quoted verbatim:
You can see that this whole distinction between results vs. doing the best you can (leaving aside whether or not one buys that Obama has made a serious effort on the “tried but failed” portions) comes straight from the top.
Anyway, I forget the exact timeline of liberal criticism vs. Obama presser, but the event that prompted the presser was a bunch of liberals — bloggers, professional left, Dem pols, etc — shitting all over the tax compromise.
At least I assume that’s what you were referring to. This happened more towards the beginning/middle of the week than last weekend iirc.
—
As for him being Clinton, I can see that. I don’t think he’s that far off from Clinton in the big picture; I think his performance is on par with Just Another Democrat and isn’t much better or worse than we might’ve seen with for instance Kerry — assuming Kerry had the House and a 59/60-vote Senate anyway. But you’re right that the country is in a drastically different place so the expectations are greater. I suppose some people would say that it isn’t reasonable to expect anything more outt’ve leaders in times of crisis than we normally would, but I certainly would not be sympathetic. Or yknow, maybe that’s just a strawman I made up. I don’t know, how do we feel about the idea of greater expectations in times like these?
Anyway, it isn’t a secret that being President is hard work. Ability to step up when the pressure’s on and your back’s up against the wall is part of the measure of a person’s character. I have even more cliches that can be applied here if you like, some of them sports-related!
Bnut
Beating a dead drum: Navy 24 Army 10. Future Marine officers giving the beat down to those Dogs.
Anne Laurie
@Keith G:
__
Yeah, that’s not a ‘leg’ Bruce is pulling.
If only he’d go into another room before indulging… and then wash his hands afterwards.
FlipYrWhig
You know what would be a good solution to this? Yet another comparison of Obama’s situation to card-playing or schoolyard bullying as it took place during the Eisenhower era!
The thing that gets me — and, look, I know I can be as repetitive as any of the Obama detractors — is that there are commenters who appear to lie in wait to post “bwahaha” and “toldja so” comments on every. damn. thread. There’ll be a post about something in the news, and within the first 10 posts will be someone saying, “Betcha Obama caves”; or there’ll be a post where a front-pager voices disappointment, and within the first 10 posts will be someone saying, “Glad you came around.” It really does turn into the political equivalent of “Fuck Tom Brady, he looks like a girl.”
There’s dissent, debate, and dialogue, and then there’s just straight-up trollery and douchebaggery, and we’ve seen _tons_ of that over the past few weeks. It’s not even fighting about politics, it’s just badgering and abuse.
I think it’s pretty easy to tell the difference between “This deal blows and is bad for Democratic politics and I’m pissed off at Obama for making it for the following reasons” and “This deal blows, Obama’s a pu$$y, and if you defend the deal, you’re a brainwashed fanboy loser,” which lately barely even takes the deal or whatever the immediate news item is as a jumping-off point, and just goes straight into “Obama has no balls, toldja so, I’ve been disappointed in him since the bitter-cling speech and with every passing moment my utter rightness is only more confirmed, and anyone who disagrees with me is an asshole, and I’m already disappointed in his next offense against basic human decency, which, oh, believe me, is coming sooner than you could possible imagine.”
Mike M
The accomplishments of the past two years would look a whole lot different (and substantially more progressive) if the Senate had gotten rid of or substantially reformed the filibuster. By its structure, the Senate is already anti-democratic, favoring the views of the big empty states over the more populous ones. Under the current rules, a single senator of either party can delay or block just about any nomination, legislation, or treaty.
I noticed that when I raise the topic of filibuster reform that many progressives will immediately raise the concern that when the Republicans inevitably take control of the Senate, then they will be able to pass any legislation that they like. Well, it seems to me that they are already largely in control anyway, even as a minority under these rules. As it stands, the Democrats have gotten the blame for lack of progress in any case because, after all, they are the ones in the majority.
Yutsano
@Bnut: Dawgs beating up Dogs? That’s some kind of bizarre logic there. :)
stuckinred
@Bnut: Maybe things are different now but my old man was a mustang, 4 years in the Pacific on an APD as an enlistedman and then a commission in time for Korea. He fucking hated Academy officers. I was a enlisted dog face and only encountered one puke from the West Point Protective Association and the idea that the line troops were all “Go Army” and “Go Navy” never occurred to us.
FlipYrWhig
@johnny walker:
Well, I’d say that he used the word “sanctimonious” to describe the attitude he sees in his sanctimonious, purity-mongering critics, most of whom are liberal. I think it’s sleazy for the major bloggers to pretend, continually, that Obama has an issue with all liberals or even all critics, as opposed to his obvious issue with people who evaluate all politics according to an artificially high standard of what they think would be best. Those are the people Emanuel called “fucking retarded” and their leaders are the ones Gibbs called the “professional left.”
TR
@NR:
What an incredible discovery you’ve made! A Republican who only cares about tax cuts for the rich likes a proposal with tax cuts for the rich. My God, you’re like Einstein here.
Obama got a lot more out of this deal for Democrats than Grover did for Republicans — which, incidentally, is why Grover is out there trying to convince other Republicans that this really is a good deal for them.
Ezra Klein ran a handy comparison on what each side gets in this deal. As much as I’d love to see Grover Norquist drowned in a bathtub, I’m not going to judge the merits of a deal by what that shithead thinks of it.
I have an uncle whose unemployment benefits are about to run out, and this deal will save his ass. I’d be happy to pass along his phone number if you’d like to call him and let him know he and his family should go fuck themselves because your precious ideological purity is offended.
johnny walker
@General Stuck: “We all”* have had complaints about Obama for quite awhle, and the whole time “you all”* have been telling us we only feel that way because we hate him personally, have pissy-pants hurt feelings, etc. Now that he’s gone and caved in a way that a larger-than-usual portion of the liberal/dem commentosphere can agree is a cave, the line from you** is, “Ah, see! You’ve just been waiting for the opportunity to pounce!”
Whatever works, I guess. Whatever it takes to keep convincing yourself** that the problem here is liberals. Did Obama make a bad decision? Will it ultimately hurt or harm the country? … Fuck that! The adults know nobody cares about that, it’s all about the hippies’ “compulsive natures” and pathological hatred and the like.
I picture a siren in Stuck’s head: alert, this is not a drill, Obama may have actually fucked up this time, etc. Time to really put those talking points he’s been working on to the test!
*meaning amorphous, ill-defined groups of people who do not necessarily share the same opinions, or if they do may have come to those conclusions using different reasoning
**meaning stuck specifically
Keith G
Is this thread a self fulfilling prophesy?
cckids
@TR:
Thank you.
TR
@FlipYrWhig:
No, he used the word “sanctimonious” to describe a hypothetical future in which he theorized that a collective “we” — liberals and the president — might refuse to compromise at all and thereby get nothing done. “We” could feel sanctimonious about keeping our ideological purity intact, but that would be about all “we” — in this hypothetical future — would be able to accomplish.
The only liberals who have a right to be offended by that sanctimonious line are liberals who live in the hypothetical future of the president’s imagination. Is that you?
FlipYrWhig
@Mike M: I agree with you about filibuster reform — but I also have some concern that some of the Democrats who lend their votes to these 53-vote counts that fail wouldn’t necessarily still lend their votes if they actually made the bills pass. If it took 51 votes to pass a bill, my cynical view is that some of those 53-47 counts would probably end up 48-52, and we’d still all be frustrated about why good things weren’t passing. Still, I think the government can’t function with a supermajority requirement in an era when voters and the media aren’t willing or able to hold obstruction against those doing the obstructing, or to shame the shameless.
Mnemosyne
@NR:
Good thing all of the right-wing blogs haven’t been in a lather this past week about how the deal was a total giveaway to the Democrats, or else you’d look pretty silly right now trying to claim that Norquist’s attempt to calm the troops is a straight-up endorsement of the deal.
stuckinred
@Keith G: I hope not, I’m worried to death about my dogs.
DickSpudCouchPotatoDetective
@Bruce (formerly Steve S.):
Here’s a real ProTip: Don’t call other commenters “sweetheart.” Whether that person is male, or female, unless it’s your spouse and you mean it.
It’s right out of the high school boys’ PE locker room.
Be a man and call your adversary “asshole” and “motherfucker” and be honest about it. And then expect the same in return. And don’t whine about it. Dish it, take it, and move on.
TR
@Keith G:
Perhaps. But no more so than liberals who thought the president called them sanctimonious and decided to show him he was wrong by getting sanctimonious.
Brilliant!
Omnes Omnibus
@TR: I think you two are talking past one another on the the same side of this issue. Just my opinion.
stuckinred
@TR: Oh, THAT part of the thread.
Mnemosyne
@Keith G:
I think it’s an attempt to tie the jagoffs to this thread so the rest of us can have rational discussions about non-Obama-related things on the other threads.
WyldPirate
@Yutsano:
You’re excused, but may I ask what part of this you did not understand?
I’ll be the first to admit if the economy picks up and we add 3.5 million jobs between now and the summer of ’12, then Obama will probably win going away. Hell, *I’ll be the first to admit that if Palin or some other insane shitbag Rethug got the nomination that he will probably win.
I don’t see the job recovery happening like that, though. You made the point, I think in this thread, that the US economy has added 1 million jobs this year. That is not enough to even keep up with the people entering the workforce. In fact, it is about 500K too few. On top of that, After the ’01 recession, it took 5 years for the jobs lost to recover to the previous level.
Jewish Steel
Man!
The # of commenters (on this thread alone!) who show minimal reading comprehension skills, let alone any grasp of rhetoric…why do they bother?
It’s kind of like when your favorite band goes from being your little secret to The Next Big Thing. You’ve got to figure the folks on stage are appreciating the attention but thinking, “Where did all these shitheads come from?”
FlipYrWhig
@TR: Is the “you” at the end of your comment directed at me? The portion you’re quoting wasn’t my idea, I was quoting johnny walker.
joe from Lowell
John,
The issue here is that you, and they, have different definitions of “the problem.”
You think the problem is the failure to get good policies through.
They think the problem is that they, and their heroes, don’t run the Democratic Party. Don’t believe me? Look at how much of their commentary revolves around the two themes “We’re the base and we want respect!” and “Hippie punching!” All factional infighting, all the time. It’s the most important thing to them.
When you look at it from their point of view, their identification of Obama as the problem makes a lot of sense.
TR
@Omnes Omnibus:
No, you’re absolutely right. That quote is from johnny walker and not flip yr whig.
Sorry for the mistake, flip.
DickSpudCouchPotatoDetective
@WyldPirate:
You talk as if the decision were made in a vacuum. As if you were writing a made for tv movie.
In fact, it was made in reality, with the real prospects of paralysis, suspension of unemployment benefits, tax hikes for working people, and deferment of the issue to a new and more hostile congress, and complete loss of the lame duck session and any other opportunities for getting something done. But all of that means nothing when you have your stupidass rant on, right?
These realities make your entire several-day schtick here just a complete towering steaming pile of How Fucking Dumb Can You Possilby Get bullshit.
But, you know that, right? This is all just a harangue, for fun?
chaseyourtail
Thank you John! Sometimes I feel like I’m overly defensive with those O-haters but I can’t stand their relentless crusade against the President. They viciously attack him no matter what he does. I feel there are times when the President makes the wrong decision but overall I think he makes the best decision he can under the circumstances. I’m not an O-bot because I see that Obama is doing a pretty good job all things considered.
John, I want you to know that I really like this blog and I appreciate all the hard work you put into it. Have a great night and enjoy your pork shoulder. I bet it turns out great!
johnny walker
@FlipYrWhig: Seriously? The idea that the “sanctimonious” comment was directed at the liberals is one that can’t pass without argumentation huh?
Alright dude, if you say so. I thought that was a pretty fair, down-the-middle description of what went down. Apparently the people who’re convinced other people always have to find something to argue about always have to… oh, yknow.
Uriel
It’s like I said back during the HCR thing: holding your leaders feet to the fire is a good and necessary thing- on the other hand, french kissing your acetylene blow-torch every night before passing out in ecstasy over what imagined slight the morow might bring, well that’s a bit less laudible.
FlipYrWhig
@joe from Lowell: I think it _is_ a problem that liberals and progressives don’t run the Democratic party, or, at least, life and politics would be much better if they did. Making that happen, though, is a Herculean task, and a Democratic party that was comprised of only progressives would take excellent stands on every issue and get smoked 70-30 in the Senate. If a liberal majority was possible, being ballsy and uncompromising would be easy, and grudgingly accepting incremental progress would be an incomprehensible sell-out. I just don’t think a liberal majority is possible anytime soon, and while good, smart people try their damnedest to build it, we may have to choke down a few shit sandwiches along the way, because otherwise we starve.
WyldPirate
@a1:
exactly.
the same goes for all of the rest of “it’s everyone else’s fault but Obama’s here”, and :”everyone who says mean things about Obama is ruining this blog”.
What it is is weak fucking defense of what is seemingly serial capitulation by Obama. This serial capitulation seems to be tilting the board more in favor of the powerful in this country and less towards those who have suffered the most from the tilt towards the right in this country–and its increasing deterioration–since Reagan.
west coast
@Bruce (formerly Steve S.): I did read the whole thing. Every word. Twice. I agree with John.
It’s not “debate” or “dissent” for people to pull out their microscopic intellectual puds in public and insist that we all watch as they gratify themselves. Like John I don’t particularly like wading through endless masturbatory whanging in these comment sections, and like John I think people who do that should fuck of and go elsewhere. They’re doing the online version of “look at me” and, frankly, I don’t have the time to waste on what David Niven once called “shortcomings.” (You might look that up, it was at the Oscars.)
johnny walker
@TR:
“The only liberals who have a right to be offended by that sanctimonious line are liberals who live in the hypothetical future of the president’s imagination. Is that you?”
Haha, wow. The mental gymnastics here are really breathtaking to behold. Ok, what that boils down to is you saying that Obama doesn’t actually think the liberals are out of line for having *actually* criticized Obama in real life, because he wasn’t actually referring to an existing iteration of them. So I guess liberals complaining about Obama isn’t an actual problem and we can stop bitching about liberals bitching about Obama, because he doesn’t actually feel it’s a problem, knows best, etc?
See, the problem with ad-hoc justifications is what happens when they get applied to something beyond the specifically-defined instance you’re trying to argue. Beyond that you’re just flat-out wrong: the section about what “will” happen in a hypothetical future is his predicted result of current behavior:
are: present tense
measuring: gerund (or maybe present participle. I’m not entirely clear on the distinction)
He didn’t say “If that’s the standard by which we were to” or any other formulation that’d make what you’re saying a bit more reasonable. You’ve just flat-out whiffed on this one, sorry.
… how the hell does the blockquote tag turn into a strong tag when you edit your post?!
FlipYrWhig
@johnny walker:
I don’t think I’m hairsplitting on this, and here’s why. There is a subset of liberals who are purists and absolutists. Not all liberals are purists and absolutists. Calling out the purist flavor of liberals is _not the same thing_ as calling out “liberals.” But that’s what we keep hearing. Even within the statement itself the point was that even when he is confident he is right, he sometimes has to accept a worse outcome than that because what is right is not feasible. The “sanctimonious” part is not being a liberal, or even a liberal critic. It’s being the particular kind of liberal critic who is so uncompromising that he chalks up as failure anything less than his demands.
That’s not taking exception to “liberals.”
It’s taking exception to a certain brand of liberal critic who, in Obama’s opinion, have adopted a bad strategy that would produce no progress.
NR
@TR: You know, this reminds me a lot of the health care debate. Back then, anyone who didn’t give full-throated support to the Obama-Baucus-Blue Cross-Wellpoint health care bill was accused of wanting sick people to die. And now, we are being told that we have to support tax cuts for millionaires in exchange for some crumbs for the unemployed.
Serious question: Do you really think the economy is going to miraculously start generating the hundreds of thousands of new jobs needed to make a dent in unemployment over the next year?
I think that’s pretty unlikely. So the question becomes: What do the Democrats give up a year from now to get another extension, especially when the Republicans control the House?
Jewish Steel
@WyldPirate:
And you are one of the most prolific offenders.
Do you find that in real life, when you are away from the computer (we all treasure those times) that no matter how much unrequested advice you bestow on family and friends, no ever seems to listen to you?
Has anyone ever suggested to you that the harangue and the complaint are some of the least effective techniques of persuasion?
Your arguments are only dumb. No harm there. But your game is seriously shit.
Comrade Jake
But Cole, they are world-class shitheads. World-class.
General Stuck
@johnny walker:
kudos to you JW. This is a much better grade of butthurt than we are youst to seeing around here. And I don’t think his deal is best for the country in the long term. But is temp and done for reasons that swell my bleedy libtard heart.
If you can’t do something smart, do something right
WyldPirate
@Bnut:
That shit happens when you lower the hell of your standards to get some athletes.
beulahmo
@El Tiburon:
I don’t find that very convincing — not because I’m experiencing a knee-jerk impulse to defend Obama, but because I think the oligarchy’s power is more deeply and systemically entrenched than any one President or Congressional coalition is equipped to fight against.
However, lest I sound as though I’m attempting to persuade you to accept mediocre results, or worse, that I’m arguing for surrendering to despair, I want to refer you to this most excellent article/essay by Michael Tomasky, because it gives a great historical perspective to the pace and process of progressive gains we’ve seen so far in the U.S. It helps us to put everything we’re seeing today into a framework, and to better evaluate whether we’re still on track or not.
Wile E. Quixote
@stuckinred:
Seriously. Who gives a fuck outside of academy grads? Years ago Navy played the University of Washington. I was in the Army National Guard, and a student at the UW, and someone asked me if I was rooting for the Huskies because I was in the Army and wanted Navy to lose. I shocked them by explaining that I was rooting for the Huskies because I wanted the Huskies to win and would have rooted even harder for the Huskies if they’d been playing Army.
I then further shocked them by telling them that I thought the football programs at all of the service academies should be shut down and that the service academies should only be open to enlisted soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines who had spent at least two years on active duty or four years in the reserves.
General Stuck
@Mnemosyne:
Could be. Cole’s attempt at 11 dimensional Hopskotch
joe from Lowell
@NR:
You mean the one Blue Cross and Wellpoint spent millions of dollars trying to kill?
This is exactly the problem: anything that isn’t yours, you shit all over, just because it isn’t yours.
Bnut
@stuckinred: Academy officers do suck. Agreed. The only mustang I knew got shot in the throat in OIF2 and was a hard ass Mofo.
edit: forgot to mention he also NJP’ed the guy who pulled him out of the line of fire (for drinking underage in the barracks).
NR
@joe from Lowell: The reason they spent all that money fighting the bill is that by doing so, they were able to strip it of all meaningful reform.
If they’d surrendered at the beginning, like the Democrats did, things would have gone very differently.
WyldPirate
@Jewish Steel:
funny how you don’t try to address anything and drag out the ad hominum attacks.
So, since you left me no resort since you had no point, I’ll reply in kind: you must not be stainless jewish steel–just the rusty, shitty cheap-ass kind.
Jc
What can be done, is the question. The bottom line is the nation voted for the hostage takers. 60 seat change.
Voters made their opinion known.
A good percentage of that is swayed by an incompetent and lying media, and the rethug megaphone.
Nick said something in a thread earlier. People are busy, “view” themselves as conservative, though from a POLICY standpoint they support a lot of liberal policies. And basically the American public, as a whole – not as individuals – but as a whole, a significant amount are scared, greedy and selfish. You combine this with the filibuster – which empowers a small minority preventing good legislation getting through – and the power of lobbyists – it’s a recipe for failure
Given the above too many people don’t make the connection that continuing to elect republicans is simply a transfer of wealth to the rich, and leads to bankrupting the nation.
So what we are left with is to vote on a shit sandwich, or not eating at all.
Remember that we keep fighting the fight because it’s the right thing go do, not because we are guaranteed victory.
So:
1. Fix the filibuster
2. Organizations like move on.org, start creating funny and truthful slick commercials on issues. Repetition repetition, repetition, make it so interesting, that people will watch it, just like people watch funny superbowl commercials. Also educate with humor, and clear graphs.
A lot of this is being done. I think things would have been different if the senate wasn’t so broken.
So they vote against their interests.
That is the bottom line.
rob in dc
@Giants Fan:
Actually one more thing to add. A lot hardcore progressives are in fact more interested in reality than strategy. They realize that what the US is doing right now is kicking the can or rearranging the deck chairs as the whole shebang heads to implosion.
In light of this reality as we see it (and this is actually a debatable proposition that I would gladly argue for) all the strategy bullshit comes down to being completely insignificant. Which again is why we go with the expectation of no hope and generally rag on everything the administration does, because in our view its all bullshit that isn’t addressing the root problem anyway.
The root problem is an economy which cannot function as an effective engine for first world living standards for the entire country. An economy captured by the FIRE sector, specifically finance and inherently non productive activity in its current form (90% of it anyway), is going to fail. FAIL! Thats it, no questions in our mind.
So here is what Obama really could have done that would have gotten firebaggers off his ass but never would have because its not his politics. He could have scrapped stimulus, healthcare reform, wall street reform, and every congressional initiative. If instead the only thing he did his entire first term would have been to indict and prosecute rampant fraud amongst the executive suite of our corporations and in our ENTIRE financial sector (the entire mortgage bubble was in fact a Ponzi scheme by 2006), as well as nationalized the banks and begin the deleveraging of debt in a way that did not force the pain onto the bottom 90% of this country, then he would have done more good for this country than the entirety of what he has actually done this first term. All the bullshit half measures and even the numerous nuggets of genuinely good policy that have happened are worth 10% of the hypothetical I just outlined.
And btw, again, that hypothetical is entirely plausible. The DOJ and the SEC answer to the executive branch only per the removal power (Myers, Bowsher and PCBOA if I recall correctly). Enforcing the RULE OF LAW equally for all men in all positions in this country. Now thats change I could believe in.
joe from Lowell
I’ve suspected for a long time that a lot of the problem here comes from liberals and progressives who first became politically aware during George Bush’s first term, and who think that the way they saw him operate, and the way the political system worked, was normal and desirable.
Hence, when they see a Democrat get elected while things go back to working the way they’ve worked for every other president, they feel cheated. The houses of Congress getting in each others’ way? A conspiracy of inaction! Congress not passing everything the president wants exactly the way he wants it? Impossible! He must not have actually wanted it, and been lying about wanting it, because George W. Bush didn’t have that kind of problem with Tom Delay.
FlipYrWhig
@johnny walker: Try thinking through Obama’s comments as about critics (who are liberal), rather than liberals (who are critics), and maybe what I’m suggesting will seem less opaque.
I might say that Obama is calling out purist (liberal) critics with doctrinaire demands, and saying that that’s no way to accomplish progress or progressive policy.
Because _not all liberals_ take the view that the way to be liberal is to stick to a set of demands and never compromise them.
Or, in other words, if the way you see yourself as a progressive is that you try to accomplish _progress_, by viewing compromise as betrayal you make progress here-and-now impossible, and then what kind of progressive are you, really?
It’s a debate about _how_ to be a liberal or progressive, not _whether_ to be a liberal or progressive. Obama sticks up for pragmatic, incremental liberalism, and tags his (liberal) critics as idealistic, all-or-nothing thinkers. That’s not shaming _liberals_, because it’s defending another option for how to be a liberal. It’s shaming liberal purists. That’s who’s “sanctimonious,” not all liberals, or even all liberal critics.
joe from Lowell
@NR:
Odd, then, that they continued to oppose the final project, and put their money where your mouth is, working to defeat it, if it had been stripped of all meaningful reform.
But I guess free community health clinics, like unemployment insurance, isn’t meaningful anyway. You know what’s meaningful? Shmashing teh corporations, dood.
FlipYrWhig
@johnny walker:
IIRC it’s a “gerund” when it’s used as a noun, in essence. “Knowing is half the battle” –> gerund. “Knowing the result, I’d do things differently” –> participle.
ETA: Hmm, maybe bad example for the participle. More like “Every day that goes by we are knowing more about the causes.”
johnny walker
@HRA: No, it couldn’t have. Nothing else was on the Senate schedule. But hey yknow, Sanders is clearly in the wrong because thing you pulled outt’ve your ass.
@FlipYrWhig: So “is” isn’t the verb in that construction? See I was thinking that’s the rule, but every example I could think of has “is” in it and I wasn’t sure how that worked out.
I always hated grammar.
… because apparently it confuses me so badly that I do stupid shit like mix up the gerund example with the pres. participle example. Now I see it. That makes sense. Thanks.
Admiral_Komack
@John Cole:
I think that’s going to leave a mark
Hee, hee, hee.
oondioline
When will John Cole disclose that he’s on the DNC payroll?
Allan
@rob in dc: Oh look, here’s a perfect example of what I was talking about here.
Wile E. Quixote
@WyldPirate:
No kidding. Here are some of the fine people the USNA recruited to
become future officersbolster their football program.13 officers fired in cheating scandal
Hey Adam, call the Waaaaaahhh-mbulance, the number is 1-976-CRY-BABY and it costs two dollars a minute, which just gives you something else to cry about.
I’m glad that this meathead lost his commission, not only is he stupid and lazy, and unable to master land navigation, which is easy and fun, but he’s a crybaby as well. This moron would have ended up getting his own marines killed until one of them fragged him.
Jewish Steel
@WyldPirate:
When…no. If you post something worth addressing, believe me, I will.
I’m not holding my breath.
pickledjazz
Mr Cole, I have to agree with you. The problem for me is that most of the sites I tune into on a daily basis are democratic sites and ALL THEIR headlines and blogs are filled with what the Republicans,teabaggers, Palin,Beck etc are doing or saying. You never hear what the democrats are about…and then they claim that the messaging is poor.
Yes,people the messaging is poor because the bloggers are fixated on the repugs and to me this is totally irresponsible.
It is tantamount to asking or wanting to know about the dems and you keep telling me about the repubs…and yes, it seems stylish to demonize the president and yes, there seems to be a pact by the MSM to undermine him.
I don’t care what anyone says, right or wrong, I still support President O and to be blunt none of them could do any better Feingold, nor Romney, because of the times we live and the political climate that has been built up over the last 8 years.
joe from Lowell
joe from Lowell
John,
That our manic progressive commenters can’t figure out who the problem is
The issue here is that you, and they, have different definitions of “the problem.”
You think the problem is the failure to get good policies through.
They think the problem is that they, and their heroes, don’t run the Democratic Party. Don’t believe me? Look at how much of their commentary revolves around the two themes “We’re the base and we want respect!” and “Hippie punching!” All factional infighting, all the time. It’s the most important thing to them.
…
oondioline
When will John Cole disclose that he’s on the DNC payroll?
…
Submitted without comment.
jaleh
I love you, John Cole.
Omnes Omnibus
@Wile E. Quixote: When I was in Army OCS, we had a land nav cheating scandal as well. Rumors that TAC officers were dropping hits to candidates during the retest for those who had not passed the first time around. It was fucking huge. Investigation by an O-7 led panel, etc. Luckily, I had passed on the first try and spent that day at the Peach Tree Mall in Columbus, GA. When interviewed about what I knew, I was able to say I had no idea and that I did listen to rumors.
Kath
Ok. I’ll go. Not that I ever comment at all, but I get the message.
The left s/b a big tent even on a blog, and on the leading edge of the left should be folks screaming about principle. Just as on the other side of the left there should be realists bitching about everyone else. If we got along, yeah nothing would change. It’s much better if there is no lockstep here as there is on the right.
I get that Obama likes Reagan as a role model on some issues and so do a lot of centrist liberals, and Andrew Sullivan thinks he is just the best evah. I get that progressives see that as unacceptable. But in the end we will all vote for Obama in 2012, because there isn’t another choice on the horizon and we hurt ourselves by dividing the party. And progressives will continue to organize on the downticket and get better at that, from which all liberals will eventually benefit.
You think it’s bad here, as a progressive I’ve stopped reading FDL because it has just become a morass of emo pain and existential despair — you just want to slap people and tell them to snap out of it. So now the far left fractures and we only have a couple of years to find a way to fix ourselves there. The primary talk is just an effect of the greater despair but recognize that there is pain there, eh? And it overflows here.
I’ve enjoyed it here, because of the passion of it all. And there’s lots of growth, evolving thought. Maybe there should be a bit more reaching across and less pitched hysteria. But that would have to start with the main page posters. And then it wouldn’t really be Balloon Juice I suppose. I really hate it when there’s no passion at all.
WyldPirate
@DickSpudCouchPotatoDetective:
You want to know why this argument is a steaming pile of horse shit? Because Obama and the Dems have known for ten fucking years that this tax bill was going to sunset. They had the choice to bring it up or not. They did not do it. The results of this debacle were completely predictable from the previous performance of the Rethugs.
But what did the Dems do–and Obama is the “leader of the Party? They painted themselves into this corner. They could not even ge3t any mileage out of it beating the Rethugs over the head. This ended it up coupling the taxes to UI benefits.
Here’s Digby on the Dems procrastination:
Here’s Rick Perlstein who she quotes in the same post:
This tax bill fuck-up was political malpractice by Obama and the Dems on an epic scale. Not only did they cock it up, they give the Rethugs a cudgel to use against them later and they weakened SS as well which is another cudgel for the Rethugs.
Bnut
@Wile E. Quixote: This reminds me of the time we had an airstrike called down on our own position. By a Master Sgt. Shit is shit.
joe from Lowell
Does anyone else find their latest shtick, acting all wounded and shocked that Barack Obama would dare say something unfriendly about some other Democrats, and bemoaning how politically foolish it is to have a factional intra-party fight in public, to be absolutely hilarious in light of their own behavior for the past two years?
Right, firebaggers, there’s nothing you hate more than Democrats saying mean things about each other in public. Doesn’t he know that smack-talk like that will discourage “the base” from turning out?
They actually have the nerve to say this crap.
General Stuck
@Kath:
An economy size tube of Crazy Glue, and yer good to go.
Karen
It looks like Metro DC is spared this storm for a change. We’ll get rain and just rain. We got slammed last winter with the huge storm and you know how in DC we only have one snow plow for Maryland, DC and Virginia. Well that’s the joke anyway.
As for the stifling dissent if we can’t say that “Obama Sux0rs” every minute of every day on BJ well that’s just another game of “all or nothing.”
That’s what PUMA..and other people have said it when I haven’t Corner Store so it’s not my imagination or mistake…has been sent here to do.
Here is how ridiculous the all or nothing logic is:
Let’s say I’m an atheist. You’re an Evangelical Christian. You just KNOW I’m going to hell but you also know that if you minister to me directly when I don’t want you to, that it can be harrassment so you find another way to make it known that I will end up in hell.
You start speaking with all the Christians in the office and pass flyers about how I don’t belong in your office because I’m not Christian. You can’t make it a policy of course but you and the Christians in the office can make me feel unwelcome. If you’re a boss, you can give me a bad review for any reason you want except that I’m atheist because that’s against the law. But free speech means that you can proselytize me and while I can tell you to stop, you don’t have to.
I’ve finally had enough so I go above my supervisor’s head to the main office and complain under the EEOC that I’m being discriminated against so there is a now a company policy of keeping religion out of the office period.
Instantly you complain and sue that they’re religiously discriminating against YOU and YOUR religion and shutting all dissent because you can no longer try to “save” me. Your religion is Evangelical Christianity therefore not evangelizing is the same as forbidding Christianity and they’re damning you to hell.
This is the same thing. You’re basically saying that not being able to blame Obama for everything in the universe, verbally vomitting the same hate over and over, means John Cole is shutting down dissent. In order to not shut down dissent, he has to let you say whatever the fuck you want. In fact, if he won’t let you provoke someone and purposely incite the commenters then he just doesn’t understand what Free Speech means.
I’m sorry, you don’t want free speech. You want to throw bombs and clap in glee when it explodes. Well I really am believing that the biggest bomb throwers are not only PUMA but PUMA recruited by the Republican Party. You know, like how Nader was given funding by the Republican Party.
And if I can’t say that why you’re just proving how one sided you think free speech is.
Bullsmith
@taylormattd:
How stupid do you have to be to notice John occasionally baits firebaggers? Yea, though they annoy him mightily, he does so layeth his baits.
General Stuck
I love yu too, Cole. sniff sniff.
But I still thinks of the poor Dolphins every damn day
and that beautiful waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! sunset
Mnemosyne
@NR:
Is that also why the healthcare companies poured hundreds of millions of dollars into the midterm elections to get Republicans into office who pledged to repeal the bill?
It’s weird how a bill that you say is nothing but a giveaway to the insurance companies is still their Public Enemy #1 and they want it repealed. Almost like they know something that you don’t.
Kath
@General Stuck: Honey, I do believe it was glue that got us in trouble to begin with.
rob in dc
@Allan:
Wow nice work responding on the merits of my argument, lets just call it regurgitated right wing talking points and call it a day.
Because the right wing has ever talked about how bad it is that we didn’t prosecute former Bush criminals, or didn’t do enough in a health care bill which was passed by reconciliation. Whatever its really easy to act serious, responsible and mature when you can dismiss the real problems in this country because they are just too damn big to solve and nobody in our corporate owned and narrow idealogical media talks about them. Lets focus on rearranging the furniture so its got a good feng shui while the walls are on fire and crumbling around us.
Guess what sometimes in our nations history people actually did bring up real serious problems that no one was talking about and no wanted to fight about or for because they were in fact, real serious problems. Go look up the history of the Sherman Antitrust Act. And yes that was passed with the help of big corporate interests anyway but it still ended up helping the entire nation as well as them.
The same could be done today with the obliteration of TBTF banks. Community banks, MBS investors, people in underwater mortgages, 3 wide diverse and potentially powerful groups that if we could communicate to them properly we could enact some real change and fuck wall st. up. And yes I am interested in some corporation punching, not for the sake of corp. punching even though it will feel good, but because you can’t work with these sociopaths, they belong in jail.
But again its easy to act like your oh so serious and part of the realist crowd who knows what needs to be done, while laughing at the dirty hippies for their unrealistic ideas about solving the ACTUAL problems in this country. Its easy enough to be David Broder in this country.
Sko Hayes
People had such high expectations of Obama, there was no way one human being could live up to the Progressive Savior image many people had of him.
My expectations were not that high to begin with, so maybe that’s why I’m not angry at him, but I think he pulled our ass out of the fire on the economy, and we have the beginnings of decent health care policy, and at least this country is crawling slowly out of the hole the Republicans dug.
Obama is a negotiator, not a fighter. In a normal world, that would work, but we don’t live in a normal world right now. The Conservative party has gone down a rabbit hole and had a Tea Party moment, and we’re not dealing with logical beings. When they take over the House and start investigating Obama, I think a lot of the angry left will come back.
WyldPirate
@Jewish Steel:
Weak..and chickenshit as well.
junebug
This needs more attention.
It’s a YouTube video of a radio talker’s reading of an email about how congresscritters were on the front row at the recent Medal Of Honor ceremony and the families and fellow soldiers were all the way at the back.
The person who sent in the email then put the reading of it to pictures and voila! hoards of people belief the lie and have yet another reason to slam the president.
sigh.
johnny walker
@Bruce (formerly Steve S.): Not a John Cole thing. “Protips” were video game strategy suggestions, hints, etc. published in GamePro magazine back in the day. It’s since become an internetwide phenomenon.
Wile E. Quixote
@Bnut:
When I was in ROTC they hammered us on land navigation. It was about 50 percent of the curricula. This was in the early 1980s (God I’m old) and more than one officer and NCO came flat out and said that they were doing this because they had seen too many troops get killed in Vietnam by artillery and air strikes called in on their own positions by officers and NCOs who couldn’t read a map.
Shade Tail
@a1:
You would have a point if the people Mr. Cole was referring to weren’t so utterly clueless. The thing is, the vast majority of the “criticisms” of Obama they post here are completely divorced from reality. They pretend Obama has authority that he doesn’t have (example: “make Congressional Dems vote the way you want!”) and even re-write history (example: “Obama never pushed on the tax cuts or DADT!”).
When you use little more than exaggerations and lies to attack the President, then Mr. Cole is correct; it really isn’t about policy. The difference here is, we’re used to making that point about Faux “News” viewers, not about people ostensibly on our side.
Dr. Squid
@FlipYrWhig: Better example: She looked at me with a knowing glance, then ridiculed the press guys attached to Tim Tebow’s ballsack.
General Stuck
@Kath:
Nope, what got us into this mess is a country that insists on allowing every idiot to have a keyboard and internet connection. it’s the one cost of freedom I question most.
And “Honey”? I had a crazy aunt that always said that. We feed her Roosevelt biscuits in the attic these days.
joe from Lowell
I’ve found the argument “Obama broke his promise to close Gitmo!” to be a very useful shorthand for identifying someone whose opinion can be safely ignored at no cost.
If you don’t understand why, please reply to this comment so I can scroll past your name whenever I see it.
Yutsano
@Dr. Squid:
That, honestly, is a mental image I could have gone through my life without ever having. Thanks doc. In your honor I’m eating calamari somewhere for dinner tonight.
@Bnut: An EMP can be generated from miles above the target area with no warning and no real way of stopping it. That should do the trick nicely.
Bnut
@Wile E. Quixote: It’s only a matter of time before the Chinese or someone else knocks out GPS. I feel sorry for the E1-4 who has to scout shit with an officer using a map and compass.
joe from Lowell
@General Stuck:
What are Roosevelt biscuits?
I tried googling it, and discovered that there are a lot of chicken and biscuit joints located on this nation’s Roosevelt Boulevards.
ruemara
@handy:
The new quest mechanics are rather fun. They’ve expanded on vehicle style quest, incorporating FMV video, quests with bosses and the new monsters are gorgeous!. Fuck Blizzard for not even interviewing me. I want to get a poster size render of the the giant tunnelers. Guild xp thing makes no sense, but it is giving me some clout to organize lowbie dungeon runs so we can qualify for some guild bonus’. Leveling is much easier if you’re 80 and there are some new quests within old dungeons-most of which are right at the instance so there’s much less “pick up quest in Southshore and Desolace, oops forgot 1 so now you have to head back to SM”. Worgen accents are the worst sort of cockney I’ve ever heard in my life and I’ve watched children’s musical theatre.
@stuckinred:
Don’t beat yourself up. Sometimes, pets do things you cannot expect. I lost my beloved marmalade kitty, ButterNut, because he would not stop licking the anti chew stuff I put on computer cords. I did not know this but it seems he loved the taste so much, that he started drinking it from the a water display that I sprayed with it just to keep him off. I kept putting it higher and higher, wondering why this no-eat stuff wasn’t working. Next thing you know, kidney failure. I can’t really be sure, but in my heart, I believe it and I, were to blame. Supposedly safe, non-toxic and disgusting to pets. So he drank it in secret and passed. You got to your furballs in time and I am sure they’ll get better.
I hate these prog-prog (because we are mostly prog liberals here, whether or not you believe it) wars. Here’s substantive holding Obama’s feet to the fire: I believe that we are not doing enough to employ people and we need a new WPA for the 21st century. While some stimulus dollars paid for low income sustainability employment, it doesn’t go far enough. I think Obama can hard sell such a program in the House & Senate, it would take time. I believe that his leadership style is too much like the conflict resolution strategy that has been employed by community organizers, like the one we both worked with, NYPIRG. The Democratic Party needed a more firm, commanding style to maintain party discipline, so whether or not he liked it, he should have gone privately confrontational. They were already gonna hate him for winning the presidency, might as well go whole hog and be the bastard you need to be. While the Senate is ineffective due to Harry Reid, it is President Obama’s responsibility as the party leader to push Reid to be harder. Reid needs to be held accountable as majority leader and Obama is too anti-confrontational to do it. I am also not impressed with Eric Holder as Attorney General. I’d prefer a firebrand to milquetoast 2.0. We needed a clean house of embedded Bush appointees, we need prosecutions for the fiscal perfidy that has gone on at the highest levels of the market. Eric Holder is a competent administrator. We needed an Eliot Spitzer. I am not clueless as to why we would not have gotten Eliot Spitzer. The man shafted himself and could never have passed confirmation. There’s so much more, I could write a book.
manic progressive meltdown complaints: BULLY PULPIT!(adam green, Bold Progressives.org) He should make the Senate hold a vote!(FDL, DKOS, TP) He won’t lead!(F. Rich) How dare he negotiate with the Republicans!(DKOS) He’s worse than Bush!(FDL) He squandered a huge majority!(Rachel)
None of those are valid complaints, they ignore reality and substitute mythology. It’s like creating a lockdown on my mind and I really want to try this whole organizing and leftyfying America thing. But I can’t ignore that most left media throws out tons of facts, then hands out the interpretation you should take from those facts, while still leaving you just as ignorant of the process to get to the goals you want. These are void comments, sans shape or function, echoing in the dark. It should not surprise anyone paying attention that such formless political ideology is out there, it should surprise everyone that it is the loudest voice heard amongst supposed progressive, intellectual, reality-based communities.
That’s my 2¢. Cata is calling, over 600 pics of a local event to sort through and there’s a lovely pork tenderloin and leek roast in my stove. I am going to enjoy this rare moment of satisfaction in my life and ignore that damoclean diagnosis of a catalytic converter needed for my crappy car. Like Obama, she’s not perfect, has been disappointing but is the best damn thing I can get in this reality. I am blessed by her faithful service that has allowed me to have my job. May the goddess oprah send me a car. or a winning lottery ticket.
matoko_chan
Obama has entirely lived up to my expectations….because i only ever expected him to TRY to do his best.
I worked on his campaign, and i will again, i donated fundage and i will again. i dont understand everything he does, but i do understand A LOT of it.
And like Cole I understand the alternative.
Obama is not a centrist, or a liberal.
He is a Machiavellian Pragmatist.
Obama sees clearly the deep wound in the heart of the nation, the New (un)Civil War….the wound that will be Americas death if it cannot be healed.
He is trying to be the Lincoln of the Age.
I will do my best to help him succeed.
Dr. Squid
@WyldPirate: Sorter WyldPirate: How dare Obama let the legislative branch do what it’s supposed to do. It’s all his fault the Senate Dems suck!
I might as well, because no one wants to read your windy crap.
inflector
@Bruce (formerly Steve S.):
No, actually Bruce, it isn’t.
It is consistent with dealing with a group of people who have made themselves unwelcome and a nuisance and who no longer deserve civil treatment. People who just don’t “get it.” People for whom a simple polite statement won’t work because they are too fucking dense.
Dissent can be constructive, but in your case, John thinks it isn’t, so he doesn’t want you here (at least that’s my read of his point 3 above).
Instead of a mea culpa and contrition you just defend yourself, further fanning the flames. That’s probably why he asked your ilk to fuck off and leave.
Bullsmith
I’m deeply disturbed that the Democrats got a clear mandate for change and, except for HCR which we’re years away from being able to evaluate, changed nothing. Every significant direction the country was headed in in 2008 it is still headed in today. The rich are richer, the nation’s poorer etc. etc. etc. If 40 Republicans can stop the entire ability of government to do good, then the Dems needed to exercise the nuclear option, period, by their own logic. These are hostage takers. They’ll get a chance in January, anyone think they’ll use it?
What that means is that the mantle of populism gets handed back to the completely unshamed Republicans who decided to rape their own country in the first place. Because the country wants change maybe more than ever, generally only anti-incumbents can take political advantage of that. As the Republicans are showing, it’s not they’ll let facts or patriotism get in the way of lying their way back into office.
Doesn’t matter if you’re a firebagger or want firebaggers shot, that’s not a good outcome.
My two cents. Deep enough that perhaps it won’t upset the regulars’ fee fees too much? Don’t want to help elect Sarah Palin or anything.
Dr. Squid
@Yutsano: Pleased to be of service in the fight to enforce the proper use of participles.
General Stuck
@joe from Lowell:
They are entirely a jump sharking allegorical figgament of my obot imagination. Maybe it will catch on though, and I can be famous for at least something.
It’s my weakness for food metaphors before dinner. They don’t have to make sense and are hunger driven by nature
FlipYrWhig
@Dr. Squid: That’s a woman I’d love to meet!
(“Knowing” there = participial adjective. “Knowing what I know now” = participial phrase. My last example, “are knowing” = present progressive tense, with “knowing” as the participle that is the distinguishing feature of that form. I think.)
matoko_chan
and ……i have a confession…….my mother (who (probably vainly) hopes i will get married some day) subscribes me to Martha Stewart Magazine.
this is the best pork shoulder roast ever, but it takes 4 hours.
it literally melts in your mouth.
TR
@johnny walker:
And where in that present-tense paragraph is the word “sanctimonious”? Nowhere.
There’s a piece discussing the present state of politics, and there’s a piece on hypotheticals with the word “sanctimonious,” and then there’s your fevered imagination in which the two overlap.
Remind me, because I don’t have the True Liberal Sensitivity to secret code language set on high alert like you — When the president said the word “and,” was that a sign of his hatred of gays or was that a secret indication that he wants to nuke Iran?
WyldPirate
@Wile E. Quixote:
I had the exact same experience in ROTC as you did Wile E and I was in during the same time period as you. Got the exact same explanation as you got from the officers and NCOs.
Most of us got to be really damned good at it as well.
WyldPirate
@Dr. Squid:
Oh, you mean like cutting a deal with the Republicans without even consulting your own party? Do you mean that level of respect for legislative function?
You can sit the fuck down now Squid for brains.
I meant that since Obama is the leader of the Democratic Party that perhaps he and the Democrats who had control of the House and the fucking Senate could coordinate their activities to help advance you know–a Democratic agenda.
trixie larue
Considering what we are up against, Obama is still the best person to work with Republicans. I wish it would be magical and they would go away; but that ain’t gonna happen. Republicans are holding this country back for no good reason; just petty politics. They absolutely do not care about ordinary people or the damage they have done to this country through their actions.
An interesting UK website (http://magicalnihilism.com/) had this to offer:
“…we badly need more utopian speculation. The consensus future we read about in the media and that we’re driving towards is a roiling, turbulent fogbank beset by half-glimpsed demons: climate change, resource depletion, peak oil, mass extinction, collapse of the oceanic food chain, overpopulation, terrorism, foreigners who want to come here and steal our women jobs. It’s not a nice place to be; if the past is another country, the consensus view of the future currently looks like a favela with raw sewage running in the streets. Conservativism — standing on the brake pedal — is a natural reaction to this vision; but it’s a maladaptive one, because it makes it harder to respond effectively to new and unprecedented problems. We can’t stop, we can only go forward; so it is up to us to choose a direction.”
Death Panel Truck
@Gus:
It isn’t. The sixties have been over for 40 years. We haven’t had a truly liberal president since LBJ, and his liberalism only extended to domestic policy. He was full metal wingnut on Vietnam.
As long as the Murdochs of the world own the media, center-right Democrats like Obama are the best we’ll ever do.
johnny walker
@FlipYrWhig: Well, at the very least we’re in agreement that it was certainly aimed at least a portion of “the liberals” right? ‘cuz basically it sounds like we’re just disagreeing on whether he was justified in doing what he did. I can’t read his mind well enough to cut deeply into what he said and find the nuance that tells me whether he considers all liberal critics or merely some subset to be annoyingly ideological, so all we’re left with are assumptions.
Here’s my thing: He’s never going to say who specifically he was referring to. Part of that is just smart politics, sure — if I’m Obama I’m not going to hand (specific critic X) a nice little fundraising email or wtfever where they can specifically cite, “See, the President really does hate me personally!” Granted. But the other side of that is that for better or for worse he can just throw that out there and never really have to stand behind it. Any *specific* person who might be shown to have been right about this deal necessarily wasn’t the person he was referring to. Anybody who might eventually get his ear and convince him to change course necessarily was not motivated by ideological purity. Etc. So it comes across as less like a statement of conviction and more like triangulation — “I am the adult in the room,” etc. being a common media interpretation of how he’s trying to portray himself that I think is reasonable enough. I can see the potential political upside to this — I don’t agree with doing it, but I understand the strategy.
Ehh I’m kinda rambling, but point being he seems to have boxed himself into a corner with this, “liberal base”-wise anyway. The same issue I was talking about with specific people in the previous paragraph applies to Obama critics: oh well yknow, I’m doing less screaming, gnashing of teeth, “worst president ever”-ing, etc. so he must not have been referring to me and I shouldn’t find it offensive. He values my opinion, just not the those other dickhead liberals.
Ok, well here’s how it breaks down for me:
a) Any interpretation of what he meant is based on assumptions. “Obama was criticizing all liberals” is an assumption just as “He was specifically targeting purity trolls” is an assumption.
b) Most of the analysis I see of the compromise is of the “this is a bad idea for the country kind.” To the degree that “Obama is a sellout” comes up I see it more in the context of “Dammit, this again. Bummer.” versus “See! This again! I told you!” Obviously opinions vary.
c) When most of the analysis I see comes across — again, to me — as well-intentioned policy critique with some shrieking outliers and the President issues a generic statement that open to interpretation which characterizes such a wide-ranging and ill-defined group of people I do get the impression that he equates criticism of *any sort* from the left with ideological sanctimony, especially given that he’s made similar statements in the past. A little bit of token “Now these aren’t the only criticisms I’ve heard, and many made by my friends on the left are valid. I’m referring specifically to (blank)” kinda language sure would’ve went a long way here.
d) Just like Cole turning 1 person saying 1 thing 1 time into “4-5 shitheads” coming into the previous thread and subjecting him to endless and repetitive abuse made me have to call bullshit, having the President come out and turn any liberal who dislikes the tax compromise into ideological purity trolls makes me do the same.
Now I totally get there are different assumptions that go into this and lead to different conclusions and whatnot, but this is where I’m coming from, this is how it has led me to see it, and I don’t see where there’s a *factual* argument to made that what I’m saying is incorrect. Not cuz I’m all that, but because there just aren’t enough hard facts to arrive at what I would call certainty.
Certainly the idea that Obama’s statements need to be interpreted in a very nuanced manner and applied only to specific individuals — coincidentally enough, usually the ones that person finds to be objectionable, Hamsher etc. — is a massive assumption of its own.
Observer
@John:
I don’t know about any of this heartfelt desire to discuss issues on this blog that you refer to.
What would Obama have to do before you turned on him? (there’s a corollary question: what would Obama have to do for some folks to love him).
Does Obama have a blank check with you or can you describe minimum set of circumstances that he’d have to do to lose you.
He’s got a deal that has tax hikes for the poor and tax cuts for the rich. Of course some people are going to be pissed. What did you expect for a party that’s supposed to be standing up for the little guy?
So simply, what would it take or what would *this* have to have in it before you said it was a deal that shouldn’t be made?
Again, asking for *your* definition, not some b.s. homily about how we must all have compromise.
How you would answer that question and craft a scenario and what would be in it would go a lot further to fomenting a discussion of the sort you allude to and in seeing where other people’s breaking points are and why.
That, to me, would be a starter discussion based on the issues, if that’s in fact what you want.
johnny walker
@Dr. Squid: I realize that you think Presidents arm-twisting congress to get what they want passed is some kind of Bush-esque abuse of power.
My question is whether you realize how completely wrong you are?
General Stuck
Just to let you know. Cole has a fresh firebagger thread for you all play in, with even some baited breath treats. I know it’s spelled wrong, but only in Elitistburg, usa/ I live on the ornery side of town.
arguingwithsignposts
I cannot WAIT to read this comment thread. :)
joe from Lowell
@Bullsmith:
Not every direction. This country was heading towards another Great Depression in 2008.
I believe this fact explains a great deal about why Obama hasn’t ticked off as many items on his progressive agenda than I, circa July 2008, hoped he would. He didn’t get to come into office and set his agenda for the next two years the way we would have liked. Nonetheless, I think he’s done pretty well for himself.
Why would it? You didn’t end it by cackling and denouncing Barack Obama.
johnny walker
@TR: Wow, silly me for thinking you’d actually read the article containing the quotes before dreaming up your convoluted imaginary hypothetical. Here’s the full quote:
“Now, if that’s the standard by which we are measuring success or core principles … we will be able to feel good about ourselves and sanctimonious about how pure our intentions are[.]”
Unless you’re arguing that Obama doesn’t actually think some portion of his liberal critics are being “sanctimonious” — and if that’s what you think please say so — then the “If” construction is a rhetorical flourish. I mean if you want to say that the whole preceding paragraph (that I had to mash into one big paragraph btw, b/c FYWP) about “it’s the public option all over again,” etc. stands completely seperate and wasn’t what he meant by “that” in the “Now, if that’s…” construction then feel free. Given the hoops you’re willing to jump through to avoid a simple admission that Obama called at least some of his liberal critics sanctimonious, seeing you argue that when he said “If that’s how…” he was used the word “that” to mean something other than the thing he was just talking about wouldn’t surprise me in the least.
I mean, by your logic a guy who says, “If we are eating burritos we’ll end up with gas” isn’t making a present-tense statement about eating burritos because the part about gas happens in the future. Nice try, but you probably just want to stop digging.
ino shinola
@Mnemosyne:
Just speaking for myself, I’m not pissed off at Obama supporters. I’m pissed at Obama, he broke what was left of my political heart. I don’t hold it against anyone who still supports him. As a progressive I’ve long said, (well not really but it’s what I would have said) “What’s it going to take for things to change in this country? Maybe if when the Reagan Revolution collapses it’ll happen so convincingly that even half witted Americans can see that they’ve been conned and we happen to have a highly gifted politician with tremendous popular appeal elected president within a few months of it happening and all he’ll have to do is give a few well-timed speeches to channel the pure disgust the country holds for the financial sector …nah, that could never happen.” I can’t think of too many ways the collapse could have been exploited with less political skill than shown by our good President. I know that campaign rhetoric about change is essentially meaningless, and I don’t know if his failure to deliver is because of political miscalculation or if he actually believes we’ve been on the right track for the last 30 years, either way I feel betrayed in a way that I never am by politicians. I expect them to be bought and paid for, the combination of the circumstances and the man got my hopes up.
About the wage freeze:
States have been laying off employees because their tax revenues are crashing and they can’t print money. The situation at the federal level is fundamentally different. Conventional economic theory dictates that during a recession the federal government should spend (print) more money. During this recession, the amount of money spent by the federal government has been way less than needed to provide relief. That opinion is held by a very large majority of economists. Given that economics is the most ideologically slanted science there is and that the way to make real money as an economist is to go to work for a Wall Street firm or conservative think tank, the near unanimity of belief in greater stimulus is remarkable, and I think telling. The government should be providing aid to states so they don’t have to lay off so many workers.
Although the real effect of the wage cut is small, it is anti-stimulative. It’s not a big deal in the huge scheme of things, but I think that’s part of my problem with the decision. If you’re going to make a symbolic gesture with small practical consequences, give an award to a teacher. Don’t do something that illustrates that you believe that the way out of a depression is to follow the policies of Herbert Hoover, unless that’s what you believe is right. Maybe that is what he believes, I don’t know any more.
It’s last straw in the sense that appointing Larry Summers was, and it’s been two years of last straws ever since. I gave up on him as an agent for meaningful change long before the fed wage decision. I don’t expect a whole lot, but I wish him well.
FlipYrWhig
@johnny walker:
Well, that’s the thing, I don’t think he did that. I think it’s fairly clear from his whole statement that his target is something more like “any liberal who dislikes the tax compromise _because it falls short of the perfection he demands_,” rather than “any liberal who dislikes the tax compromise.” I very much take to heart his critique that even when he is sure he is right, he may have to settle for a compromise because what he thinks is right doesn’t have enough support to get adopted as is.
That’s where the analogy to the public option comes in. It’s not that the public option is bad policy; he continued _liking_ the public option and would surely have signed a bill with the public option in it. But if there isn’t enough support for that provision, it doesn’t matter how great an idea it is. And viewing the decision to pull the plug on a good idea as a betrayal or as weakness really does suggest a view of politics where anything less than total victory is not only failure but ineptitude.
So the criticism is, “If you’re going to demand that a bill match up in every letter with what you want, and nothing else will do, then you’re not going to get any results, and while that might make you feel a kind of satisfaction at your own integrity, it won’t really be progress.”
And when you get right down to it, it’s been self-described lefties who have most often sounded that way thus far, but there’s no reason it will always be that way, and IMHO if a “centrist” organization like Third Way or the DLC was out there saying that the Wall Street reform bill was a betrayal because it put too much trust in bureaucracy or something, and was running ads against it, he’d probably say something similar: you can’t just set up litmus tests and instantly judge everything good or bad on that basis, you have to take a step back and determine whether it moves in the right _direction_ even if it does so without following your preferences on tactics or timeline or in every other particular.
That’s why I think the speech was a castigation of purists and political litmus tests, not a castigation of “liberals,” although the target this time was liberal purists. And the “sanctimonious” point is about the tension between counting compromises as losses (because they don’t satisfy every principle) and counting them as moral victories (because they advance something good and in keeping with those same principles, at least minimally).
And I get grumbly when I hear people say that he called out “liberals.” His testiness comes from a different view of how to move successfully towards liberal goals. I don’t think the liberal purists should get the right to pass themselves off as the Only True Liberals.
Fenster
When it comes to Obama, this will be those disgruntled, manic progressives in about a year. Bank on it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ee925OTFBCA
Bullsmith
@joe from Lowell:
See that’s the thing Joe, if the country really was headed for the Great Depression, how come nobody had to even be fired? The simple fact that Jamie Dimon and the evil elf of Goldman Sachs are richer than ever forces me–leaves me no choice– but to question WTF happened that the world was saved and the people who nearly destroyed it made out like bandits. Absolute bandits…..
And now they get to give even more of it to their kids tax free.
Glinda
Best FP comment I’ve read anywhere for the last several months. Kudos!
Omnes Omnibus
@johnny walker:
You clearly have not been reading this blog regularly for the past couple of weeks. Cole was not talking about one person in one thread. Do you not get that?
Kenneth
The entire system in this country is broken and even if we had FDR again not even he could fix it thanks to Citizens United.
One party (Republicans) are insane, the other party (Democrats) are either weak or bought out by the corporate power.
It makes me think its time to expatriate to Europe where they actually care about social equality and oppourtunnity, instead of racism, homophobia, and class war conducted by the corporations.
Chessy
@NR:
Except that the promise that was endlessly repeated was to not raise taxes on individuals making <$200,000 & couples <$250,000. Maybe it could have been different before the election, and the President both pressured congress and stumped for getting a bill to his desk to sign, but at this late juncture, without the compromise deal, Obama was going to be unable to keep that promise.
I get that some on the left would have preferred to let the entirety of the Bush tax cuts expire, but it seems silly to be critical of a promise broken when a policy the President campaigned for was going down either way (either maintaining the middle-class tax cuts, or the wealthiest bracket cuts expire).
Angry Black Lady
@Bill H.: You obviously don’t know what free speech is.
I probably should read the rest of the comments because I’m sure someone has pointed out how asinine this comment is, but seriously? This has absolutely nothing to do with free speech. Unless Balloon Juice is the government, which it isn’t… is it?
OMG. Balloon Juice is the gubment!!!111
Martin Gifford
John Cole,
This is a disgusting post from you. Vile. It’s also full of offensive remarks, projection, and delusion.
Yeah, Obama talks about his policies, but he doesn’t go out on the line for them. America is in an emergency situation and it needs leadership. Vetos and attacking the Republicans are clearly needed. Instead, Obama has been intent on accommodating and resuscitating the Republicans. They were dead just 2 years ago.
Seeya at your next Mea Culpa in a few years time.
johnny walker
@FlipYrWhig: Yeah I was just looking back over that post and I noticed that part was kinda poorly-phrased. Shoulda tossed in a “seems to me that he” … or, I don’t know exactly what. It wasn’t quite what I was trying to say, which I guess would’ve been more toward the direction of not giving him the benefit of the doubt for choosing to box himself into that particular corner rather than feeling certain that he said mean stuff about me. He’s the President of the United States. He has endless people he can consult w/ on the wisdom of a particular phrasing, and if his intent was to get across that he thinks this was the best way to proceed he can say that and then hit the hostage stuff without having to get quite so explicit about sanctimony, concern trolls and etc.
And while we’re on the subject: I’ve seen the folks who say “Wow, where’s this passion when he’s talking about the GOP?” and others who say, “Where’s he getting pissed? Because I don’t see it,” etc. To me what’s striking here is the difference between what he’s characterizing, ie. specific behavior vs. base motivations. He says the Republicans are taking hostages, in the past he’s said that they’re trying to keep the car in the ditch and various other things. To me this seems like a critique of behavior, and at the same time he’ll say they’re motivated by a desire to help the country and have some ideas worth listening to, we just have specific points of disagreement so let’s sit down and has it out and blah blah blah. Now maybe I’m just a manic progressive firebagger(-who-doesn’t-read-FDL), but this stuff pushing back against purity trolls and hardcore ideologues and whatnot seems more like a critique of something more underlying and generalized than the things he’ll say about the Republicans: Republicans are reasonable and well-intentioned people who are acting like dicks, vs. liberals inherently care more about racking up purity points than about getting anything done. I mean again, I could be wrong.
Ok, now show me the dividing line between those two groups. How are they determined? What is the difference between “because it falls short of the perfection they demand” and “because they don’t think it’s good policy?” How do I know which group I’m part of?
Leaving aside the part about backroom deals I’m not even close to trusting any politician enough to give them a Shirley on anything but being a cynical, calculating asshole and doing whatever it takes to get re-elected. Obama “liked” the public option? IE. on Facebook? I mean let’s be straight: you’re taking a politician at his word. Totally your prerogative, but I decline to join you.
You really don’t see how this is a strawman? I really can’t think of anyone outside of the Republican Party who has said in the last couple years that Bill X had to be exactly as they wanted or it was no go. I have certain things that’re a bridge too far — I can accept a certain level of compromise, but past a point it becomes unacceptable. I imagine you do too, and just because those breaking points don’t line up doesn’t mean it’s remotely accurate to characterize me (or people like me) as just absolute my-way-or-the-highway mofos. I do sometimes wonder what it would take for some of the folks here to say ok, this time Obama actually bargained away too much. For Cole it seems to have been the tax cut deal — or maybe he’s just straight up trollin’ again. Fuck if I know, but when I read this thread and see people taking it to the point of that TR guy who won’t even admit Obama called *some* actually-existing human being(s) sanctimonious I get concerned. Still, it wouldn’t exactly be fair of me to come in here and go OH MY GOD NONE OF YOU WILL ADMIT OBAMA SAID SANCTIMONIOUS right? Ok that one’s a little obvious, but what if I came in here and railed against a group of shitheads, accused them in the plural of behaving that way and then refused to say who I was referring to?
Maybe that helps explain where I’m coming from with this sanctimonious thing.
Well if that was the intention wouldn’t it have been more constructive to tie the whole thing together into one bigass point and include right-wing extremists as well? Breaking it apart into sanctimonious liberal concern trolls vs. GOP hostage takers is part of the problem I have, as I mentioned. I mean at the very least if he was saying people were being sanctimonious all around he could’ve waited a bit between the public option comments and that — also could’ve avoided throwing in “That’s not what it means to Democrats” or whatever the exact line was. Not that I think of myself as a Democrat, so that particular line falls pretty flat anyway.
Kidding aside, I think it’s pretty clear that he was going specifically after liberal critics. How wide-ranging or narrowly-defined the group of people he was referring to is up in the air, but I’m just not getting this “Yeah, he was specifically targeting liberals but only in order to make a wider point about the entire process” kinda thing you’re suggesting here. If that’s his intent he could be perhaps a bit less subtle about it.
@Chessy:
http://www.ontheissues.org/economic/barack_obama_tax_reform.htm
Both from that page. There are like a half-dozen others but I’m outta editing time.
SectarianSofa
@Martin Gifford:
Hey, you can stop peein’ in the wheaties. The bowl’s already full.
Allan
@rob in dc: If you don’t want to be hippy-punched, you probably shouldn’t keep grabbing my fist and banging your face into it.
Tonal Crow
@Keith G:
Yes. And I give P=0.9 +- 0.05 that it was intended to be so.
pattonbt
I think it simply comes down to this….
Many on the left thought that Obama’s election and the D friendly results of 2006 and 2008 meant that maybe finally the country was waking up to the nightmare of Republican governance and would gleefully accept the progressive agenda (an agenda that seems to be supported poll after poll across a wide variety of issues throughout time). I think they also believed that it would become toxic to support Republican goals. But what we all forgot is with the two party system in the US it has become too much like sports and the media treats it as such. The media does not attempt to find “the truth”, ratings are in covering the game. And the media doesnt want to cover a 54 to nothing blowout, it wants to cover the superbowl overtime game winning fieldgoal as time expires.
So now that the dust has settled after two years, what has been done is nowhere near where they hoped. Now I’m a cynic and generally believe politicians can do great harm but very little good. Doing good is very, very hard. The best I expect out of governance is trying to keep things afloat and slowly moving forward. Maybe I’m part of the problem for not demanding more, but I give money, time and effort to getting “more and better Democrats”. But I also accept the pace of that process.
Even so, I must admit I am also disappointed with where we were at. There’s a deep part of me that’s wants to buy the “bully pulpit” business but the larger part of me knows that’s overly simplistic. I do believe that forecasting your compromise point is not the most effective way to negotiate, especially with those who will never negotiate in good faith. But some good things have been accomplished.
And two years is not enough time to change course, but a greater part of my disappointment is with my apparent fellow citizens idiocy with ever voting Republican again. PT Barnum was right.
So I can understand why so many on the left are disappointed. We have watched decades of disaster and thought we finally had our “See??!!! This is what we have been saying all along” moment and that the tide had finally turned. We were sadly mistaken.
And I fear the next two years are going to make now look like “the good old days”.
General Stuck
@Martin Gifford:
Could this be independent verification that John Cole has found his missing mojo?
The Raven
My sympathies, John. I will take the opportunity to say here that I believe the current policy and political disasters have been at least 30 years in the making, if not 50, and cannot be blamed on Obama. They are, however, come to a head at this time, during his administration. I do not know how long this time will be, and if we will begin to recover our balance in 2012 or retreat into more destructive reactionary policies until 2020.
I think your loyalty is a rare and wonderful thing, and I think the world would be a better place if we had more of it.
rob in dc
@Allan:
Oh noes! Scare me more O-BOT troll. See, I can dismiss people as unserious losers too. Why don’t you email me a big picture of a fist if you wanna fight that bad [email protected]
CynDee
@jeffreyw: What are those black things next to the roast?
Karen
It’s one thing to say certain things when you campaign and are under the (mistaken) impression that members from both parties want to actually to find common ground to save the country from free falling. It’s another thing to try to keep the country running as smoothly as possible against an opposition kamikaze party who would be thrilled if we have another September 11 with as big a body count as possible because they feel the bigger the death toll, the better the chances the GOP will control the country again.
It’s also another thing when the liberals in your party are perfectly willing to kamikaze too, because they care more about making a political stand than they do about people. It’s another thing when the centrists in your own party care more about getting elected again and are willing to sell their own mothers if it means they’re elected again.
It’s one thing to make campaign promises. It’s another when you have a media who cares more about ratings than the truth.
Obama has been going around the country, saying how these taxes were only going to affect people making about $250K but his own party begged him not to hold votes about it until AFTER the election. Well, they’re reaping what they’ve sown.
By no means am I saying Obama is a saint or that I agree with everything he’s doing. But I knew what I was getting when I voted for him. I never saw him as the great liberal hope because I knew that if he was, he never would have won the primary.
All you “primary Obama” people who think that your darlings Feingold or Socialist Bernie Sanders would win? Are you on crack? If Feingold couldn’t keep his seat, how would he win a general election or even a Democratic primary?! And if Obama can be demonized as a Socialist and he isn’t even one, there is no way on G-d’s green earth Sanders would win. But at least you’d be making your political stand.
Ruckus
@Mnemosyne:
How hard would that be?
beulahmo
@General Stuck:
Did you click on Gifford’s link? I think his site is called Global Happiness. Awesomely funny juxtaposed with his comment!
Mrs. Polly
@rob in dc: “Strifestrike?” Oh the toughness!
Careful, Allan. Make sure the fist you email is wearing brass knuckles.
Dr. Squid
@WyldPirate: Yep, you’re still an idiot. Poor put upon legislature who did nothing before the election and likely would have given the GOP all the extra tax cuts for those making over $250,000 while letting taxes go up for everyone else. And you still would have blamed the n####r for that deal.
Karen
I posted something at 9:44 and I’m still in moderation? Really? Well it’s not my house so whatever the landlord says goes.
Christin
Well, I notice you only told the unhinged fucked up haters to go back to No Quarter and FDL, when in fact they infested DKos, are still there, and all with the owner’s blessing along with Meteor Blades’ support. I’ve seen large swaths of Obama supporters banned from DK, large groups of outspoken brave AA’s recently banned for daring to claim there is racism on DK, and the most despicable teabaggers and firebaggers given free passes by Meteor.
So while they ban AA’s and pro Obama supporters, BJ and BWD et al have to put up with those same assholes given free reign to post here since it’s just to hard to do what DK does with their bans and screenings. They’re like the TSA on crack. Only the hate can stay.
You should think about asking people to sign up via email and keep a list of IP addresses handy, which is what they do.
Christin
@NR:
LOL! Oh my god. It’s you. Again. Firebagger extrordinaire.
You have no idea do you?
I guess something really does have to fall on your head before you would understand.
FlipYrWhig
@johnny walker:
I think the most understandable critique would be something like, “I don’t like the deal because he could have done better, and here’s how.” Or “I think that standing firm and making no deal would have been better, and here’s why.” Too much of the criticism has taken the form “Because he didn’t eliminate the tax cuts for income over $250K, I can’t accept it, and damn the consequences.”
I go back to the HCR debate, in which Obama quite consistently said that he had _principles_ he wanted to see in the final bill (increased affordability, competition between providers, ah, jeez, I can’t remember it all), but the details and mechanisms were all up for grabs. Legislators have to hash it out and figure out what the consensus is and move forwards. With that in mind, you can say, “Even though I wanted to see the public option in the bill, I still support the bill without it, because _on balance_ it moves American health care in the right direction.” Or you can say, “On balance, it doesn’t move American health care in the right direction.”
But there are thousands of people who concluded, “Because the public option is not in the bill, it is a bad bill.” Same thing applies to “Because she didn’t vote the right way on some key bill, she is a bad candidate” (the occasion for the “fucking retarded” comment) and “Because the tax cuts on upper income will continue, it is a bad bill” (the current debate). It seems Obama doesn’t have a lot of patience for that kind of thing.
I think Obama is being rather utilitarian and making decisions that he believes result in the greatest good for the greatest number. And in general I find it kinda curious when would-be progressives lock themselves into these symbolic political statements, whether it’s the public option or upper-income tax cuts or the appointment of Elizabeth Warren, and view them as important gestures of _respect_ for “the base” or whatnot. I mean, I love Elizabeth Warren, think tax cuts for the rich are abhorrent, and think the public option was a clever idea for health care, but I’m no expert and have no reason to decide that any one of those things is so terribly, terribly important, that it’s going to be the price of my support.
I am much more persuaded that the American political system is full of choke points, and that changing the game is valuable but always secondary to helping people’s actual lives in the here and now, and that often you have to say, “Fuck, this sucks, but we gave it a shot and this was the best we could do.”
Unless I can figure out how playing these things differently than Obama did would be _clearly better_, I’m not too inclined to criticizing him or impugning his manhood.
That’s why I think the wage freeze was stupid, because I’m not sure what was gained by it or why it’s good policy. And I see why people who are bigger civil libertarians than I am have gotten upset about privacy and due process issues.
FlipYrWhig
@johnny walker: For me the best analogy to Obama’s sentiments is what it’s like to shop for a house. You probably want a big backyard, up-to-date appliances, big closets, a finished basement, posh bathrooms, all of that. But you don’t have enough money to get all of those things, especially in the right location. So you have to decide which elements are true deal-breakers and which you could learn to live with or plan to change over time.
I think Obama’s point here is that if you decide that you have to have a finished basement, and because the house doesn’t have a finished basement it’s not worth buying, but no house in your price range has a finished basement, you’re not going to have a damn house at all, which is dumb… especially when you could afford a house with an unfinished basement, sock away some money, and then finish it. It would be counterproductive and maybe even “sanctimonious” to prevent yourself from buying any house just because it didn’t have a certain feature, considering that the supply of houses is not infinite and you’re starting a new job in this city next month, so you’ve had _some_ time to find the perfect place, but you’re starting to run out of chances.
FlipYrWhig
Partial proof of my own overreading from Benen:
But while I may have gotten too far out on that limb, I still stand behind the idea that Obama’s target was not “liberals” all told but rather a particular _kind_ of liberal absolutist or purist.
Benen’s piece is interesting, worth a look for those of you who haven’t seen it.
Bill H.
@LosGatosCA:
Oh really? What is that that Army and Navy were doing?
NeoOstrakon
lmao…Classic.
mclaren
That’s really quotable. An instant classic.
I happen to disagree with John about this, but his post this time is particularly well written.
Nick
@joe from Lowell:
except that he often actually, you know…did
the farmer
Holding someones feet to the fire is an old established form of torture. Burning someone at the stake is what should happen to the morons who torture people by holding other peoples feet to the fire. But that won’t stop either one of em.
*
Platonicspoof
@John:
As you, and others in this thread, have said, some commenters have gotten predictable in their not making more of a distinction between Obama the person and the political compromises he’s made in a system that rewards greed and other nastiness by design.
Although they stop adding to the discussion at some point, I hope you don’t get too frustrated. It’s no worse, e.g., than people tallying up Democratic vs. Republican votes in Congress, rather than progressive vs. reactionary and all the points in between, and then wondering why something can’t be enacted. Personally, I’ve learned a lot from the commenters who have explained the complications of DADT, etc., in responding to those I just see as devil’s advocates.
Of course, I don’t subject myself to all of the comments on all of the threads either :)
arguingwithsignposts
Only 372 comments. I haz a sad. ABL is clearly a better FP.
matoko_chan
Cole, this is a great post.
another trail of carnage in the Pasture of the Cudlips.
what is so difficult to understand about this?
I voted for O because i understood perfectly he would TRY HIS BEST TO DO HIS JOB.
He has always done that.
He and i might differ on approach and intent…but that is fine.
i am allowed to voice crits, this is america and i escaped the scold’s bridle of lockstep movement conservatism long ago.
But whining about how O “sold us out” or is a secret crypto-conservative is simple moronic bovine dumbass cudchewing.
It is obvious to the sapient that he is doing the best he can.
matoko_chan
@pattonbt:
that wont happen until the demographic timer goes off in 2021. Obama was elected before his time in a perfect storm of republican fail….the Econopalypse and the saddle point of Salam-Douthat stratification coincided.
The American government isnt broken– conservatism is broken.
Modern conservatism is the idea that human nature is immutable, so it must exploited and channeled rather than changed.
Like the founders and framers, i believe people can learn, can be educated.
But modern conservatism is just the empowerment of eumenes like homophobia, racism, anti-intellectualism, and anti-education in the service of “managing” human nature, ie keeping the people safe from themselves because they are too stupid to learn.
The devolution of conservatism has led to a base that believes they are entitled to be homophobic racists, believe stupid wrong shit like fetal personhood and creationism and climatology-denial, because they were here first and there are more of them.
And to a conservative elite that ruthlesslessly farms their votes in stead of trying to educate them because they believe the base is too stupid to lean.
It will continue I think, until the demographic timer goes off.
Unless Assanges systemkiller prototype brings down the american security state and we wind up with a new design or possibly a military junta.
That would be sad.
It is possible that the founders design of a secular judiciary composed of non-elected elites will be able to stop the process of America becoming a police state on its way to system collapse.
I guess we will see.
it is kinda like the Founders design going up against Assanges systemkiller.
we will see how robust the Founders and Framers design is.
THE
@matoko_chan:
Awesome comment by Irish dude on the financial crisis.
The language does get a little “technical” in places so NSFW.
sparky
@beulahmo:
i pretty much agree with you on this (OMFSM!). my point(s) such as they are, are that at this point in time, both of your “dangers” are here, now.
to change gears, IMO, no one who has any familiarity with politics and american history would expect Obama to be a militant leftist*, or to “be like” FDR or LBJ, whatever that means. my concern is that the events you mention are occurring, and that at perhaps the last opportunity to change the direction of the USA, there is another Franklin Pierce in the White House.
this time the problem is not slavery but the ability of formal legal institutions to remain at least partially responsive to the general public. can the organizations that routinely control great slices of power and money be constrained in any way by a Federal government? perhaps an analogy can be made to the robber baron period in the US (post-CW till, say 1892). will it play out the same way? i don’t know but am skeptical as (a) the power in the government is shrouded in a way it was not then and (b) much of the money at play in the US is in the hands of corporations rather than individuals.
*or sanctimonious, or whatever other negative characterization of people like me are accused of being.
rob in dc: well-said and thanks–i am sorry i didn’t see your comment first (dunno how i missed it).
as a last note, it is intriguing that most of the “pro-D/Obama” folks engage in one-liners and invective, while there is precious little engagement with the detailed arguments put forth by, for example, rob in dc. for myself, i would greatly prefer to be wrong, but no one here ever submits any evidence to the contrary, just invective and talking points.
edited for clarity (i hope) :P
sparky
@matoko_chan:
i disagree.
if i understand you correctly, you suggest that because conservatism is “broken” we mistake that for the government being “broken.” what you think is the cause (conservatism being broken) i think is a symptom of a systemic problem. reversed, if you will.
sparky
@FlipYrWhig:
i think you inadvertently(?) hit the nail on the head here. with a few paltry exceptions, i don’t think anything Obama has done can, in truth, be called liberal, whether pragmatic, incremental or otherwise.* so, the problem is that people like me (or maybe just me) disagree with your premise. the rest is just flotsam (posturing) and doesn’t matter.
imo, it is not the critics but the defenders of Obama who have and continue to read “liberalism” into his remarks as somehow constituting progress in policy.
cynicism is easy, and hope can be hard. but hope grounded in demonstrably empty platitudes is something else.
*unless you mean liberal in the sense of classical liberal economics.
General Stuck
@sparky:
I can assure you sparky, this observation is most mutual. If I started posting at FDL, would I be the “sparky” of that blog? Would me doing such a thing make any sense, or amount to any notion of time well spent? When we disagree that an apple is is/is not an orange, and vice versa. IOW’s what would be the point, to make an effort to communicate/debate with people when we don’t even agree on what the questions are, or should be.
FlipYrWhig
@sparky:
That suggests to me that you have an obscenely high standard for what counts as “liberal.” HCR is certainly liberal, just not liberal enough for the naysayers. The stimulus is certainly liberal, just not liberal enough for the naysayers. Fair pay laws, tighter environmental regulations, practically the whole WTF Has Obama Done list is liberal, no? If it isn’t, if it really constitutes to you _no_ “progress in policy,” then it seems to me it’s going to be eons before you find a president satisfactorily liberal.
Someone as openly and vocally liberal as we liberals would like… ain’t gonna get elected. And if she or he _did_ get elected, liberal policy wouldn’t flow down like manna from heaven either, because the numerous and strong forces of anti-liberalism would do everything they could to stop that from happening.
General Stuck
@FlipYrWhig:
Do you ever feel as though you are responding to the same comment, over, and over, and over, though usually worded and structured some different? Sometimes, I wonder if there is a self repeating space beacon from some far away galaxy broadcasting the bullshit, with a bunch of little green space men gathered around the short wave, giggling their asses off at us, falling for their hijinks, time after time after time.
FlipYrWhig
@General Stuck: I’ve had that thought too — it’s a bit of the old “eternal September” feeling, where every post brings out a slightly different group of people to raise the same issues as though for the first time. (Think of the number of times someone longs for a _real_ filibuster.)
Then again, my responses tend to be the same responses as though for the first time, so I’m probably part of the problem too.
beulahmo
@sparky:
You know, it’s possible that our only real differences are our assumptions about where we can marshall the power to counter the threats I described (and that you believe are already at work.) I think that looking for a president to be a change agent at the level of efficiency you seek is the problem. It seems to me that the political will a president can assume he/she represents is too difficult to discern with the certainty we require for our purposes _– there are so many variables involved that it’s guaranteed at least some of the operative assumptions made will be wrong. I mean, look at all the disagreement we have here! I think we need to find a much more efficient way to organize and express unambiguous political will.