This is going to get Sullivan flamed:
I’ve had many criticisms of the Obama administration’s tardy and milque-toast efforts on civil rights for gays and lesbians. But at this point, the peril facing repeal of the military’s gay ban is not the administration’s fault. In fact, it seems to me the events of the last month or so reveal that the Obama administration has finally delivered the goods for the military, which is hobbled by this dated, counter-productive policy, and for the gay community, by moving the issue deliberately DADTCOLLINSBrendanSmialowski:Getty through the Congress before the executive branch or the judicial branch. And the fact remains that in the current Congress, we have essentially achieved repeal, with the military’s support and blessing – only to be foiled by tricky parliamentary maneuvering by a hard Republican faction that is impervious to reason. That’s some achievement, however tragic the possibility of defeat.
I mean: look at it. We have the support of the Joint Chiefs, the Republican defense secretary, the majority of the troops, a hefty majority of the public, a majority in the House, and 57-40 majority in the Senate and a president ready to sign the bill. What more – to be frank – could we ask of the administration? Yes, I know there are executive branch ways forward, and judicial intervention looms as well. But it is far, far, far preferable that DADT be undone the way it was done – by the Congress.
All that stands in the way is the filibuster and those Republicans supporting it. But those Republicans must surely know, as defense secretary Gates has warned, that if they do not act with care and deliberation in the Senate, the courts at some point will – with far more damage to military readiness than a careful and deliberate phasing in of this overdue reform. I suppose the far right could try and use a potential court ruling to burnish their view that the courts are the source of all evil, especially gay evil. But if they deny gays equality by the legislative route through a parliamentary maneuver that clearly overrules the plain will of the Congress and the majority of the public, they can hardly complain that a tiny minority, essentially checkmated by one faction of one party with a filibuster, would seek recourse in the courts instead. And if they really want to save the military from disruption, the path charted by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the Pentagon Report and defense secretary Gates is obviously the responsible way forward.
Why does Andrew Sullivan hate gay people? Sure, Obama has done everything a President could do to repeal a law, going through the accurate channels, providing a united front with the people of America, the military branches, the Joint Chiefs and Service Commanders, and large majorities in both houses of congress, but if only he had used the BULLY PULPIT then Joe Manchin, Olympia Snowe, Scott and the 30+ members of the Republican bigot caucus would have voted the other way.
Can’t he see how this is all Obama’s fault?
And I am so disgusted with the performance of Joe Manchin that if I could do it over, I would vote for Raese and hope he won, because then in two years I might have the opportunity to vote for a Democrat. His performance on this was so gutless and cowardly that it is breathtaking:
A senior Democratic aide was unaware if Reid knew Manchin would vote no, but said that the understanding is that Manchin’s vote was something of a stunt.
“If he was somehow the 60th vote, I don’t think he would have voted the way he did,” the aide said.
Manchin told reporters in a statement that his no vote will likely stay a no through the rest of the year at least. See his repose here. The senior aide said that Manchin’s office had told Reid’s office that the new Senator still needed “more time” to review the defense spending bill before he could vote for cloture.
Now there is a real profile in conviction and courage. And this just made me laugh out loud:
“While I believe the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy will be repealed someday, and probably should be repealed in the near future, I do not support its repeal at this time,” Manchin said in the statement. “I truly understand that my position will anger those who believe repeal should happen now and for that I sincerely apologize. While I am very sympathetic to those who passionately support the repeal, as a Senator of just three weeks, I have not had the opportunity to visit and hear the full range of viewpoints from the citizens of West Virginia.”
If you think it should be repealed, vote to repeal it. And we’re all waiting with bated breath for your listening tour through West Virginia to find out what we think. Wait, what? You haven’t scheduled one, and won’t go on one before you vote again on the issue in the future? What’s that “L” word again? No, not lesbian.
Thanks, Joe, from someone who has supported you for a long time.
Dimmic Rat
Its ‘bated’ breath btw.
Downpuppy
All very sensible, except when they could have just let the thing be overturned, they appealed a ruling striking it down.
John Cole
@Dimmic Rat: Fixed. Typing fast and my editor is on strike.
This site really needs an ombudsman.
ruemara
You don’t need Republicans to sink a Democratic President.
I sent this via OFA to President’s Murkowsi & Brown:
Your “support” of DADT repeal
You have publicly voiced your support for the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Soon, you will have another chance to show that you stand by your words – and on the right side of history. I’m counting on you to pretend that you have ethics, that your word means something besides, “I don’t want the Democrats or the President to have a win on anything and I’m willing to side with bigotry to do it”. It’s because of people like you, in your party and in the Democratic party that this country is both terribly divided and facing a horrific fiscal storm. You and your ilk put party over country, power over country. You have no shame and have no delusions that you are doing anything moral in your actions. You know exactly how wicked you are.
Prove me wrong. Cast a vote to repeal a discriminating law that is not supported by the troops or by the bulk of Americans. Stand up and cast a vote for repealing DADT and replacing a statute that should never have been created with an anti-discrimination clause. Maybe I’m wrong and the reason why you’ve been two-faced on this issue is some firm principle. Maybe it’s because you’ve had absolutely no press pointing out that a “support the troops” Republican has been voting against the Defense Funding Bill. Maybe it’s not all political calculations for, once again, power & party over what is just. Of course, I could also believe in the tooth fairy. Here’s your challenge. Prove, not just me wrong, but what thousands of gay and straight people think is wrong about you. Yeah, you personally. What else can you think about people whose words and deeds don’t match up? You’ve got another opportunity to do what’s right, trouble is, I don’t believe a Republican could do what’s right even if God himself came down and told you to do it. Money and power seem to matter much, much more. I won’t hold my breath, no matter how much the hypocrisy smells. With The Minimum of Due Respect,
Maude
@Downpuppy:
Look up how the court system works and then what the AG does when the US has a case before a court.
It has been explained here over and over.
Then, go look up the job description for the president in the Constitution.
Start with the facts.
Jennifer
God, I love this place. Every time I pop over for a visit, I realize there really *is* still sanity in this crazy ass country. Bless you for that. Sincerely.
I
almosttotally want to hug you right now.kwAwk
Hmmm…..I volunteer to be the ombudsmen for this site. It would be fun explaining to everybody just how you guys just aren’t giving the right wing a fair shake by actually posting facts as opposed to rumor and innuendo.
Back to the topic at hand even I’m getting sick of all the whining about Obama which is a stretch for me since I’m not the greatest fan myself.
If you think that the whole tax deal is so bad you’re in for a plain hell in the next couple of years with the Repubs running the House. They’re simply going to get their way on a few things.
But even with the tax compromise, we haven’t lost anything, we’ve just pretty much kicked the can down the road. We may have lost this battle, in the opinion of many, but we have a chance to win the issue in two short years. What are we going to do to prepare for that moment?
Downpuppy
@Maude: If Holder can overlook clear obligations to investigate & prosecute torture & massive war crimes, fuck him.
That is all.
Except for the horse he rode in on.
enplaned
It’s certainly not all Obama’s fault, not by any stretch of the imagination.
That said, appealing the court striking down the ban was just stupid.
And if I was an Obama advisor, I’d have told him to send DADT to the Hill the day he was inaugurated, and to have said in his inauguration speech that the American people wanted it, that he had a mandate and that he expected it to be passed by the end of the week — and that bleating about whether it would affect military readiness was a red-herring — that all other NATO armies let gays serve, that the Israeli military let them serve. That it was time to just do it and get it over with, no excuses — time to stand up and be counted, to either be on the right or wrong side of history.
Further, I’d have made the following additional point in his inauguration speech — suppose a study was made that said that military readiness would be improved if, say, blacks (or women) didn’t serve. Would we kick blacks or women out of the military? No, of course not, because equality is a basic principle of our society, and there are some things which we won’t compromise over, and equality is one of them.
It’s b*llsh*t that anyone thought this needed to be delayed to allow other things to go first.
General Stuck
@Jennifer:
The timing Karma gawds are with you then. The BJ pendulum can swing left at any minute/ I keep my galtmobile gassed up and ready, these days.
JR
Were I a West Virginian, I would be seriously pissed off not just at Manchin’s vote, but his craven attempt to use me to excuse his bigotry.
freelancer (itouch)
They’ve come a long way from “Country First”, baby.
TOP123
Waaiit a minute… Senator Manchin has not had time to hear “the full range of viewpoints of the citizens of West Virginia”?
Excuse me if I’m confused, but wasn’t said Senator Manchin known to the public as governor of said state prior to his election to the Senate? And, although I realize Wikipedia may be wrong (sorry, not from WV, so I needed to do some research), prior to his election as governor in 2005, was he not in the House of Delegates, and the state Senate? And prior to that, was he not a student at WVU… and even before that, actually born in the great state of West Virginia?
How much time, exactly, does Senator Manchin need, going forward, to hear “the full range of viewpoints” of his fellow citizens?
MAJeff
The worst thing about Manchin’s vote announcement was his “apology” to people who support repeal now. Bigot can blow his apology out McCain’s ass.
Davis X. Machina
Joe “Nighthorse” Manchin….
WyldPirate
This is something that I think Obama has done a pretty damned good job on. I didn’t get why his own DOJ appealed the court order, but I will admit to not following this issue so closely.
The big problem is, as someone said upthread, that this is an equality issue. It is hypocritical to prevent discrimination in the civilian workplace but enforcing it in the military workplace. And yes, I know that there is the issue of “imperiling moral, discipline and unit cohesion”, but our society functions just fine with the inclusion of gays in all areas and the studies have been done by the military–as requested by the bigoted old SOBs in Congress–and they no longer have a leg to stand on.
This issue, however, doesn’t rise to the level of threat that the one of economic disparity in this country poses.
Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle
John:
I hope you keep calling Manchin’s office about when his listening tour is headed to your area(when ever that is). He deserve to take a verbal beating over this. Who would have thought that an ex-Klansman would have more balls than Manchin.
Stillwater
It’s sorta remarkable what happens to people when they get elected into the
Greatest Deliberative Body in the WorldGood Ole Boys Club. It’s like the realization that they are one of 100 people who have the power to irretrievably fuck things up goes right to their heads.Tecumseh
When the vote came down, some commenter on Gawker went off about how he’ll never give money to the Democrats again or vote for them and how they exploit the gay vote to which he got comment after comment pointing out that 57 Democrats voted for it and it was a few Republicans who chickened out on the vote and he’d respond by saying that he’s never going money to Democrats again because of the vote and he’d get all these comments pointing out that 57 Democrats voted for it and it went on and on despite the fact the guy never said why it was the Democrats fault.
@enplaned: The plan was from the start to go through the process, do a report and so when a vote came down, he’d have the entire military backing him up and studies showing it wouldn’t make a damn difference. Then, the plan was because people in politics are rational people who don’t play political games over other people’s civil rights, an overwhelming majority of Senators would vote for it. Right plan, wrong planet.
General Stuck
@Downpuppy:
It is being investigated/ as we speak. though quietly.
The steps that come after the investigation, are inoperable, until that investigation is complete. there won’t be any frog marching of bush or cheney, but there will be a reckoning of some sort, I predict/ It won’t happen until and if Obama is reelected, for what should be obvious reasons, plus the fact an investigation first needs conclusion.
And besides, Bush has admitted he personally approved of all the waterboarding, even violating his own faux lines of distinction with torture. This book isn’t written yet, and like DADT, Obama is moving like a crafty politician he is, slowly and cautiously, and within the system navigating the political mine fields in the process, but moving nonetheless.
Brick Oven Bill
It is hard to understand the anger of the homosexual lobby regarding military personnel policy. They already have the Army.
Thomas Beck
“But if they deny gays equality by the legislative route through a parliamentary maneuver that clearly overrules the plain will of the Congress and the majority of the public, they can hardly complain that a tiny minority, essentially checkmated by one faction of one party with a filibuster, would seek recourse in the courts instead.”
Umm…what planet is Andrew Sullivan living on? Of course they can and will complain. He’s already noted that the Republicans are “impervious to reason.” What makes him think they’re any more susceptible to logic, decency, shame, or any sense that they will ever have to pay the slightest price for all of that?
Mike in NC
Our exposure to “West By God Virginia” were limited to visiting Harper’s Ferry, Shepherdstown, and a charming honeymoon stay at the Bavarian Inn.
Baud
I think Obama was correct to appeal the court ruling while there was still hope for a legislative fix. The big decision will be how to proceed if the Senate adjourns without breaking the filibuster.
FlipYrWhig
@enplaned: I dunno — I think there’d be ample opportunity for significant backlash to the notion that Obama was “forcing” or “ramming” the idea of ending DADT onto an unwilling military — At A Time Of War! ™. I think the whole thing has been pretty well set up, starting from the decision to retain Gates as SecDef (undermining the Republicans’ ability to say that homo-lovin’ Democrats don’t understand the military) and including allowing the military to do its study–remember how the Aravosis wing of Democrats was sure that the point of the study was to make repeal less likely?–because that would give people like Jim Webb and other “centrists” proof that it was not “social engineering,” and even attaching the DADT repeal to the must-pass defense bill. Even the legal maneuvering makes sense to me as attempts to force the resolution of the issue: keep defending, keep appealing, and work that fucker right up to the Supreme Court and _get it settled definitively_. It hasn’t been fast, but I give them credit for carrying out a strategy that has minimized the number and ferocity of conservative complaints and has moved the issue much further and faster than I would have thought could happen.
Suffern ACE
@WyldPirate: I just fainted.
Lolis
I have become convinced that the president’s strategy on DADT repeal was the absolute correct one. I wasn’t always. It has been heartening seeing our military leaders speak eloquently on equal rights. I think it sets the right tone for the change in the military. There is still a small chance it will pass this year. I fervently hope it is repealed this year. If it isn’t I will blame those who voted no, not Democrats.
Sharl
OT:
Two bomb blasts in separate locations in Stockholm. Unfortunately there were casualties (one dead, two injured), but early reports suggest it could have been much worse, given the proximity to a lot of Christmas shoppers.
Someone called in just before they went off, claiming the bombs were in protest of Sweden’s Afghanistan participation (500 troops). But methinks numerous speculation opportunities abound with this one! Wuz it a radical faction with pro-Assange sympathies getting violent? Or action by an anti-Assange government agency, intended to frighten Swedes into clamoring for their government to “fight terror” by extraditing that pro-terrorism dood to the US if/when they get him (he’s still in UK, fyi)?
Don’t wait for facts (assuming we ever get a full accounting)! Start yer speculation naow, and beat the rush!
Kmeyer the lurker
Here’s what I don’t get: reliable nitwits like Sullivan repeat the trope that repeal by the courts will ‘hurt military readiness’ in a way that a more careful, legislative phase-in won’t. Why should that be? This makes no sense. The military has contingency plans for everything, including scenarios so imlpausible as to be considered ludicrous. They certainly have a contigency plan for implementing a DADT repeal as well. This line is trotted out constantly without challenge as the main reason that this must, must, must be done through the legislature (i.e. it will die in the Senate as does everything else), but it’s pure bullshit.
Observer
@General Stuck:
See that’s the point where some of the Obama train travellers disembark.
You may write that and it may be correct but other people might think:
“Obama is moving like a crafty politician he is, slowly and cautiously, and within the system navigating the political mine fields in the process, but moving nonetheles so that his staunch supporters can claim he’s doing something even though in the end no one will actually be sanctioned and Obama will say some other force in the political system will stop him from getting what he ‘really wanted’.”
See that’s the crux of the whole matter on too many issues.
You say slow and cautious because he’s being crafty to outfox the Repubs, others say slow and cautious because he’s using his craftiness on you to keep your support while ensuring the outcome he really wants but doesn’t want to be open about.
John Cole
@TOP123:
Not to mention, as a lifelong West Virginian, I can assure you the range of viewpoints in WV is “fer it” or “agin it” and “why the fuck are you talking about this when half us have no jobs and if we do we’re making 7 dollars an hour while our good jobs and union jobs disappear?”
celticdragonchick
@FlipYrWhig:
That will be fucking hilarious if we get a 5-4 decision against us…
But 11th dimensional chess is teh awesome.
In any event, there isn’t much more he can do to help on the legislative front, I concede. That is broken beyond repair, in all liklihood.
bcwbcw
@General Stuck
torture investigated slowly and quietly? Right, your bridge is in the mail.
Obama has said he is not pursuing torture orders by higher ups “look forward not backward.” Why the hell do you think Bush was so ready to smirk about torture? The lower level investigations have been confirmed by the wikileaks documents to have been dog and pony shows to get the Germans and Spanish courts to back off. The highly touted investigation of the destruction of the CIA torture tapes whimpered to a close lately, as the statute of limitations ran out three years after the event even though we know who did it and who ordered it. Of course none of the investigations was ever given any real subpoena power.
But yes, it IS just like the DADT effort, carefully delayed again and again (we need that DADT report which we have somehow scheduled to not come out until after the elections and a expected loss in seats) so as to be able to have a totally ineffective carnival sideshow of support just a little to late to do anything. And never, ever, saying I will not sign a defense appropriations bill without DADT repeal.
Kind of like the tax deal
Kind of like the health plan public option.
Kind of like everything Obama lied about in his campaign promises
MikeJ
@Sharl: The guy had six pipe bombs strapped to his body with a backpack of nails, but only one bomb went off.
Bizarre that he did it at midnight, not when the streets were full of shoppers. At least that’s what my shitty reading of swedish says. It takes me forever to make bad translations now. When I worked there I could read the newspaper on the way to work but these days I take minutes per paragraph.
Gravenstone
@Sharl: I made the mistake of reading the first few posts on the Yahoo news article when this first became public. Yeah, it was pretty much 100% speculation about “jihadists” and “Sharia law” and, well you get the picture.
Mnemosyne
@Kmeyer the lurker:
Because the nitwits in the right wing will scream about “activist judges” and spend decades chipping away at the right until it only applies to a handful of people. Or do you think you’ll be treated differently than those evil, evil women who want perfectly legal abortions?
Mnemosyne
@Observer:
It always cracks me up that the people who are most likely to sneer about the possibility of “11-D chess” are the same ones who hold deep, dark conspiracy theories about how Obama deliberately plotted to kill the repeal of DADT by attaching it to a must-pass defense bill because he’s just that devious.
WyldPirate
@Suffern ACE:
Well, I hope you were sitting and didn’t fall out of your chair. ;)
You should get that syncope thingy checked out.
Allan
@enplaned: Ah yes. Remember how well the brand-spanking-new and widely popular president was able to ride his mandate to close Guantanamo. Those were great times.
Mnemosyne
@efgoldman:
If it goes through the courts, in what way would they be “taking on the military”? They would claim incessantly that they were protecting the military, the media would repeat that claim 24/7, and the screaming of the actual military to point out that they actually did want the repeal will be ignored.
If you don’t think that right-wing groups have briefs all prepared to file their own lawsuit in case DADT gets overturned by the courts, you’re living in a dream world.
Downpuppy
@General Stuck:
And Alabama?
Of all the crap that the Justice Department has swept under the rug, the heap that hurts worst is the Canary in the lead mine.
It would have taken about 5 minutes to clean out the bastards that railroaded Siegelman. Instead, they kept them on.
It’s just damn near impossible to avoid thinking we’re doomed to live in a plutocratic dystopia.
celticdragonchick
@Mnemosyne:
Strictly speaking, an argument can be made that Obama has no say over what the Justice Department does because it is supposed to be independent from political calculation.
Beats me. I do have to laugh when I hear the conspiracy theories like you describe just like I laugh at the suppositions that Obama is playing a smart “long game” with courts that he has zero control over.
General Stuck
@bcwbcw:
Like what exactly? List shit if you make an accusation.
@bcwbcw:
See this is a good example of the intellectual laziness or dishonesty that pervades the concern trolls. Obama did not say this, nor did Holder. What they said was that they were focusing on cases where the Bybee memos standards and limits were exceeded, which they were obviously on waterboarding. What? you think Holder didn’t already suspect or know Bush was personally directing violations of his own bullshit limits on waterboarding? And that could be why Bush spilled the truth in public recently.
You may be right in the end, and nothing is done, but you are wrong that there is no investigation going on into Bush torture policy, and that you have any clue about it’s nature, other than non binding, most likely for pol cover statements on the focus of those investigations, and what they might or might not lead to. You claim to read the future, and it is all Obama fail, all the time. It should be also obvious that this projected ability is laughably false.
celticdragonchick
@Downpuppy:
According to Citigroup, we are…and times are good for investment in Tiffany’s…
General Stuck
@Downpuppy:
Yes, Siegelman was railroaded for pol reasons, for doing stuff that every politician does, that happens to also be wrong, and sometimes illegal. What was Obama to do? go into court and tell a judge to vacate the conviction, or have a new trial because everybody does it? what Siegelman did.
And I don’t know why they kept the bushie USA attorney in AL. Maybe to use them like cheap whores for something else. I don’t really care that much, the BS that happens in AL/
Liberty60
A comment I heard during the HCR struggle, that Obama is a strong believer in having legislatures legislate, as opposed to the Executive-centric view we have grown accustomed to, where the Congress just rubber stamped whatever Cheney put in front of them.
I also believe that there is a terrible tendency on our side to swing wildly from idol worship to hatred; either Obama/ Sully/ Greenwald is Jesus reincarnated, or he is Satan.
This is the point I tried to make on an earlier thread, that why as much as the Right hates the tax deal, you don’t hear them calling for Mitch McConnell to be primaried. The Right at least has a grasp of who their enemies are. They see a failure of a conservative bill as a reason to redouble their efforts, not a reason to sulk and flounce off to their room.
I think we can criticize Obama strongly for some things, while acknowledging that he he very good on others.
For instance, while the tax deal seems terrible to me, and I think he is horribly wrong on civil liberties, still, I would rather have 20 more Obamas in the Senate than a 1 more Nelson.
General Stuck
@Observer:
Don’t put words in my mouth, I didn’t say slow and crafty to outfox republicans. I said it was to navigate political minefields, mostly the ones set by national prevailing public political norms. And he has more than most to navigate thru. It is politics, not the charge of the light brigade. They all do it. Because they have branes. The ones that don’t, end up as also rans, picking shit with the chickens.
And my support keeping doesn’t have all that much to do with obama personally, it has to do with the fact that if a dem doesn’t occupy the WH, then it will be a republican. And Obama is no where near creating the kind of disappointment it would take to change that immutable equation.
celticdragonchick
@Liberty60:
The Senate would certainly be more competent.
johnny walker
RE: Manchin. Something something Cole’s a bad Democrat something something President Palin something something party unity or else.
I’m glad you’ve acknowledged that sometimes it’s ok to just go, “You know what? I’m not comfortable with these options,” or however you want to put it. But I somehow doubt this will cause anyone around here to rethink the, “Well go ahead and don’t support the Dems. We all know you can’t wait for President Palin, and it’ll be on your ass when she gets elected” bullshit that gets pulled on a regular basis when we’re having our two minutes’ firebagger hate, or even to realize that it might be cause to rethink in the first place.
General Stuck
@johnny walker:
Does it get lonely, that cross you nail yourself to?
ChrisNBama
Normally Sully is unrealistically critical of Obama’s approach to gay issues. At one point, I got the idea that Andrew thought Obama could wave a magic wand and repeal DADT ex nihilo.
It’s nice to see that he is re-joining the reality based community regarding the Obama Administration’s efforts to get rid of this discriminatory law.
Sorry, John that you have a weasel for a Senator. I’ve got Richard Shelby and the race conscious Jeff Sessions. You got the better deal.
Observer
@Mnemosyne:
I don’t think anyone has any “conspiracy theories” about Obama and have no idea what you are talking about.
And Obama is devious. He’s a first term Senator who got elected President. He’s smart, craftty, ambitious and devious.
What did you think the 300 or so “present” votes were about when he was a state senator anyways.
But that’s not the main point, which I believe you have missed. Obama’s strategy, to some, is plainly obvious and better characterized as cynical than devious.
Look this isn’t actually hard: he’s gaming you. Every issue that can have a blue dog outcome does, and on each one make sure there’s a little scrap of something that Dems like you can rally around and compromise on to be “pragmatic”.
It’s also massively easy to predict what he’ll do and what he’ll say on just about every issue. Run a contest, ask me a prediction on *any* substantive issue you think will be resolved in the next 3 to 6 months and I can tell you almost *exactly* what he will do.
Go ahead try me. Run a blog contest, collect your predictions and see what happens. Any issue.
MikeJ
@Liberty60:
I get the idea that many of Obama’s critics are pissed of we don’t live in a monarchy.
johnny walker
@General Stuck: So the Obama admin. has a secret plan to end torture huh?
@MikeJ: Right, because it’s totally unconstitutional and evidence of royal/imperial behavior for the President to write legislation and then present it to Congress. Strawman much?
Kryptik
@ChrisNBama:
It’s still disappointing though to go from fucking Robert Byrd to this. And I say this as a WV native myself.
General Stuck
@johnny walker:
LOLwut? There is no evidence Obama or anyone else in his government is currently torturing people. It was ended from day one. You got evidence? lay it on us. My drool cup is emptied, so bring it on. I won’t be surprised most likely of your answer, this has all been done before, here in the Shangri La of hot air.
MikeJ
@johnny walker: There are times, like now, when I *wish* he could say “off with his head!”
Mudge
John…Manchin is a sniff the wind opportunist who had plenty of time to get up to speed with the issue, but doesn’t want to piss off the voters who are agin it. I fear this is just the tip of the iceberg. He’s already been called a DINO and that will stick. My friends and I think this is round one in him not being a rubber stamp for Obama (as he was accused). It’s all political for Manchin, he has no values.
Sniff the wind.
eemom
which is a perfectly reasonable question
MikeMc
Joe Manchin isn’t a coward or a bigot. I’d actually have more respect for him if he were either. His actions are nakedly political. He has started his 2012 re-election campaign with this choice. I guess he and his people think this will play well in WV. Will it, John?
MikeMc
@Mudge: He is a DINO. And we democrats never call anyone that!
johnny walker
@General Stuck: Right, how dare I suggest that barely a months’ time between “I would crawl through broken glass to vote for Manchin” and “if I had it to do over I’d vote for the Republican” suggests that our host’s opinions are not necessarily well-thought-through. Weird how Cole can say he’d rather have voted for a Republican without getting shouted at about unity, President Palin, etc. from those of you who constantly claim that even mean comments on liberal blogs can make the GOP retake the WH. Not that I’d expect an authoritarian asshole like you to actually question an established authority figure, but the silence is deafening.
@General Stuck: It’s a Nixon reference, you dumb bastard. Point is about putting faith in “secret plans” that you admit upthread you have no way of knowing the details of. You say No, trust Obama. Cheney will get prosecuted! Just wait! I say you’re servile and naive.
@MikeJ: I know, how dare I call you on your bullshit strawman! I’m just so mean. How frustrating to not just be able to pull stuff outt’ve your ass.
Joe Beese
Whether you think Obama’s plan was the correct one or not, don’t expect the GLBT vote to be understanding when, as will certainly happen, Congress fails to repeal and the Roberts court reverses the Virginia ruling – thereby buying DADT an additional 30 years of life.
eemom
@General Stuck:
not only is that right, but you know what else? What a sanctimonious crock of shit this whole post is for someone who purports to be something other than a knee jerk left-bot.
The guy has been in office barely a month……he won a tight election in a redneck-ass state……it is a given that this thing was going down even if he had voted for it…….
…..and already you’re ALL SET to dismiss him as a DINO and a bigot??
And tell us you wish you’d voted for Raese, cuz prospects are gonna be SO much rosier for the Democrats in 2012??
Who IS John Cole, anyway?
General Stuck
@johnny walker:
Stop putting words in my mouth you lying twit. I said nothing about “secret plans” . It is no secret there is an investigation going on, and unlike you I claim no special abilities to foretell the future and didn’t, only to offer some possible examples how it might turn out, or not.
And after all the bullshit that has been splashed on this blog, by you and large cast of fellow firebagging clowns, you will have to excuse me if I didn’t pick up the Nixon reference. Especially, as it originated from a false meme you just created characterizing my comments with claims of my claiming what is happening having to do with “secret plans” by Obama. Whatever idle speculation I offered was to highlight the idle speculation by you and others as being, in fact, idle speculation, and not based in knowledge.
Joe Beese
More than you can ever know.
General Stuck
@eemom:
Don’t know. but it’s been one hell of a ride finding out.
But I will say. He’s a guy who likes critters, and that is usually good enough for me.
dollared
I read Sully, which is I why I oppose the repeal of DADT.
I hope he stays mad forever. He wants to feel that he is equal to all other men. Of course, he is also richer than almost all his fellow men – and he doesn’t want to pay more taxes than them.
He wants my Social Security cut after I’ve paid for 35 years.
He wants to rich people to feel empowered. He loves the Tory cuts in the UK.
Fuck him. Fuck his pet project. Send him off for a two year project being part of the working poor. When he comes back, then he can talk to me about his little gays in the military issue.
dollared
@JC 31
@EEmom 62.
Damn right it’s a perfectly good question. I am really tired of people who don’t understand why working people vote Republican. Of course they are lying sacks of shit, but they promise something better than the sheer loss and desperation most working people feel these days.
And if you want to know why I am mad at Obama, it’s because he isn’t spending every goddamn minute trying to solve this problem.
And he’s not trying. He’s not trying. Look at HAMP. Look at this tax deal. Look at all the “tax cut stimulus” rather than real construction jobs stimulus.
Obama really is an elitist neoliberal, which is to say: there is no hope for things to get better for non-college-educated working folks. And that is wrong.
Observer
@General Stuck:
You don’t have to have special abilities to accurately predict what’s going on. Just make a few hypothetical asssumptions, use some logic and presto!, you’ll be 95% accurate.
The hypothetical assumptions are:
1) The Dems have absolutely no convictions or principles about anything and will compromise on anything, no matter how ridiculous.
2) The republicans will not compromise on anything and will only vote for things that favor the rich.
3) Obama wants to get re-elected and favors blue dog outcomes as long as he can blame “the Senate”.
With those three “rules” you can pretty well predict everything. I’m not saying any of these three assumptions are true, I’m just saying you can make predictions based on these things.
Joe Beese
And you want him to feel otherwise.
In my book, that makes you a much bigger asshole than he is.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
@johnny walker: I’m sorry, what was that he did the other day? Oh yeah, negotiate with the other party in Congress to create a bill that could pass. That went over well with the people who want him to legislate.
Barb (formerly Gex)
@dollared: The rest of us gay people are happy to hear your support for our rights depends on the behavior of this one gay guy.
General Stuck
@Observer:
Neither am I
eemom
@dollared:
I regret to agree with you. Wholeheartedly.
also, why the fuck doesn’t he go back to the UK where he belongs?? Nobody has ever provided a satisfactory answer to this.
@General Stuck:
roger that. Truth be told, I luvs our John to death. Doesn’t mean I shouldn’t tell him when he’s full of shit though. I tell everybody when they’re full of shit.
eemom
now with this I absolutely do NOT agree.
As good, sane people such as Flip have pointed out, it IS possible to disagree with what Obama has done on a specific issue — and I really, really disagree with him on the tax deal — without defaulting to facile condemnations such as this type of “Aw, fuck him” type of attitude.
celticdragonchick
@dollared:
You really are a worthless POS.
Suffern ACE
@eemom: Ummm. It has been 20 years since I was living there, so maybe it has changed, but I don’t think “opinion” is as highly paid in the UK as it is here, and there probably are fewer openings.
Suffern ACE
@celticdragonchick: Oh, I wouldn’t go so far as that. I would gladly trade Sullivan if it would lead to more support for DADT. It’s a cruel world sometimes, but he’ll land on his feet. I’m sure if we told him to focus more attention on income inequality and ways to solve it, he probably wouldn’t comply, even if it meant broader support for his issues. Heck, I’ve got a list of probably a dozen opinion writers whom I’d trade if it meant firmer alliances could form in the big tent…
Ija
@dollared:
Of course this is a very logical position. Who cares if thousands of our military people get screwed. It’s more important to hurt Sully’s fee fees. If Sully is for breathing, would you be against that as well?
Ija
@dollared:
Pet project? His little gays in the military issue? Maybe if you stop being so obsessed about Andrew Sullivan you can start thinking about DADT on the merit. Here’s how you can start: Sullivan is irrelevant. DADT is not his “pet project” or his “little” anything. There are real lives being destroyed as we speak. Think about those people. Just walk away from the Sully.
johnny walker
@Belafon (formerly anonevent):
Point being that people on here bounce between “What, you expect Obama to write the legislation himself? Let Congress do its job, he isn’t a King!” and “Of course Obama had to go behind the Dem Congress’ back to write the legislation with the Republicans, he’s got to get shit done!” If it’s convenient at a given moment for Obama to be capable of negotiating and crafting legislation himself, he is granted that power. If it’s convenient for Obama to “rise above” politics, be constrained by the whims of Congress, etc. then the Congress is intransigent and Obama’s doing the best he can but we shouldn’t expect him to act like a dictator, etc. etc.
If you think going over the Dems’ head and brokering a deal with the GOP was the way to go that’s fine. Having the President create and submit legislation for a vote vs. having him wait for Congress to craft legislation and send it to him are both valid approaches. What I’m tired of is the inconsistency: people who thought going over Congress’ head was dictatorial, royalist, Bush-like behavior until it became necessary to defend the tax compromise.
@General Stuck:
You’re fuckin’ hilarious dude. First, yeah silly me thinking people might get a political reference on a political blog. So here’s your previous post:
(sigh… FYWP. had to mash it all together so the blockquote would work)
So
1) It’s being quietly investigated
2) You predict that “There will be a reckoning”
3) “Obama is moving like a crafty politician he is, slowly and cautiously”
So it’s your assertion that snarkily suggesting that you’re saying, “Don’t worry, Obama is going to prosecute these guys. It’ll just take awhile. He’s playing the long game,” is completely unreasonable. That there’s no possible way that a reasonable person would look at these points taken together and conclude that you were suggesting Obama was doing some long game 11-D chess type stuff, that the reckoning will be coming if we can just be patient, etc.
You also think that making ‘predictions’ about the future means you’re less guilty of trying to uh… yknow, predict the future… than someone who said nothing at all about what’s going to happen and merely gave you shit for what I perceived as servile naivety. OMG, I used the phrase “secret plan!” Like I said, sorry for assuming that someone who hangs out for multiple hours a day on a political blog might have a reasonable enough familiarity with recent US political history that I could reference the “secret plan” as a slam without having to explain it to you. So yeah, let’s get all hung up on that and play the semantic game eh? Maybe I wasnt clear enough, but what I was trying to tell you in the “dumb bastard” post was about holding onto your faith that “the reckoning” is coming, however slowly. About you essentially saying, “Trust Obama, he’s got this” because you have faith in some hazily-defined investigation process you readily admit you’re all but clueless on.
Then you’re going on about me “speculating” about the future and all this crap… huh? My point of speculation was on whether or not people would read Cole recanting his Manchin vote and actually think twice about the “President Palin” browbeating shit that gets pulled out when people dare suggest they’re not feeling all that enthusiastic about voting for Democrats. Besides that, my activities in this thread have been about giving you “secret plan” related shit with a small digression to flip shit to a guy who was acting like having the President draw up and submit legislation himself is a move that’s exclusive to monarchies rather than a common and absolutely normal part of our political process. Any predictions you’ve convinced yourself I’ve made here are a figment of your imagination. Judging from the typography you’re displaying I’d say you’ve had a few, so maybe that’s why you’re having trouble distinguishing me from the other Reverse Obots, Firebaggers-Who-Never-Actually-Read-FDL, or whatever other label you might feel like slapping on me. Either way, I’d ask that you pay more attention.
@eemom: Are you upset about the characterization or the conclusion drawn from it? I don’t know if we’re doomed but “elitist neoliberal” is a pretty accurate description of Obama as a politician.
WyldPirate
@General Stuck:
Obama Reluctant to Look Into Bush Programs:
The Presidential Oath of Office from Article Two, Section One Clause Eight:
I suppose Obama’s “ability” is a little lacking when it comes to the Constitution. Kinda sucks for a Constitutional Law prof….
johnny walker
@WyldPirate: So if in the process of accusing someone else of intellectual laziness one fails to do their own homework is that also intellectual laziness? Intellectual laziness squared? Actual laziness?
Maybe calling it “Pulling a Stuck” is the way to go.
WyldPirate
@johnny walker:
LOL. Good one Johnny Walker.
I suppose you and I don’t get it. Obama can’t possibly be blamed for anything even if he actually did do it or say it.
and it’s our fault that the Obots won’t use the Google.
I’ve got a question for you. Since waterboarding is clearly a crime since the US has prosecuted it as such against the Japanese and against its own citizens in (Vietnam and a Texas sheriff during the Reagan years), how does Obama and Holder refuse to prosecute Bush when Bush admitted i that he had ordered the breaking of a law? And why does Obama try to pressure the Spanish courts from investigating this admitted international war crime?
General Stuck
@johnny walker:
It’s your lying and putting words into the mouths of other commenters that makes you silly. Your lame Nixon reference wasn’t attached to what we were talking about. You introduced an entirely different topic suggesting that torture is actually occurring now, and not what we were discussing about investigating and prosecuting Bush’s torture, then expect me to pick up on some generic term of “secret plans” tethered to a non sequitor
And all of your polemic bullshit coming out of the original false claim I pointed out as false, that no investigation was occurring. And leaving out my references and main point that nobody knows what, if anything, will end up happening, to create another firebag false meme that flows out of your mouths like we expect to see from republicans.
Quit lying, I said no such thing. And I never use the 11 dimensional chess thing, and the only peeps that do are firebagging twits like you.
Not to mention, I clearly stated there will likely be no “frog marching”, meaning outright prosecuting of Bush, imo, and making predictions of a “reckoning” is simply that, a personal prediction, and simply means that at some point obama and holder will have to answer the question of what are they going to do given Bush has admitted to guilt that is the announced focus of inquiry into violation of Bush’s own faux limits to waterboarding. A prediction that is more valid than yours and the others zombie false meme that no investigation is even occurring. I could be wrong and they do file some type of charges, or some other means of holding account for what happened. If they don’t, when they should, when their investigation is concluded, then and only then will claims of failure be true. Not withstanding all your wanking to the contrary.
You really need to get a hold of yourself dude, the bullshit of false characterizations of what others here are saying is at a manic level and quite embarrassing. I think you have the potential to be a credible firebagger, so be all you can be.
john b
@ruemara:
shit. pull no punches. some pretty powerful stuff.
General Stuck
@WyldPirate:
Moron. taking a generic statement like ‘looking forward, and not back” means nothing in this instance given the fact that THE OBAMA DOJ IS CURRENTLY INVESTIGATING BUSH’S TORTURE PROGRAM.
Try not to be so obvious, and wipe that snot offin yer nose.
WyldPirate
@General Stuck:
Damn, stuck. You’re a piece of fucking work. Just exactly did you mean when you clearly said that Obama or Holder didn’t say what at least Obama clearly said?
do you want me to go find some fucking video tape of himn saying it? I know I’ve heard him say it on at least 2-3 occasions in reference to these sorts of things. I’m pretty sure I’ve seen Holder say the same.
You’re nailed dude. You clearly didn’t know what you were talking about. You didn’t bother to look. You were unequivocal in your statement This goes directly to the point johnny walker was talking about—you Obot’s shift the goalposts constantly.
There is no putting this off on me. Get as mad as you want because you were busted on this. But the guy you should be pissed at is the one staring back at you in the mirror.
Suffern ACE
@Ija: Hmmmm. If I were going to write about the direction of the GLBT movement in the past 20 years, it would be very difficult to leave Andrew Sullivan out of the book. It isn’t a pet project, as there is a method to all of this citizenship based approach to equality, but I can’t really ignore that the two of the biggest names in the gay and lesbian news media establishment have a few blind spots when it comes to class concerns (as quite a few members of that establishment do.) i could see how someone might notice that.
General Stuck
@WyldPirate:
Dumbass, he didn’t say anything about prosecuting, or not, anyone about anything. you read that into your lying obama hate machine on about every thread on this blog. I don’t know if you are really that stupid, or simply have zero self esteem, or there is some other unknown reason for it. So, once again, whatever obama mused about in generalities means nothing since his DOJ is actively investigating the Bush torture program. When that investigation is completed, then we can have a rational discussion about it. And the only thing I am “busted on” is why I even bother to answer your bullshit comments.
Mnemosyne
@Observer:
When you say that Obama attached DADT to the DOD finance bill because he knew it would not pass, that is a conspiracy theory. You are accusing him of taking an action that a normal person would see as an attempt to get DADT repealed and insisting that it’s all a devious plan to not get it repealed.
You may want to get a dictionary and look up the word “conspiracy” if you’re still confused about why saying someone is deliberately trying to deep-six his own policy by taking steps to put that policy into place is a conspiracy theory.
Ah, so we’re back to claiming that the health insurance companies didn’t really pour hundred of millions of dollars into Republican campaigns that promised to repeal the healthcare bill in this year’s election, or if they did, it was all an elaborate plan to really keep the healthcare bill in place because … uh … um … hmm …
Funny, you still haven’t come up with an explanation for why the health insurance companies are lobbying hard to get the ACA repealed if they’re so thrilled with the massive giveaway to them that’s in the bill. Why not answer that one before demanding we give credence to any of your other conspiracy theories?
WyldPirate
@General Stuck:
Stuck, that is not what is at issue and what caused me to post what I did. You said that Obama didn’t say that “we should look forward rather than back”. You were clearly referring to prosecutions regarding torture as was Obama.
As for the part about “prosecuting or not”, please. Can you not read? Read the article–Obama says that:
That alone implies that Obama is looking for weasel room to let people off the hook–ie “looking forward and not back”.
The law was fucking broken–blatantly. Hundreds of times with one person at least. Bush admitted he ordered it. He smirked about committing war crimes. Obama tried to twist the Spanish courts arm into not looking into this issue. That is protecting an admitted war criminal in my book. It hardly seems to be upholding the Constitution or the laws and treaties of the US.
At this point, I’m not even convinced you can read well. Are you dyslexic or something? Do you have some sort of cognitive deficit (other than cognitive dissonance due to a severe case of Obama worship)? You can be helped even at your late stage in life if you have some sort of disability in this area.
General Stuck
@WyldPirate:
then, obama quote
then
At this stage, I am wondering if space aliens have captured wildythang and making him say odd shit.
I may have forgot, but don’t think i said this. Please provide quote, little space dude.
WyldPirate
@General Stuck:
Go look at your post in #45 below the second bit that you blockquoted in that post from bcwbcw. That is what I quoted in post 87 above–which is what you said in reply to what you quoted from bcwbcw.
Nick
@Kryptik:
Robert Byrd was the reason DADT exists in the first place. Byrd is the reason they didn’t tackle this issue a year ago. Byrd was the reason the DADT repeal language was “after a thorough examination was done”
General Stuck
@WyldPirate:
Well, that question is answered. you really are that dense, dumb, idiotic, whatever the choice. What I was responding to was the meme, or content of what bcwbcw was expressing, or doing the same thing you do, attaching “look forward, not backward” to something Obama didn’t say, as far as I know.
this part of bcw comment was what I was responding to.
When Holder gave the presser, or statement on the parameters of the SP investigation, he did not make such limitation that I heard, but simply stated they were looking into cases where the bybee memos set limits on waterboarding and other torture techniques, and they were exceeded.
Of course Obama has said the look forward, not back thing, and everyone knows it/ And I can’t believe you would pedant something that obvious to try and score a debating point. And not read or disregard what I said right after stating that’s not what Obama said. in comment 45
I have never believed in pie filters, but for you, I think I’ll make an exception. to save myself the utterly wasted time, explaining something like this.
Ija
@Suffern ACE:
Noticing it is one thing. Hoping that DADT is not repealed because they are pissed at those two people is another. Nobody in the gay community elected Sullivan as their rep. Why should they suffer because of his shortcomings? And characterizing repeal of DADT as somebody’s pet project is just a way of trivializing it. It must not be that important if it’s someone’s “pet project” and “little issue”
Nick
@Ija:
every issue is somebody’s “pet project”
Odie Hugh Manatee
Like most politicians, Manchin is a follower and not a leader. His statement proves this point. He says that he is willing to vote for it but only if popular opinion in his state is on his side. He is just another politician who will never stick his neck out for anything so he can keep his job as long as possible. Safe stuff is all he will enthusiastically support. Like most of our congress, Manchin is just another politician who will never do anything of consequence because he is a follower. He will never do what’s right if there’s a chance he could lose his job, he will only do what’s right for Joe Manchin.
Like the rest of our gutless wonders in congress.
Ron
@Joe Beese: Because it’s Obama’s fault the republicans in the Senate are crazy and the SCOTUS is all but certain to rule in favor of DADT? What exactly is Obama supposed to do in that situation?
Ron
In general, I don’t understand the people on the left who seem to think every failure of progressive legislation is Obama’s fault and don’t understand that as long as the Senate is broken, it is very difficult to move on things.
I’m not a huge fan of the tax plan he agreed to myself. On the other hand, if we don’t get this one, does anyone really believe that the House will pass anything better when the right wing crazies take over? Everyone who thinks the legislation we’re seeing now is bad should just enter a drunken stupor until 2012. It’s going to be awful. I honestly have no idea how they pass almost anything. The House will write a teabagger agenda and the Senate will tell the house to go fuck themselves (I hope)
matoko_chan
I’m about done with Sully. He praises O for avoiding culture war issues, but throws a hissy fit when O isnt fierce enough on his Own Personal Culture War issue.
He keeps linking intellectually dishonest propagandists like Douthat while trying to fool himself that conservatism is anything but an empty purse manipulated by business class oligarchs at this point.
Conservatism is simply DEAD.
There are no “good” conservative ideas anymore.
Dead white guy philosophy is as dead as phrenology.
Sully’s beloved Oakeshott, Burke, Hayek and Hume included.
He can’t bear to admit that his lifework is in service of CRAPOLOGY.
Sully says he is not a conservative, but he only links conservatives and liberals that are polite enough to pretend that there is any value left in conservatism.
Dont lissen to what they say, watch what they do…or ….when someone shows you who they are, believe them…..the first time.
Sure Sully linked Bady’s analysis of Assanges mission state– but then linked Douthat’s spin on Assange. That is what he always does. He will link something Very Bad for Conservatism, and bring on one of his spin stooges to “refute” it.
/spit
WyldPirate
@General Stuck:
You didn’t “know it” in post 45 because you didn’t say what I quoted above in post 45—you denied Obama or Holder said. That is what you meant when you wrote “he never said that” If you didn’t mean for that to follow the comment you quoted from bcwbcw, then when in the hell did you quote it and then write what you did?
You said, quite plainly, after quoting someone else that he didn’t say it. That was what you were referring too–that quote about “looking forward and not looking back”
You’re simply a liar and got busted it on it and don’t have the sack to fess up…
Keep on making excuses, though….
lawguy
@Maude: You have no idea what you are talking about. Nor do you have any knowledge of history and what other presidents have done in the past.
When you’ve educated yourself come back.
matoko_chan
@Cole
i know you all think im obsessed with WL, but you don’t see what WL really is.
Sully on wikileaks was the last straw for me….
Assanges strategy is not so much anti-american as it is anti-conservatism.
Conservatism is the idea that human nature is immutable, so it must exploited and channeled rather than changed.
My once-friend Razib Khan has said that many many times.
But like Assange, i believe people can learn, can be educated. the founders believed that too.
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.
I must finally admit that Sully is my enemy because he is the enemy of truth and freedom.
lawguy
@Ron: Obama was to not appeal the god damn court decision. Obama could have started with his legislative repeal immediately after being elected, rather than wait until a congressman started it and then jump on board. Incidently, do you remember who he had give the invocation at his inauguration? The fat homophobe from Colorado. Doesn’t that really tell you where he is and always has been?
WyldPirate
general stuck, you are evidently full of shit on the DOJ torture investigations –at least as far as higher-up bush administration officials is concerned:
Torture Investigation: Bush-DOJ Attorneys ‘Exercised Poor Judgment’
<blockquote>The investigation was overseen by the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), an internal watchdog that monitors decisions and actions of the department’s lawyers.
So, Stuck, you’re simply talking out of your ass. The DOJ absolved the Shrub’s administration’s legal counsel of anything but “poor judgement”. this let’s Bush and all of the higher=ups off the hook as far as facing justice for what they did.
Bush,Rumsfeld and Cheney got away with it. They got their lawyers to say something was legal–just conjured the reason’s up out of thin air–that the US has prosecuted its own troops for in Vietnam, that we prosecuted Japanese officers for in WWII as “war crimes” and that a Texas sheriff was prosecuted for in the 80s during the Reagan administration.
There is a reason why Bush is going on national TV smirking about authorizing waterboarding. He knows that the investigation absolved his lawyers of nothing but “poor judgement”. That puts a legal fence between him and prosecution at least from US courts. That’s why the Bushies had Bybee and Yoo gin up the BS legal rationale in the first place.
You need to learn how to use Google instead of talking out of your ass, Stuck. It took less than 30 seconds to find that article. You look like a total dumbass insinuating there are behind the scenes investigations of high up Bush administration officials regarding torture. There might be someone in the future that gets busted, but it will be some poor powerless schmuck—like it always is–such as the Joe Snuffy enlisted folks after Abu Ghraib.
arguingwithsignposts
Well, he was actually a fat homophobe from california, if you’re talking about Rick Warren.
General Stuck
@WyldPirate:
coming from the moron who just said that because Obama said if folks blantantly violated the law, they will be prosecuted, actually means this
should never be taken seriously, and likely should not be walking around the planet without supervision. I just hope you turn out to be a spoof, because no one can be as dimwitted as you appear to be. Or, maybe the diagnoses should be terminal mendacity. I don’t know, but either way, you are likely on the wrong blog. I am fairly certain there are some perfectly respectable clown blogs you would be more comfortable with. otherwise, yawn, at your braindead accusations, I have or am lying about anything on this thread. The sane readers can decide for themselves, like always.
General Stuck
@WyldPirate:
Why do I even bother responding to your nonsense. The internal investigation into these lawyers did not conclude their legal analysis was sound. They concluded the opposite, that it was poor judgment and opted to not take action based on poor judgment. I don’t agree with this finding but it does not open any doors to absolving Bush and Cheney. Especially since the Special Prosecutor is focusing on excesses to the faulty legal opinions of Bybee, et al. Which clearly were the case with at least waterboarding. So your broad assertions, per usual, are nothing more than flailing Obama hate wankings not matched with the facts. But like I said earlier, you folks might be right in the end, and nothing comes of this. But you can’t claim that mantle just yet/
eemom
@matoko_chan:
well, whaddaya know.
A completely coherent and cogent analysis with which I agree.
And it wuz Sully whut did it.
sheeeyit.
different church-lady
@wyldPirate AND Stuck: you know, considering that the sentence in question is so mangled to begin with, don’t you think it’s kind of idiotic to be arguing this hard about it?
Also: pie filters ROCK! Everyone needs that amount of laughter in their day.
General Stuck
@different church-lady:
I’m not the one arguing about it, so pie me and stfu up with the false equivalence.
different church-lady
@General Stuck: Pie you? Hell no, sometimes you’re the only one on the entire blogsphere who’s making any sense.
BTW, when I say pie filters rock, what I mean is: you start with them off. You read what people have to say. You turn them on and have a really good laugh, which takes the edge off your anger. Then you turn them off again.
General Stuck
@different church-lady:
well, ok then. the current trollery stock here is making me cranky, or crankier than usual. And if I am the only one that is sometimes making any sense on the blogosphere, then we are more totally fucked than can be calculated. :)
JR in WV
Hi:
Anyone who thought Joe was a competent manager, good delegate/state Senator, Governor, deserved to become US Senator in Senator Byrd’s place was on drugs at the time they thought so.
I worked in state government most of my career, under Governors as diverse as Gaston Caperton (a naive non-politician businessman with learning disabilities who could barely talk in public when he first ran), Bob Wise (a clogging outsider somehow elected to Congress) , Cecil Underwood (an elderly republican with a drip feed of vodka), Arch Moore (a convicted felon who regarded everything in the state as his personal property) – Joe Manchin was the worst all-time in our lifetimes.
Worse than Wally Barron who also went to jail! Worse than Hulett Smith who didn’t DO anything. I knew a reporter who Arch showed a drawer full of cash right there in his office in the capitol. Hundreds of thousands of dollars, back when that was a lot of money. Manchin was worse.
Mr. Manchin profitized every activity of the state. He sold off the DOT’s equipment and hired private companies to do the work. He made it nearly impossible to hire good staff. He built a freaking party tent behind the governor’s mansion on the statehouse grounds for FSM’s sake!!! There was no operation in government he turned his attention to that was better for it.
He was and is a cheap politician. Someone put him in his place by saying “Yes, we’ve met before. When he came to measure for my carpet.” That’s the limit of his expertise.
He hates everyone he can’t control. This includes you.
No one in state government voted for the busterd. That’s for sure. Unless they were well paid.
There should be a special permanent unit of the Justice Department to monitor the Governor of WVa continuously so that the apparatus doesn’t have to be reconstructed for each newly elected crook.
Our replacement Governator’s an ex-illegal gambling kingpin who set up a state program that enables his Mom (FSM bless her!) to receive hundreds of thousands of dollars each year for raising greyhound race dogs. We have no hope – sometimes I think we make Mississippi look good by comparison. Then I read about MS and I know better, but still it feels bad.
rikyrah
for those 31% of Gays who voted GOP —-where are your Senate votes for DADT?
Stillwater
I agree. And part of the slight of hand you’re getting at (in this and the next post) is that lots of serious people very seriously discuss the ways in which Conservative principles touch upon and enrich (albeit, a little roughly) peoples lives. The corolla of this is – the switch part of the bait-and-switch game – is that we liberals, in order to also be considered serious, must also take the mythology seriously.
But here’s the kicker: even if it’s true that there is something serious about it all, it isn’t an intellectual seriousness, nor is it a seriousness about policy. The only thing conservatives are serious about is reaffirming their emotional commitment to the immutable ‘truth’ of their ideology.
Of course, there is not, nor has there ever been, and intellectual defense of conservatism based on reason and evidence that would ever persuade someone to believe it on rational grounds. It’s a collection of narrowly self-interested emotions that can’t be analyzed or justified. Conservatism really ought to be a studied in psychology departments or cultural history classes, since it has nothing whatsoever to do with rational decision-making in politics or governance.
Bernard
yes Obama bots are fascinating. Like Palinites. mirror images
the new America! nothing is real and everything is real.
Weimar Germany pales in comparison.
Observer
@Mnemosyne:
doubt anyone will read this but in case you’re still monitoring this thread:
Didn’t say that. Said “some people” think that. It’s an observation. I have no idea why Obama does anything. Can’t read minds. In this specific instance, I haven’t followed DADT that much so I have no idea about the substance. Me not following DADT has no bearing on my observation because it’s about form not function.
I don’t follow your arguments enough to know if you always do this but all you’ve done in this instance is throw up baseless sideshow accusations rather than stick to the points brought up. If you actually want to learn/understand something that someone else is trying to say, you might want to go easy on that.
Notwithstanding any of the above, if Obama was trying to be sneaky about DADT, then the proper term isn’t a “conspiracy theory”. Conspiracies involve more than one person. You don’t have to be the POTUS to have looked at DADT and estimated that it’s got a very low probability of passing by legislation in Obama’s first term. I’d estimate it has less than 10%. If you’re the POTUS and have blue dog tendencies and/or decided it was political better for it to fail but to be seen as being passed, you don’t need a conspiracy for that because you don’t have to let anyone else in on that thought. you can just let the process run it’s natural course.
Well, because they’re not conspiracy theories as I’ve explained above. Perhaps you should read (or re-read) Sun Tzu’s Art of War and generally Game Theory. Again, this isn’t hard if you pay attention.
Have you never heard of the phrase “The devil always sends lies into the world in pairs” aka “Satan’s Deception”:
So I hope I’ve being polite here up to this point but Mnemosyne, you clearly have no idea about certain things in life when you write this:
Well yes. See, that’s the whole point when someone is “gaming” you. They figure out how something will look and they go along with your assumptions even though they hold the opposite view. I should not have to list to you the large number of situations and phrases in life that amount to the saying that someone is “gaming” you but here’s but a few:
“yes I’ll pull out”, “Going through the motions”, Jim Crow, “bait and switch”, “the check’s in the mail”, anti-homosexuality campaigns by closet gay politicians, Ted Haggard, “show trials”
This list is not exhaustive but I hope you get the point.
“Devious” is not the word. I’d use “common place”.
4jkb4ia
But John, I immediately thought that Joe Manchin made that milquetoast half-apology because you had the power to embarrass him. That was only half snark.
(My dad comments that Pitt yesterday failed to show up.)
(Duke vs. SLU can be chalked up as a learning experience. You can pat all the Billikens on the head.) (This editor does not recognize “Billiken”)
johnny walker
two months ago
Little late I’ll grant, but I just feel like this belongs here. Maybe someday Cole will learn to stop latching onto the Daddy Figure Du Jour.
matoko_chan
@Bernard: Palin is straight out of Weimar. That is why she can’t get an invite to the WH.
Ah…..jeezus h keeeyrist inna handcart, Cole et all.
75% of the country is below one std of IQ. Those people are
mostly stupidhighly permeable to anglo-saxon protestant demogoguery. The same 70% or so that freaked out over the terror mosque and are homophobic and racist. The same 70% that were against Brown vs Board and for DOMA. Today 70% of the electorate are non-hispanic cauc, down from 90% in 2000.Obama was elected before his time because of the Econopalypse.
Black people, brown people, the highly educated and the highly intelligent ….and young people will eventually reach grouped electoral parity with stupid old white jeezus shouters.
About 2020.
And then they will nevah win again.
:)
matoko_chan
@Cole and here is ANOTHER SIMPLE THING.
The godbothers (TP/GOP) universally do not believe in JEFFERSONIAN separation of church and state.
They ALL believe in MARTIN-LUTHERAN separation of church and state– that MEANS….separate THE OTHER GUYS CHURCH FROM THE STATE, NOT MINE.
christ its not hard.
Protestantism is DISTINCTLY anti-intellectual.
THE
Speaking of simple things,
I really liked the picture on the troll thread that Annie Laurie posted the other day,
it reminded so much of the pictures you used to post on your old blog.
That 19th century fantasy style. The picture is by John Bauer.
If you click on the link she’s provided,
it takes you to the Wikimedia site where there’s a lot more of his work.