• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Republicans in disarray!

I’d try pessimism, but it probably wouldn’t work.

Spilling the end game before they can coat it in frankl luntz-approved dogwhistles.

The willow is too close to the house.

Glad to see john eastman going through some things.

“Squeaker” McCarthy

Not all heroes wear capes.

I’m pretty sure there’s only one Jack Smith.

DeSantis transforms Florida into 1930s Germany with gators and theme parks.

So it was an October Surprise A Day, like an Advent calendar but for crime.

Innocent people don’t delay justice.

Imperialist aggressors must be defeated, or the whole world loses.

Never entrust democracy to any process that requires republicans to act in good faith.

Red lights blinking on democracy’s dashboard

It’s time for the GOP to dust off that post-2012 autopsy, completely ignore it, and light the party on fire again.

It’s a doggy dog world.

But frankly mr. cole, I’ll be happier when you get back to telling us to go fuck ourselves.

We cannot abandon the truth and remain a free nation.

How can republicans represent us when they don’t trust women?

Make the republican party small enough to drown in a bathtub.

A snarling mass of vitriolic jackals

Usually wrong but never in doubt

This blog will pay for itself.

Anyone who bans teaching American history has no right to shape America’s future.

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Open Threads / My Grio.com post in response to Politico: Confessions of a so-called ‘Obamabot’

My Grio.com post in response to Politico: Confessions of a so-called ‘Obamabot’

by Imani Gandy (ABL)|  October 19, 20117:28 pm| 322 Comments

This post is in: Open Threads

FacebookTweetEmail

Yesterday’s article in Politico about the so-called “Obamabots” was odd not because of what it said, but because of what it didn’t say. Missing from the article was any attempt to analyze or wrestle with the issues that separate the so-called Emo progs and the pragmatic progressives. Rather, the article was no sound or fury, signifying nothing.

Rather than make a good-faith attempt to unpack the arguments and reasoning of our “ragtag digital cavalry,” or to discern what drives us to “ride to the president’s rescue,” Politico dismisses us as “decidedly amateur supporters” whose intense loyalty and passion at a moment of wide disaffection can be reminiscent of Palin’s core backers.” Palin’s core backers? The misguided sycophants who have no grasp of facts or reality? Really, Politico? Ouch.

The Politico article argues that there is wide disaffection with President Obama. It is this narrative of “wide disaffection,” “disappointment,” and “enthusiasm gaps” that comprise the canard against which we bots push back.

There is no wide disaffection with Obama (and, contrary to Politico’s claim, there certainly is no wide disaffection in the “the supportive precincts of African-American talk radio). There is wide disaffection with Obama among a small percentage of supporters who are avid readers of bloggers with the loudest microphone.

The Greenwalds, the Walshes, the Hamshers, and the Sirotas — these bloggers sow seeds of dissension, and comfortably nestled in their cocoon of Obama disappointment, they begin to believe that their viewpoint is more representative of sentiment on the left than it actually is. When these bloggers take to Twitter, however, Obama supporters who otherwise would have no paltform from which to make themselves heard push back.

Months ago, I noted that the Professional Left seemed taken aback by the frequent, and admittedly sometimes harsh pushback. I warned that those of us who are too often kept on the sidelines until we are needed to vote with the herd would no longer be silenced.

Apparently my warning was taken a tad too literally. “Some prominent liberals declined to talk to Politico about the Obamabots for fear of drawing their wrath?”

Really? I wonder if it’s one of the prominent liberals who labeled Obama supporters “dumb motherf**kers” for recognizing that the debt ceiling deal was good for Democrats (a fact which the Professional Left finally grasped about two months after the pragmatic progressives did). (Side Note: Contrary to Politico’s claim, Hamsher did deceptively edit a clip of her appearance with Ezra Klein on The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell.)

While not particularly useful as a journalistic effort, the article in Politico served to highlight precisely the tension that has been running through Netroots Nation as of late, and that is the seeming marginalization of voices (both black and otherwise) of those bloggers not included among the Professional Left.

Professional Left bloggers tend to hail from the first-responder blogs, those that gained popularity and readership during the Bush years, a period of liberal togetherness, and which have maintained their status despite the proliferation of “independent or “New Left” blogs such as mine, The People’s View, PoliticusUSA, Addicting Info, Pragmatic Obots Unite, POV, and others.

(read the rest)

[cross-posted at Angry Black Lady Chronicles]
FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Funky shit going down in the city
Next Post: Open Thread: “You Smell Like Bacon to Us” »

Reader Interactions

322Comments

  1. 1.

    AA+ Bonds

    October 19, 2011 at 7:33 pm

    Why continue this whole Democrats-beat-on-Democrats thing at all? Time’s running short to get serious.

    I mean, this is a whole essay attacking successful left-wing voices that you and I will need in the coming months, EVEN IF they are critical of the President.

  2. 2.

    Guster

    October 19, 2011 at 7:35 pm

    Which ones are emo again?

  3. 3.

    JWL

    October 19, 2011 at 7:35 pm

    You lost me at “Emo Prog”.

    What the fuck is an Emo Prog, and why should I care?

  4. 4.

    Bullsmith

    October 19, 2011 at 7:36 pm

    To be honest, it was hard to keep reading past the word “Politico.” I did, but it wasn’t the obvious move.

  5. 5.

    Odie Hugh Manatee

    October 19, 2011 at 7:37 pm

    I see that the whiners are out in full force today, eh?

    Truth hurts…lol!

  6. 6.

    geg6

    October 19, 2011 at 7:40 pm

    Word, ABL.

    Also, too.

    X1000.

  7. 7.

    j low

    October 19, 2011 at 7:43 pm

    Tiresome. Fer us er agin us is so 2002. I generally find points of agreement and disagreement with Obama, Glennzilla, Sirota, Hamsher and even ABL. Why use freaking Politico as an excuse to snipe your left flank?

  8. 8.

    Brian S

    October 19, 2011 at 7:43 pm

    @JWL: They’re the people who are butt-hurt at the fact that Obama is the moderate he campaigned as and not the progressive unicorn they deluded themselves into believing he was.

  9. 9.

    Swishalicious

    October 19, 2011 at 7:43 pm

    Don’t worry, ABL has a few months before the mandatory “QUIT YER BITCHIN AND PARROT THIS RATIONALE FOR RE-ELECTION WHEREIN ALL OBAMA’S MISTAKES WERE DUE TO REPUBLICANS, LARRY SUMMERS, OR EMOPROGS LOLZ LOLZ” posts.

    It’s fun to tear apart the Democratic party until we need to be rowing in the same direction, at which point the most effective method is smacking people in the head with an oar. Over and over and over again. /snark

  10. 10.

    piratedan

    October 19, 2011 at 7:44 pm

    @AA+ Bonds: well isn’t the converse also true? Why are they ragging on those folks that support the President when they’re gonna end up doing said same in supporting Obama in 2012? It’s okay to have a difference of opinion, in fact that’s what makes Dems that much more appealing, more voices do get heard, but these guys have been so busy concern trolling instead of actually HELPING that maybe they need to check themselves a bit. How about a little help nationally instead of fanning the flames and providing cover for the false equivalency crowd?

    Not saying that everyone has to walk in lockstep like the R’s do, but stating your case and then suggesting alternatives is a bit more constructive than the constant purity trolling that’s been going on.

  11. 11.

    Mr. Poppinfresh

    October 19, 2011 at 7:50 pm

    Missing from the article was any attempt to analyze or wrestle with the issues that separate the so-called Emo progs…

    A stupid, unnecessary ad-hom in literally the second sentence.

    This is why nobody takes you seriously.

  12. 12.

    arguingwithsignposts

    October 19, 2011 at 7:50 pm

    I think whatever ABL said (I scanned the part she posted here) I can safely say that Politiho has achieved its sole purpose in life. (columbia journalism review link – disclaimer)

  13. 13.

    Strandedvandal

    October 19, 2011 at 7:51 pm

    Nice article ABL.

  14. 14.

    Uncle Clarence Thomas

    October 19, 2011 at 7:52 pm

    .
    .
    Urgent – Breaking – All Emoballoonbaggers on Deck
     
    For a circle pop of epic proportions.
     
    Sponsored by griftio.com
    .
    .

  15. 15.

    JWL

    October 19, 2011 at 7:53 pm

    @Brian S: Thanks. That explanation makes perfect sense.

    I’ll quibble, however. To those with ears, Obama campaigned as a conservative, and not a moderate.

  16. 16.

    lol

    October 19, 2011 at 7:54 pm

    @JWL:

    Emo Progs are progressives who constantly need to be upset about something, anything, just please god pay attention to meeeeeeeeeeeee.

  17. 17.

    JR in WV

    October 19, 2011 at 7:55 pm

    Anyone not behind re-electing President Obama 100% right now today is too stupid to participate in political discussion.

    Last election cycle I contributed a LOT of monies to a wide variety of Democratic candidates. My wife just did come out of ICU after I took her to the ER on September 23. [ She is doing fine and no longer is connected to any support devices, heading to rehab to learn how to walk soon. Thank FSM !!]

    So we won’t be participating as much financially, but will be supporting the President as hard as we can.

    I have a “Veterans for Obama” bumper sticker on both the Truck (F-350) and the car (VW Jetta TDI). We have had a biker in Arizona give us a thumbs down (for a biker, that’s pretty polite!) and a guy in a big Chrysler do the same up in Ohio. That bumper sticker was from before he won the nomination!!

    I think once the choices are clear and people are going into the voting booth, there will be no mistaking the will of the people! President Obama may not be the most popular president ever, but compared to the Republican pretender, there will be no choice.

    Best of luck, President Obama!

    JR in WV

  18. 18.

    AA+ Bonds

    October 19, 2011 at 7:55 pm

    @JWL:

    What the fuck is an Emo Prog, and why should I care?

    The definitive response.

    I find it astounding that as I’ve moved toward sympathy with ABL over Democratic unity, these posts have gotten more and more cheerleader-table-in-the-cafeteria, to the point that even I am not Internet enough to really understand the blogfight going on here

  19. 19.

    David Koch

    October 19, 2011 at 7:55 pm

    @AA+ Bonds:

    attacking successful left-wing voices

    Successful at what? None of Hamsher’s candidates have ever won. Greenwald isn’t even left wing as he strongly supported the Citizen’s United decision (I don’t know a single honest to goodness lefty who wants more money in political system). And Sorota is so successful, his prior blog, Open Left, died due to lack of traffic.

  20. 20.

    SteveinSC

    October 19, 2011 at 7:56 pm

    …reminiscent of Palin’s core backers.”

    Game, set, match.

  21. 21.

    AA+ Bonds

    October 19, 2011 at 7:57 pm

    @j low:

    Why use freaking Politico as an excuse to snipe your left flank?

    Why in the hell would you snipe your left flank at all, as a member of the left-wing party going into an election year buoyed by a left-wing grassroots movement

  22. 22.

    scav

    October 19, 2011 at 7:57 pm

    I’m about as happy with this president as I’ve ever been with any president in my life: meaning I want to yell at him with great vigor, generally about once a week. All in all, quite happy with the current situation, thank you veddy much. There have been a few were the shouty bits were every half hour and interfered with my sleep. But I’m sure this sort of rag-tag complexity isn’t anything they care to take into account.

  23. 23.

    I_D_Inuse

    October 19, 2011 at 7:57 pm

    ABL
    I am a fan of yours and past the overblown writing you make sense. You are now entering breitbart mode. Nuff said?

  24. 24.

    Too Many Jimpersons (formerly Jimperson Zibb, Duncan Dönitz, Otto Graf von Pfmidtnöchtler-Pízsmőgy, Mumphrey, et al.)

    October 19, 2011 at 7:58 pm

    Say it again and again.

    It still dumbfounds me that so many people still seem to believe that Obama can just do anything he damned well feels like, so, if something they want to happen doesn’t happen, then Obama chose to stop it.

    And I’ll say this again: Run liberal primary challenges to sitting politicians in states like Maryland or Massachussetts, if the officeholder doesn’t vote liberally enough. Don’t do that in Louisiana or Nebraska. To repeat myself from a few weeks ago, in Louisiana, the choice isn’t between Mary Landrieu or somebody who votes like Al Franken; it’s between Mary Landrieu or some dickwad who votes like David Vitter.

    You want to change that? Have at it. But it’ll take work to show white voters in Louisiana that they’re voting against their own interests. It isn’t flashy, it won’t happen fast, and you can’t beat your chest about how steadfast you are to The Cause while you’re doing it. So lots of overwrought, pissy liberals won’t bother to do that. It’s more fun to throw fits and scream about how Obama’s worse than Bush. If you think I’m being unfair, then go to Louisiana and show me how wrong I am. I’d love to be wrong about you. Work your ass off instead of complaining it off, and I’ll sing your praises. I’d be willing to bet ABL would, too.

  25. 25.

    AA+ Bonds

    October 19, 2011 at 7:58 pm

    @David Koch:

    You’ve heard of them, so they’re successful, I don’t care about “Hamsher’s candidates”, anything else I can help you with?

  26. 26.

    Short Bus Bully

    October 19, 2011 at 7:59 pm

    @Mr. Poppinfresh:
    Go read up on what an ad hominem actually is and then come back and post here. Until then STFU.

  27. 27.

    AA+ Bonds

    October 19, 2011 at 7:59 pm

    @Too Many Jimpersons (formerly Jimperson Zibb, Duncan Dönitz, Otto Graf von Pfmidtnöchtler-Pízsmőgy, Mumphrey, et al.):

    You should actually just sing the left’s praises unequivocally no matter what provocateurs say because presumably you don’t want the country to slide off the continent into the goddamn ocean.

  28. 28.

    Uncle Clarence Thomas

    October 19, 2011 at 7:59 pm

    .
    .
    @Odie Hugh Manatee:

    I see that the whiners are out in full force today, eh? Truth hurts…lol!

    So true. She was so balloonbagger butthurt she felt compelled to publish a full-force whiny response.
    .
    .

  29. 29.

    jamurph

    October 19, 2011 at 8:00 pm

    Translation: Stay the course. If we keep licking his boots clean then he’s bound to respect us.

  30. 30.

    Strandedvandal

    October 19, 2011 at 8:01 pm

    Gawd damn I miss the pie filter. So many mentally deficient douche canoes in here nowadays.

  31. 31.

    shirt

    October 19, 2011 at 8:02 pm

    “… There is wide disaffection with Obama among a small percentage of supporters who are avid readers of bloggers with the loudest microphone.” Are you putting me in the 1% group. I AM disatisfied with Obama. It’s true, I am. Still gonna vote for him. My disaffection with Obama is but the smallest of my political feelings. Let it be represented by a bonefire on a californian beach. The disgust, scorn and absolute spite I hold for the GOP is like the texan prairy fire by comparison. They talk of Obots, implying something programmed, unthinking? When is the last time that a GOP congressional member has voted how he felt? Lemming-like the marching morans are stumble somewhere.

  32. 32.

    Short Bus Bully

    October 19, 2011 at 8:03 pm

    @JR in WV:
    Anyone not behind re-electing President Obama 100% right now today is too stupid to participate in political discussion.
    /thread

    For those of you still sounding out the ideas ABL is trying to communicate here, this pretty much sums it up. Short version of the post: “The Obama bashers are NOT the main voice on the left, they need to put on their big girl panties and get on the team to help with the big win.”

  33. 33.

    General Stuck

    October 19, 2011 at 8:04 pm

    LOL. Who are the “emo progs”? Why they are the folks being emo about the term emo progs.

    ABL casts a line with a worm attached, and all the little fishies jump right in the boat butt hurt first.

  34. 34.

    AA+ Bonds

    October 19, 2011 at 8:05 pm

    Reading this piece is like watching that sport from Central Asia where they use a goat as a football and trying to make a winning fantasy team out of the experience – the gore and spectacle are fascinating but I have no fucking clue what’s going on or who the players are

  35. 35.

    fasteddie9318

    October 19, 2011 at 8:05 pm

    Excuse me. Are you the Judean People’s Front?

    Fuck off! We’re the People’s Front of Judea!

  36. 36.

    Cliff in NH

    October 19, 2011 at 8:06 pm

    @I_D_Inuse:

    Where is the fraud? where are the lies?

    Prove it.

  37. 37.

    lol

    October 19, 2011 at 8:06 pm

    @JWL:

    Obama campaigned as a pragmatist and a liberal.

    He’s liberal enough to support single payer but he’s pragmatic enough to know it’s not going to happen any time soon.

    Liberal enough to go for a $1.3 trillion stimulus but pragmatic enough to cut it down to a size that will actually pass.

    He’s smart enough to know that the best way to move the Overton window isn’t to flood the airwaves with your viewpoint, but to steadily enact actual policy that moves the status quo towards your viewpoint.

    Before Obamacare, the discussion was whether Americans should have access to affordable healthcare. Post Obamacare, the discussion is how to best give Americans access to affordable healthcare.

    Obama has moved the national conversation to the left in so many ways but the Professional Left still can’t grasp it because they’re constantly obsessed with optics rather than results.

    Take the budget and debt ceiling deals – it’s obvious now that Obama pretty much pwned the Republicans in negotiations. Despite that, you’ll see the Firebaggers whining that 1. Obama doesn’t know how to negotiate because he allowed Boehner to save face when cutting the deal and 2. he used the wrong framing and like such as. You’ll see very little criticism of the deals themselves because Firebaggers care about perception (which is exciting, can be done by any dumbfuck blogger and easy to post), not policy (which is boring, requires expertise and hard to enact).

  38. 38.

    David Koch

    October 19, 2011 at 8:06 pm

    @jamurph:

    If we keep licking his boots clean

    Man, you have some kinky projections.

  39. 39.

    David Koch

    October 19, 2011 at 8:07 pm

    @lol: Forget it, LOL, it’s Chinatown.

  40. 40.

    I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet

    October 19, 2011 at 8:07 pm

    Hi ABL,

    Thanks for posting this. It’s a good takedown of Politico – a site I try to never read. ;-)

    A nit though – Your title probably should be changed to “theGrio.com” rather than “Grio.com” as that is a different site. ;-)

    Keep up the good fight!

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  41. 41.

    AA+ Bonds

    October 19, 2011 at 8:07 pm

    @General Stuck:

    It’s a shitty propaganda term that might as well have been slurped out of Karl Rove’s asshole with a straw, that clear it up?

  42. 42.

    Linnaeus

    October 19, 2011 at 8:08 pm

    @Brian S:

    They’re the people who are butt-hurt at the fact that Obama is the moderate he campaigned as and not the progressive unicorn they deluded themselves into believing he was.

    I’d say, though, that ABL’s essay doesn’t define the president as a moderate. Her response to the so-called “emoprogs” is of the other variety: that the president is actually quite liberal/progressive, but is blocked from fully realizing that due to aggressive Republican opposition and other constraints.

    I also find ABL’s use of the label “New Left” kind of interesting. What’s new about this new New Left?

  43. 43.

    AA+ Bonds

    October 19, 2011 at 8:09 pm

    @Short Bus Bully:

    Yeah, and this post is like a Democrat wearing a T-shirt around with a hammer and sickle next to a donkey that says “DEMOCRATS ARE NOT MARXISTS” in really small letters under the right armpit

  44. 44.

    I_D_Inuse

    October 19, 2011 at 8:09 pm

    @General Stuck: The worm wriggles. One hysteric is much like the other..ABL is great but hyperbole is unattractive.

  45. 45.

    David Koch

    October 19, 2011 at 8:11 pm

    @AA+ Bonds:

    I don’t care about “Hamsher’s candidates”

    Neither did the voters – hehehehehheheheheh.

  46. 46.

    NobodySpecial

    October 19, 2011 at 8:11 pm

    @Too Many Jimpersons (formerly Jimperson Zibb, Duncan Dönitz, Otto Graf von Pfmidtnöchtler-Pízsmőgy, Mumphrey, et al.):

    And I’ll say this again: Run liberal primary challenges to sitting politicians in states like Maryland or Massachussetts, if the officeholder doesn’t vote liberally enough. Don’t do that in Louisiana or Nebraska. To repeat myself from a few weeks ago, in Louisiana, the choice isn’t between Mary Landrieu or somebody who votes like Al Franken; it’s between Mary Landrieu or some dickwad who votes like David Vitter.

    You realize there is a third option between Franken and Lincoln, right? That being a conservative Democrat that doesn’t feel the need to vote against the party every chance they get….

    I know, it’s hard to fathom, especially among some Juicers.

  47. 47.

    Brian S

    October 19, 2011 at 8:11 pm

    @JWL: I guess it depends on your scale, but I think you’d have to be a loon to suggest he campaigned as a liberal.

  48. 48.

    AA+ Bonds

    October 19, 2011 at 8:12 pm

    @lol:

    Firebaggers actually aren’t real and “firebagger” is a Koch-enabling Republican-esque propaganda term that you shouldn’t repeat unless you want the Democrats to lose

  49. 49.

    lol

    October 19, 2011 at 8:12 pm

    @Too Many Jimpersons (formerly Jimperson Zibb, Duncan Dönitz, Otto Graf von Pfmidtnöchtler-Pízsmőgy, Mumphrey, et al.):

    The funny thing is that they *did* get that initially. They ran moderate to conservative Democrats in moderate to conservative districts and got them elected.

    And then they threw a tantrum when they, not surprisingly, had moderate to conservative voting records.

  50. 50.

    AA+ Bonds

    October 19, 2011 at 8:13 pm

    @David Koch:

    Get the fuck out, ride a sled of severed dicks into a pool of lava, along the way, try to somehow avoid talking about or thinking about Jane Hamsher

  51. 51.

    I_D_Inuse

    October 19, 2011 at 8:14 pm

    @Cliff in NH: Read again sweetie, I am an ABL fan but she is way above the hyperbole used to incite the the zombies.

  52. 52.

    AA+ Bonds

    October 19, 2011 at 8:15 pm

    I’m glad we have the “Democrats vs. the left” brigade out in full force who have chosen securing their boojy cred over the left actually winning anything, ever, at all

  53. 53.

    singfoom

    October 19, 2011 at 8:17 pm

    Article about infighting and people speaking for others causes more infighting and speaking for others. Film at 11.

  54. 54.

    NobodySpecial

    October 19, 2011 at 8:17 pm

    @AA+ Bonds: Hint: Many of them weren’t very left to begin with, they just weren’t right enough for the GOP’s Purity Brigade.

  55. 55.

    agrippa

    October 19, 2011 at 8:18 pm

    I am not a member of the commentariat; I am not on radio or tv, write a blog or newspaper column. And, I really do not much care for emotional appeals and political invective. I just try to keep up and make logical judgements.

    Everoone has an opinion and few are going to be swayed.

    I have no problem with PBO. I think that PBO has done well; he has certainly done much better than any of those – on the right and the left – who offer criticisms based upon emotional/illogocal grounds.

    Does that make me an ‘Obamabot’?

  56. 56.

    Cacti

    October 19, 2011 at 8:19 pm

    @David Koch:

    Neither did the voters – hehehehehheheheheh.

    FTW

  57. 57.

    David Koch

    October 19, 2011 at 8:19 pm

    @AA+ Bonds:

    Firebaggers actually aren’t real and “firebagger” is a Koch-enabling Republican-esque propaganda ter

    But it was an FDL front pager who coined the phrase during their attempt to kill the ACA.

    If anyone is enabling me, it’s my dear Hamsher uniting with my employee, Grover Norquist.

  58. 58.

    lol

    October 19, 2011 at 8:19 pm

    @NobodySpecial:

    That brings to mind another valuable lesson – don’t spend 8 figures in a race where both candidates are doomed to lose in the general.

    Lincoln/Halter was dumb in so many ways. Instead of wasting $15 million to just to make some kind of point, there were union loving liberals that could’ve escaped the slaughter if they had an extra million or two spent on their race.

  59. 59.

    AA+ Bonds

    October 19, 2011 at 8:20 pm

    @Cacti:

    If you mean for the win, by the Republicans, in 2012, you’re right about that

  60. 60.

    ruemara

    October 19, 2011 at 8:20 pm

    I just read the entire piece. It’s quite good writing and does what I wish the professional journalists (hah, first thing I’ve laughed about all day!) had done on their piece. Considering the fact that emo-progs and prag-progs are terms being used, I find it curious that people are so wound up about them being discussed. Especially since the original article in question used the term that these very progressive people came up with to slur those who disagreed with them on Obama. Also, here’s what has bothered me immensely about the whole DKOS, GG, FDL vs everyone else fight. There is power in negativity. The contrary view appeals. It is the story that is picked up. Facts that are complex do not make good readings. Opinions, say, Rachael Maddow’s very bold statement on NY Marriage Equality-“Make no mistake about it, the President is against what just happened here.”-those are clear and short. People want what confirms opinions. The debate that could have been had by Politico to bring these 2 views together, discuss the facts and leave conclusions to the reader, well, that was lost.

  61. 61.

    a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)

    October 19, 2011 at 8:20 pm

    Can anybody explain this to me? “Let it be represented by a bonefire on a californian beach.” Clearly I’m not hip enough – or too old – to get the reference.

  62. 62.

    AA+ Bonds

    October 19, 2011 at 8:20 pm

    @David Koch:

    For the love of God stop saying that name and get the motherfuck over it, are you capable for a single second of pretending that a blog and its blog-lady don’t exist

  63. 63.

    rikyrah

    October 19, 2011 at 8:20 pm

    GO ABL!!!

    loved it.

    on point.

  64. 64.

    General Stuck

    October 19, 2011 at 8:21 pm

    @AA+ Bonds:

    It’s a shitty propaganda term that might as well have been slurped out of Karl Rove’s asshole with a straw, that clear it up?

    Propaganda? Sounds like more butt hurt from holier than thou precious flowers who dish it out, but can’t take it. You should toughen up their son, Karl Rove has nothing to do with idiots on the center left. We deal with our own and it ain’t with kid gloves with all that is at stake. General StuckObot

    Me, could care less about the fee fees of people who shit in their own tent, and expect the rest of us to take a deep breath.

  65. 65.

    Cliff in NH

    October 19, 2011 at 8:21 pm

    @I_D_Inuse:

    Where is the fraud? where are the lies?

    Prove it.

  66. 66.

    magurakurin

    October 19, 2011 at 8:21 pm

    @AA+ Bonds: half of whom apparently don’t vote. I’m not encouraged to learn that a movement that is 90% college educated had a voting percentage of just 56% in 2008. That seems to indicate that 46% of the OWS people didn’t mind if Granpa Munster and Caribou Barbie had become president.

  67. 67.

    AA+ Bonds

    October 19, 2011 at 8:22 pm

    @lol:

    I don’t believe that shit ever happened, sounds like a fake made-up Republican story to me. Maybe you should treat it like one, err on the side of caution and not talk about it anymore?

  68. 68.

    AA+ Bonds

    October 19, 2011 at 8:23 pm

    @magurakurin:

    ^ close thread, it has now been fully infiltrated by Koch drones, thanks ABL, hope it was worth it to be Queen Internet

  69. 69.

    numbskull

    October 19, 2011 at 8:23 pm

    @Mr. Poppinfresh: Uh yep.

  70. 70.

    agrippa

    October 19, 2011 at 8:23 pm

    @lol:

    lol # 36

    That is, basically, my view of the matter.

    In 2008, there was long list of ‘things’ that had to be done ‘now’. I think that we are all aware of the items on that list. I was fully aware that a significant number of those items were not going to be done.

    Disappointed ? No. Life is unfair; life is contingent.

  71. 71.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    October 19, 2011 at 8:23 pm

    @AA+ Bonds:

    Get the fuck out, ride a sled of severed dicks into a pool of lava,

    You and I disagree on the issue at hand, but that is a beautiful series of words. Consider it stolen.

  72. 72.

    Cacti

    October 19, 2011 at 8:24 pm

    @AA+ Bonds:

    If you mean for the win, by the Republicans, in 2012, you’re right about that

    With your winning personality, I can only wonder why the firebaggers can’t persuade a majority.

  73. 73.

    AA+ Bonds

    October 19, 2011 at 8:24 pm

    @General Stuck:

    All this shit is stupid and you don’t do anything but hurt the Democrats by making your precious point, end transmission

  74. 74.

    AA+ Bonds

    October 19, 2011 at 8:25 pm

    @Cacti:

    I don’t know what the fuck a firebagger is and I don’t read shitty blogs by nobodies, it is time for the Democrats to talk about The Left is Great and We Sure Like the Left, that is what it is time for.

  75. 75.

    General Stuck

    October 19, 2011 at 8:26 pm

    @I_D_Inuse:

    The proof is in the pudding. Whatever pulls the poison out into the open is art, in my book. The methodology is ABL’s, and it might be over the top. But it has purpose, and delivers the end result. Hysteria is only hysterical when it has no plan. Otherwise, it is just loud strategy that works or doesn’t.

  76. 76.

    Cacti

    October 19, 2011 at 8:26 pm

    @AA+ Bonds:

    I don’t know what the fuck a firebagger is and I don’t read shitty blogs by nobodies

    Very important internet poster is very important.

  77. 77.

    Belafon (formerly anonevent)

    October 19, 2011 at 8:28 pm

    @NobodySpecial: Please, find me one in Louisiana. Better yet, find me a Democrat that could win against Ralph Hall here in Texas that wouldn’t vote like Landrieu.

  78. 78.

    I_D_Inuse

    October 19, 2011 at 8:29 pm

    @Cliff in NH: Comprehension problems? If so, say so and I will attempt to find an interpreter. Pictures…..?

  79. 79.

    fasteddie9318

    October 19, 2011 at 8:29 pm

    Listen. If you really wanted to join the PFJ, you’d have to really hate the Romans.

    I do!

    Oh yeah? How much?

    A lot!

    Right. You’re in. Listen. The only people we hate more than the Romans are the fucking Judean People’s Front.

    Yeah!

    Splitters!

    And the Judean Popular People’s Front.

    Oh yeah. Splitters!

    And the People’s Front of Judea!

    Splitters!

    What?

    The People’s Front of Judea. Splitters.

    We’re the People’s Front of Judea!

    Oh. I thought we were the Popular Front.

    People’s Front.

    Whatever happened to the Popular Front, Reg?

    He’s over there.

  80. 80.

    lol

    October 19, 2011 at 8:29 pm

    @AA+ Bonds:

    Poe’s Law has its limits, Doug. More subtlety if you’re going to impersonate folks.

  81. 81.

    General Stuck

    October 19, 2011 at 8:29 pm

    @AA+ Bonds:

    end transmission

    LMAO. Roger Wilco, over and out sparky.

  82. 82.

    agrippa

    October 19, 2011 at 8:29 pm

    Only a fool fights in a burning house.

  83. 83.

    I_D_Inuse

    October 19, 2011 at 8:32 pm

    @General Stuck: I can agree… but after a season of tea I crave adult conversation.

  84. 84.

    Lockewasright

    October 19, 2011 at 8:33 pm

    What blows my mind is that polling shows that a SOLID majority of democrats support the president. That being the case, why is it that we Obamabots need to justify our point of view? It’s the emoprogs who seem to not have a grasp on reality or at the very least a minority perception of it in the democratic universe. They should be the ones having their rationale brought into question.

  85. 85.

    AA+ Bonds

    October 19, 2011 at 8:34 pm

    To make it clear I will post literally anything here to try to shock people out of their “attack the left” trance in time for November, I will obtain and post a full-color shot of Jane Hamsher’s downstairs if it will get y’all to finally reach orgasm and put her out of your minds for a few months

  86. 86.

    Belafon (formerly anonevent)

    October 19, 2011 at 8:35 pm

    @agrippa:
    Probably, because I agree with

    I have no problem with PBO. I think that PBO has done well; he has certainly done much better than any of those – on the right and the left – who offer criticisms based upon emotional/illogocal grounds.

    And I’ve been arguing for tempering peoples expectations ever since we saw how the Republicans, and a select group of Democrats, were going to act.

  87. 87.

    Lev

    October 19, 2011 at 8:35 pm

    I wonder if it’s one of the prominent liberals who labeled Obama supporters “dumb motherf**kers” for recognizing that the debt ceiling deal was good for Democrats (a fact which the Professional Left finally grasped about two months after the pragmatic progressives did).

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx

    My, that inflection point sure lines up with the debt ceiling debate, now doesn’t it?

  88. 88.

    Marc

    October 19, 2011 at 8:37 pm

    @AA+ Bonds:

    There is a component of the online left that despises both Obama and anyone who defends or supports him. The comments to posts from people like ABL are a pretty fresh reminder that she’s targeting something very real.

    people like that have no respect for my opinions, those of ABL, or anyone who doesn’t follow their party line. They’re not my friends, they’re not my allies, and I’m not alienating a supporter when I confront them. I am reminding people that the Obama haters don’t speak for all liberals.

  89. 89.

    Joel

    October 19, 2011 at 8:38 pm

    Not just a play by Shakespeare, I see.

  90. 90.

    AA+ Bonds

    October 19, 2011 at 8:39 pm

    B.b.b.but Jane Hamsher! HER SCURRILOUS ALLEGATIONS SHALL NOT GO UNANSWERED!!

    Our precious precious honor! FOR THE HONOR OF ALL TRUE PURE DEMOCRATS *drives Tron bike off cliff into oblivion, Democratic Party trailing behind on a chain of posts*

  91. 91.

    AA+ Bonds

    October 19, 2011 at 8:40 pm

    @Marc:

    I actually think those people are a myth and don’t exist, that’s what all the evidence seems to point towards.

    Meanwhile, the Republicans are real and they are going to kill your family by inches.

  92. 92.

    General Stuck

    October 19, 2011 at 8:41 pm

    @AA+ Bonds:

    I will obtain and post a full-color shot of Jane Hamsher’s downstairs if it will get y’all to finally reach orgasm and put her out of your minds for a few months

    The brave selfless wanking . It’s just too much, dabs misty EYE. I love you. Stelllllllllllllllllllllllllllla!!

  93. 93.

    lol

    October 19, 2011 at 8:42 pm

    @Lockewasright:

    The Liberal Media likes to provide balance to its panels by having commentary from Obama critics on the right (McCain), Obama critics on the center-right (Lieberman) and Obama critics on the left (Hamsher). All viewpoints are thus represented.

  94. 94.

    Thoughtcrime

    October 19, 2011 at 8:42 pm

    How about this ABL (Awesome Black Lady)?:

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/10/19/BA3F1LJIPD.DTL

    Woman saves trucker from S.F. freeway-crash flames
    …
    (10-19) 16:59 PDT SAN FRANCISCO — Keenia Williams saw the big rig tip over and burst into flames in her rear-view mirror. Other drivers speeding south on Highway 101 in San Francisco early Wednesday saw the same thing. Williams, though, was the only one to stop.
    …
    “I just see the (driver of the truck) and, oh my God, I hop out, run, see the guy just sitting there,” Williams said. “He’s like standing between the fire. He passes out. And now I am like, ‘Oh my God, oh my God.’ ”
    …
    Between her and the rig were streams of diesel fuel that had spilled from the truck and now were in flames. The truck driver, 52-year-old Michael Finerty of Concord, collapsed just feet from his burning rig. Williams realized that if no one did something, Finerty was sure to die.
    …
    “I put my arms under his arms and I dragged him all the way to my car,” said the 22-year-old San Francisco resident. “He wasn’t talking or anything. He was just laying there.”

  95. 95.

    General Stuck

    October 19, 2011 at 8:46 pm

    @I_D_Inuse:

    I can agree… but after a season of tea I crave adult conversation.

    But it’s politics. There are no adult conversations in Politics.

  96. 96.

    LT

    October 19, 2011 at 8:46 pm

    “So-called emo progs”?

    One strike against you there.

  97. 97.

    ruemara

    October 19, 2011 at 8:49 pm

    @AA+ Bonds: So you’re preventing attacking the left, by attacking the left. Excellent.

  98. 98.

    arguingwithsignposts

    October 19, 2011 at 8:50 pm

    While Politiho trolls the shit outta the left, I’ll post this piece of concern-trollery from Even the Liberal NYT:

    But the increasingly caustic tone of the president’s attacks on Congress raises a question: How long can Mr. Obama continue to hammer Republicans without exhausting the patience of voters who elected him to be an alternative to Washington partisanship — and without risking the perception that he is part of the problem?

    Damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t.

  99. 99.

    maya

    October 19, 2011 at 8:50 pm

    I just come here because I want to see the republican/Koch/Fox machine destroyed. Frag-prog?

  100. 100.

    Keith G

    October 19, 2011 at 8:52 pm

    Funny thing. When I went to “read more”, I noticed the link would take me to some other site. That is so uncool ABL. At least warn me that my click will take me off site give a page view to someone other than John. That little bit of courtesy is what other FPers seem to do.

    That would also help you avoid seeming like you are stealthily using Balloon-Juice to drive up your page views on another site.

  101. 101.

    LT

    October 19, 2011 at 8:53 pm

    I know a big part off the pride-play for you is “I was once a lawyer,” and that the effect of that is supposed to be that people give you not just points for smart, but for thoughtful smart, but this:

    Months ago, I noted that the Professional Left seemed taken aback by the frequent, and admittedly sometimes harsh pushback.

    is not only not smart or thoughtful, I think most actual thoughtful people just raise their eyebrows and stuff like that, chuckle and walk away. The best thing you can call it is immature.

  102. 102.

    FlipYrWhig

    October 19, 2011 at 8:53 pm

    @Lockewasright:

    What blows my mind is that polling shows that a SOLID majority of democrats support the president. That being the case, why is it that we Obamabots need to justify our point of view?

    It all comes back to the notion of who “the base” is among Democrats. If the leading lights of the blogosphere are the base, or the vanguard of the base, then Obama has a huge problem: disaffection among his core supporters and the left side of the party. If you think the base, the left, and the blogs all line up, this is a very interesting phenomenon. If you think that the blogs aren’t really the left, or that the left isn’t really the base, then it rapidly becomes less interesting. Or, to put it a different way, the interesting part begins to be figuring out why the media enjoys giving them a platform disproportionate to their influence.

  103. 103.

    Cliff in NH

    October 19, 2011 at 8:54 pm

    @I_D_Inuse:

    entering breitbart mode.

    Where is the fraud? where are the lies?

    Prove it.

  104. 104.

    Another Bob

    October 19, 2011 at 8:57 pm

    @Marc:

    They’re not my friends, they’re not my allies, and I’m not alienating a supporter when I confront them. I am reminding people that the Obama haters don’t speak for all liberals.

    Aside from Jane Hamsher or certain specific commenters at this site, who exactly are these Obama haters supposed to be? Are Digby and Atrios supposed to be Obama haters? How about Joan Walsh at Salon? How about Paul Krugman?

  105. 105.

    FlipYrWhig

    October 19, 2011 at 9:00 pm

    @Another Bob: FWIW, the post itself name-checks Hamsher, Walsh, Greenwald, and Sirota.

  106. 106.

    Belafon (formerly anonevent)

    October 19, 2011 at 9:00 pm

    I see Kos is swinging around to “It’s the Republicans Fault”. Now, if we can just get him to write about how Obama managed to get a lot of things passed while dealing with the shitty Republicans and the Blue Dogs…

  107. 107.

    LT

    October 19, 2011 at 9:02 pm

    @Another Bob:

    Aside from Jane Hamsher or certain specific commenters at this site, who exactly are these Obama haters supposed to be? Are Digby and Atrios supposed to be Obama haters? How about Joan Walsh at Salon? How about Paul Krugman?

    They won’t dare go after figures too respected. Hamsher and GG are safe for them. When Digby, Krugman, Atrios say the exact same thing as them – ABL and gang won’t go near it. It is pure selective masturbation on their part. (And it’s particularly hilarious that they spend 99% of their blogolives screaming and whining about “emo” bloggers who at least talk about government and policy.)

    P.S. edit: Hamsher seems like a real asshole. The Cole “homophobe” thing was so far over the line.

  108. 108.

    Keith G

    October 19, 2011 at 9:05 pm

    @arguingwithsignposts: As we talked this morning, I do not see the article as concern trolling. First, the writer is stating an idea (caution) that is clearly held by some in the West Wing. Second, the writer goes on to include:

    “We’re going back 50 years because of a Congress that wants to vote against anything Obama does,” Mr. Jewell said. “The Republicans are using it as a campaign tactic.”

    If your block was knocking Obama (I think it was not), is the above block thumping the GOP?

    I do not know where this guy’s heart is at, but I do not see that he set out to ‘ding’ Obama. Too many people seem to see goblins where goblins are not.

  109. 109.

    Belafon (formerly anonevent)

    October 19, 2011 at 9:06 pm

    @Lockewasright: Why did the tea party become such a big news story? In part because it made for good television: The Republican party is split, which was proven false in the 2010 election. Making the anti-Obama group prominent makes it out to be a split in the Democratic party.

    Now, why do O-bots like ABL and me still rail against the emo’s on the left? Because 1) someone’s wrong on the internet, and 2) it really does bother me to think that someone is going to sit out the election or not help Obama and the Democrats run for office when the alternative to Obama is pretty close to pure evil.

  110. 110.

    LT

    October 19, 2011 at 9:06 pm

    @Belafon (formerly anonevent):

    Now, if we can just get him to write about how Obama managed to get a lot of things passed while dealing with the shitty Republicans and the Blue Dogs…

    Time to post a 100-item list of awesome Obama accomplishments. Because even if he ordered a SEAL unit to rape and kill a traincar-load of Yemeni grandmothers – he can still only be measured by a list of awesome accomplishments. It’s the only thing that counts.

  111. 111.

    Baud

    October 19, 2011 at 9:07 pm

    I always come late to these flame wars.

    Anywho, put me down for $50 on Team Obot.

  112. 112.

    Not Sure

    October 19, 2011 at 9:08 pm

    @Brian S: I sometimes find points of agreement with Bill O’Reilly. That doesn’t mean I find his show any less unwatchable, or the general gist of what he’s putting out any less full of shit.

  113. 113.

    General Stuck

    October 19, 2011 at 9:09 pm

    @LT:

    . It is pure selective masturbation

    Well, golly gee willickers there LT, you’re the resident expert on selective masturbation. Or spreading bullshit. You apparently haven’t read the “Obamabot” blogs. Everyone, including Krugman et al the pro left get slammed when they talk firebagger shit. I personally do the honors on this blog, especially when Krugman talks out his ass.

    It’s just that GG and Lady Jane get their mugs on teevee the most often, to spread their bullshit, as speaking for Libs/progs generally, when they don’t. They get extra hippie punches for that reason.

  114. 114.

    I_D_Inuse

    October 19, 2011 at 9:11 pm

    @General Stuck: I can only hope and dare I say pray?

  115. 115.

    I_D_Inuse

    October 19, 2011 at 9:14 pm

    @Cliff in NH: my goodness sugar, bless your heart

  116. 116.

    Cliff in NH

    October 19, 2011 at 9:15 pm

    @I_D_Inuse:

    G’damm you are fucking stupid.

  117. 117.

    Lockewasright

    October 19, 2011 at 9:16 pm

    @FlipYrWhig:

    I think that one would be hard pressed to find a lefty blogger who has policy desires any further left than my own. I just would prefer some progress over watching beautiful dream bills die because the votes simply aren’t there.

    I think that many people confuse the objective with the strategy. Suppose that I make a pact with a group of people that we all want to become millionaires. Each of us sets out to raise a million dollars. Each time a person comes along and offers whichever of us wants it a check for $100,000 or $85,000 or $150,000, the others say: “No thanks! We’re trying to get a million dollars. That’s not a million dollars.” Then I tell each of those people: “I will take that check. Thanks very much!” This is met with cries from the others in the group: “What a sell out! He doesn’t want to become a millionaire! He just settled for less than a million!” Pretty soon one of us will have the million and the others will have exactly the zero from which they started. Both of us had the same objective. One of us had a reality based, pragmatic strategy.

    I would LOVE to see our country adopt a single payer health care system. The votes simply weren’t there in the senate. That’s alleged democrat Ben Nelson’s fault. That’s Max Baucus’ fault. That’s Joe Lieberman’s fault. Guess what! 1,000,000 more people aged 26 and under are currently insured today because the president took what he could get the votes for. Insurance companies will soon have to spend 80 – 85% of what they collect in premiums on actual care or GIVE THE DIFFERENCE BACK! I could go on. The point is he took those checks for $100k or $85k and moved us closer to the million.

    You may have guessed that I am in this group:

    If you think that the blogs aren’t really the left

    I refuse to believe that people who claim we should insist on watching beautiful bills for which the votes simply don’t exist fail, make no progress at all toward our policy goals, and then blame the president for not kidnapping and replacing Mary Landrieu with a clone who will vote progressive have any business claiming exclusive rights to the liberal moniker.

  118. 118.

    arguingwithsignposts

    October 19, 2011 at 9:16 pm

    @Keith G: My point is what I stated in the last sentence. First, we don’t know _who_ floated the idea, since it’s mostly anonymous village sniping. Second, he’s filling up space because he has a deadline and space to fill to justify his plane ticket on the campaign express. Third, it illustrates the whole “bully pulpit” argument in all its flaws.

    Obama’s “finally” doing what people wanted him to do: go after Congress, and there are courtiers more than willing to hold the pearls while the centrist “independents” clutch them.

  119. 119.

    Baud

    October 19, 2011 at 9:17 pm

    @Thoughtcrime: Holy Cow! That is awesome.

  120. 120.

    LT

    October 19, 2011 at 9:17 pm

    @General Stuck:

    Nobody gives a fuck what you say in a BJ thread, you dumbass. That’s fucking hilarious.

    And you’re saying that Krugman et al get the GG and Hamsher treatment – they just don’t get the GG and Hamsher treatment. Okay. And it’s because GG and Hamsher have bigger voices than Krugman, who writes at the NYT.

    Darlin’, you are really on a roll tonight.

  121. 121.

    I_D_Inuse

    October 19, 2011 at 9:18 pm

    @Cliff in NH: One trick pony?

    edit spelling

  122. 122.

    Another Bob

    October 19, 2011 at 9:18 pm

    @LT:

    That’s the thing I don’t understand — who are these Obama haters supposed to be? Would anybody who became disenchanted about the Public Option or the Debt Ceiling negotiation be considered an Obama hater? Most of the criticism I see of Obama from people like Digby, Atrios, Krugman, et al, seems to me like principled criticism from people that are not motivated by inherent antipathy. In fact I almost get the sense that they’re saddened in a way to find themselves disagreeing with him, but that they driven by an honest commitment to their principles. It seems way unfair to call them “haters.”

    I think it’s also a mistake in general to write off principled criticism. It’s not the same as some wingnut asshole calling Obama a marxist or saying that he hates white people or some of the other stupid things wingnuts say. Maybe there is a left-wing counterpart of that kind of Obama-hating, but if there is, they must be a vanishingly tiny group.

  123. 123.

    FlipYrWhig

    October 19, 2011 at 9:24 pm

    I don’t think “emo” as an attribute is helpful at all. I’m perfectly willing to accept that there are people far to the left of the president; people who are genuinely upset about civil liberties and war on terror-related issues; people who are genuinely upset about insufficient urgency on economic measures; and people with any number of legitimate critiques. But, here’s the thing.

    I want this group of people to acknowledge that even Lefty Dream President who believed in all the right things and always tried his best to accomplish them would not, in fact, be able to get his way if he or she couldn’t also win over scaredy-cat Democrats, both those to the president’s right by genuine conviction and those who thwart the president based on calculations of personal advantage.

    That’s where it all becomes masturbatory, when “I want him to do X” and “X would be better policy than the Y bullshit he’s doing” turn into “I don’t think he even believes in X” and “He’s doing Y just to spite us.”

  124. 124.

    boss bitch

    October 19, 2011 at 9:24 pm

    @JWL:

    To those with ears, Obama campaigned as a conservative, and not a moderate.

    those with ears and eyes call bullshit on this statement.

  125. 125.

    Lockewasright

    October 19, 2011 at 9:24 pm

    @lol: Yup.

  126. 126.

    LT

    October 19, 2011 at 9:25 pm

    @Another Bob:

    This is illustrated by General Stuck’s comment:

    @General Stuck:

    It’s just that GG and Lady Jane get their mugs on teevee the most often, to spread their bullshit…

    You see – they’re ALWAYS wrong. In Stuck’s mind, in ABL’s mind – they don’t even have to listen to what they say, or really to ANY critic. Whithin the first ten minutes (weeks?) of Obama’s presidency, they were convinced that every criticism was “EMO PROG DIVIDER HATER! GAAAAAHHHH!” They’ve had little sane to say about any criticism since.

  127. 127.

    FlipYrWhig

    October 19, 2011 at 9:25 pm

    @Lockewasright: I see it your way. I’m trying to be generous towards those who see it otherwise.

  128. 128.

    LT

    October 19, 2011 at 9:26 pm

    @boss bitch:

    those with ears and eyes call bullshit on this statement.

    Absolute fucking lunacy.

  129. 129.

    Lockewasright

    October 19, 2011 at 9:27 pm

    @Belafon (formerly anonevent): Count me in category 2. It also bugs the shit out of me that, as ABL pointed out, they are handing the media a GOP friendly framing that actually does do the party and the president damage.

  130. 130.

    Baud

    October 19, 2011 at 9:29 pm

    @FlipYrWhig: I agree with you. The other thing I would ask is that people who criticize also celebrate when the President accomplishes goals we all support (or moves closer to them). Without that balance, it’s easy for the critics to be viewed as haters, like the left-wing equivalent of Fox News.

  131. 131.

    Belafon (formerly anonevent)

    October 19, 2011 at 9:29 pm

    @LT: No, hamsher hanging out with Norquist went over the line.

  132. 132.

    Raven (formerly stuckinred)

    October 19, 2011 at 9:30 pm

    @Belafon (formerly anonevent): Fuckin right it did.

  133. 133.

    Belafon (formerly anonevent)

    October 19, 2011 at 9:31 pm

    @LT: You mean the fact that jobs bills aren’t getting through the Republican controlled house is Obama’s fault? It needs more bullpit?

  134. 134.

    Carolinus

    October 19, 2011 at 9:32 pm

    @AA+ Bonds:

    I’m glad we have the “Democrats vs. the left” brigade out in full force who have chosen securing their boojy cred over the left actually winning anything, ever, at all

    I’m sorry, but you’ve got this totally backward. The voices ABL is arguing against view the president through the same dark, conspiratorial lens that the Right does. They build a narrative against the entire Democratic leadership of hopeless corruption that saps energy and morale from the Left, and emboldens the Right (as they’re often spared full-throated progressive criticism with much of the blogging Left’s singular focus on the President). With deranged zeal they anticipate a total GOP takeover with the idiotic idea that if the GOP wrecks everything badly enough, finally the electorate will see the light, and herald in a progressive utopian future.

    The unfortunate truth is the American electorate is entirely capable of forgetting spectacular malfeasance in governing within a single election cycle. When liberals vote to first let things get worse, the outcome is usually that a lot of those worsening outcomes become the new normal and are never fully recovered from.

  135. 135.

    Linnaeus

    October 19, 2011 at 9:32 pm

    @Belafon (formerly anonevent):

    Yeah, I’m not a Hamsher fan, particularly after that. No liberal should come within 10 feet of Norquist except to tell him what a scumbag he is.

  136. 136.

    LT

    October 19, 2011 at 9:32 pm

    @FlipYrWhig:

    But, here’s the thing.
    ___
    I want this group of people to acknowledge that even Lefty Dream President who believed in all the right things and always tried his best to accomplish them would not, in fact, be able to get his way if he or she couldn’t also win over scaredy-cat Democrats, both those to the president’s right by genuine conviction and those who thwart the president based on calculations of personal advantage.

    That ackowledgement – when merited – is made, again and again. People who want to see it see it fine. And again, when merited. Just for one example – the secret order too secret even for an American court to kill not just Awlaki but his 16-year-old son has nothing to do with Congress.

  137. 137.

    boss bitch

    October 19, 2011 at 9:34 pm

    @LT:

    They won’t dare go after figures too respected. Hamsher and GG are safe for them. When Digby, Krugman, Atrios say the exact same thing as them – ABL and gang won’t go near it.

    Wrong. If what they say is wrong then they are wrong. Krugman and Co. don’t get special treatment.”Obamabots” don’t hold any those people on a pedestal. Emoprogs on the other hand, put these people in the category of “those who may not be criticized”. “Obamabots” are not afraid to call bullshit bullshit.

  138. 138.

    General Stuck

    October 19, 2011 at 9:34 pm

    @LT:

    I said “on teevee” you moron, the biggest megaphone of all. You are mentally masturbating again, because you haven’t actually read the blogs in the article. Have You? Don’t lie now, gawd will get you. Go through the archives of The People’s View, or about any of the other blogs named in the Politico article. But one thing we can be sure of, is LT to show up all butt hurt about “the left” being mistreated. Here is a clue. “The Left” is a small cabal of loud morons who can afford computers with internet, and grift enough to get themselves on MSNBC to claim they represent “the base”. They are liars from the get go, and have no useful purpose other than to chum the waters of poutrage that their few followers dine on daily. And give page clicks, and send MO money. Krugman is capable of better than that, but he just can’t help his self tossing some red meat to these fools, now and then. And to feed his butthurt that Hillary lost.

    As for no one caring for what I say, it is comical a part time drive by troll is making that claim. Which could well be true, but the king of emo prog butt hurt is not where the final verdict on that charge shall rest.

    LT One Trick Pony

  139. 139.

    LT

    October 19, 2011 at 9:34 pm

    @LT:

    I meant hat I agree with you on calling bullshit.

  140. 140.

    Raven (formerly stuckinred)

    October 19, 2011 at 9:34 pm

    @Linnaeus: Careful, she’ll ban your ass.

  141. 141.

    Another Bob

    October 19, 2011 at 9:34 pm

    @FlipYrWhig:

    I’m perfectly willing to accept that there are people far to the left of the president; people who are genuinely upset about civil liberties and war on terror-related issues; people who are genuinely upset about insufficient urgency on economic measures; and people with any number of legitimate critiques.

    So far so good . . .

    I want this group of people to acknowledge that even Lefty Dream President who believed in all the right things and always tried his best to accomplish them would not, in fact, be able to get his way if he or she couldn’t also win over scaredy-cat Democrats

    I think it was the manner of Obama’s apparent deal-making, like trading things away without having really fought for them, and without getting anything in exchange from the other side. I don’t think most people would blame him for fighting and losing, but his dealings have too often left the impression that he wasn’t really putting up a fight, like when he offered up some cherished ideal (e.g. Single Payer) without even using it as an effective bargaining chip. Again, single payer may well have been asking too much, but the point is that he didn’t seem to really try. It was bad negotiating and bad politics.

  142. 142.

    FlipYrWhig

    October 19, 2011 at 9:34 pm

    @Another Bob:

    I think it’s also a mistake in general to write off principled criticism.

    True. But not all critics are principled critics, and not all principled critics use principle for every criticism. Greenwald, for instance, is a principled critic about civil liberties, who on that subject uses the same reasoning and rhetoric towards Obama that he did towards Bush. So far so good. But when challenged, he refuses, constantly, to accept that there are other principles to be held. Krugman isn’t wrong about how a bigger stimulus bill would have been more effective. But then Krugman snarks in a Toldja So vein about how he warned everyone that it wouldn’t be good enough — discounting that it was a steep, thorny path towards getting the dollar amount to be only as high as it was. That’s not being a “principled critic” anymore, that’s presuming bad faith. And that to me is the hallmarks of gratuitous, or, if you like, “emo” criticism.

  143. 143.

    NA

    October 19, 2011 at 9:35 pm

    So ABL is divisive because she is responding to an article in a prominent forum that specifically targets her?

  144. 144.

    LT

    October 19, 2011 at 9:35 pm

    @General Stuck: You are such a doofus. Krugman is on TV all the time. And what difference would that make? Only TV matters?

  145. 145.

    FlipYrWhig

    October 19, 2011 at 9:37 pm

    @Another Bob:

    I think it was the manner of Obama’s apparent deal-making, like trading things away without having really fought for them, and without getting anything in exchange from the other side. I don’t think most people would blame him for fighting and losing, but his dealings have too often left the impression that he wasn’t really putting up a fight

    Yeah, I know. We’ve been around the block about this. In lieu of yet another iteration, I’ll just say I emphatically disagree with the “just fight harder”/”negotiating 101” frame and leave it at that.

  146. 146.

    Another Bob

    October 19, 2011 at 9:37 pm

    @boss bitch:

    Krugman and Co. don’t get special treatment.

    But is it fair to lump them and Jane Hamsher in the same “emo-bagger” bin? Do you think Krugman is an “Obama-hater” or do you at least give him credit for acting according to a set of honest principles?

  147. 147.

    I_D_Inuse

    October 19, 2011 at 9:38 pm

    @Cliff in NH: Why? Remember I am stupid so make it KISS?

  148. 148.

    Baud

    October 19, 2011 at 9:38 pm

    @Another Bob:

    I don’t think most people would blame him for fighting and losing,

    I have to disagree. I think that meme developed precisely because he did accomplish so much instead of just losing. Had he lost, a lot of these people would have just adjusted their criticism accordingly.

  149. 149.

    Another Bob

    October 19, 2011 at 9:39 pm

    @FlipYrWhig:

    Yeah, I know. We’ve been around the block about this. In lieu of yet another iteration, I’ll just say I emphatically disagree with the “just fight harder”/”negotiating 101” frame and leave it at that.

    Fair enough.

  150. 150.

    Corner Stone

    October 19, 2011 at 9:40 pm

    Griftio.com

    That shit’s killin’ me.

  151. 151.

    hrprogressive

    October 19, 2011 at 9:41 pm

    Okay I’ve torn the Obama Admin several new assholes for doing stupid shit I don’t agree with, but the idea of equating “Obamabots” with any slack-jawed moron who blindly supports Sarah Palin is an insult to Obamabots.

    Yes, I think there are a lot of people who have blindly supported Barack Obama and/or have excused away a lot of bad decisions by virtue of him being Barack Obama / not being a Republican. That makes me pound my head to keyboard, often.

    But Sarah Palin’s drooling minions could not for the life of them see that the woman’s only skills were pulling the wool over their eyes, fleecing them of their money, and bleating out nonsensical hyperconservative platitudes that made them get all hot and bothered.

    Sarah Palin is a stupid, if savvy woman, who saw a good con and ran with it, and her supporters are arguably some of the dumbest people in the country.

    Barack Obama is, from my vantage point until recently, a disappointing President who hasn’t tried to realize the greatness of his election and has squandered his ability to seek real change by allowing his enemies in and out of his own party to dictate his moves for him. Obamabots are on the right team, they just don’t play the game the way I think we should be playing it.

    TL;DR version – Politico is full of shit, what else is new?

  152. 152.

    Linnaeus

    October 19, 2011 at 9:41 pm

    @Raven (formerly stuckinred):

    I don’t read FDL, except for Tbogg, Pam Spaulding, and some occasional front-page posts, so if I’m banned, I don’t think I will lose all that much.

  153. 153.

    boss bitch

    October 19, 2011 at 9:41 pm

    Oh mah GAH! the whining on your threads ABL! I love your posts but Christ some people that comment on them need to sack up and get over themselves. For a group that goes on and on about speaking truth to power, dissent, and being able to criticize whomever whenever, you are all extremely thin skinned.

  154. 154.

    General Stuck

    October 19, 2011 at 9:41 pm

    @LT:

    You see – they’re ALWAYS wrong. In Stuck’s mind, in ABL’s mind – they don’t even have to listen to what they say, or really to ANY critic.

    You really are a mendacious little clown, you know that. You have willfully mis read about every comment to reply to, and I can see why you want to defend your own kind. Wankers.

    It is the fact that they go on teevee as “the voice of the left” or whatever the title of the day is, and that is their fist lie, every time, no exceptions. What comes after may be half true, sometimes, rarely.

  155. 155.

    Anya

    October 19, 2011 at 9:41 pm

    You know the type of liberals that annoy the fuck out of me — the ones who say: “If Romney wins the presidency it won’t be so bad.” When you point out that to them that Romney is a soulless android willing to say anything to get elected, including demonizing little kids (latino kids with undocumented parents), they say with a straight: “he’s just pandering to the crazies.” Some would even argue that he will not be more conservative than Obama. I swear I had this conversation many times with normally sane liberals. What’s wrong with people?

    @Another Bob: How about the liberals who say Obama is a secret republican?

  156. 156.

    Corner Stone

    October 19, 2011 at 9:43 pm

    @NA:

    So ABL is divisive because she is responding to an article in a prominent forum that specifically targets her?

    She’s grifting off the victimization card.

  157. 157.

    General Stuck

    October 19, 2011 at 9:43 pm

    @Corner Stone:

    That shit’s killin’ me.

    What’s killin you is the whiskey and hate, has nothin to do with ABL, or anything else.

  158. 158.

    Mark S.

    October 19, 2011 at 9:44 pm

    I know I selectively masturbate. I don’t just whip it out for anything.

  159. 159.

    Cliff in NH

    October 19, 2011 at 9:45 pm

    @I_D_Inuse:

    Provide evidence of your claim MORON.

    Is that simple enough?

    Geez.

  160. 160.

    Corner Stone

    October 19, 2011 at 9:45 pm

    @General Stuck: Go crawl back in your troll hole you useless sack of agoraphobic jello.

  161. 161.

    Baud

    October 19, 2011 at 9:46 pm

    @Anya:

    You know the type of liberals that annoy the fuck out of me — the ones who say: “If Romney wins the presidency it won’t be so bad.”

    Eek. I actually haven’t come across that. Occasionally, I hear someone say liberals should support Ron Paul, which makes me want to punch my computer screen.

  162. 162.

    Carolinus

    October 19, 2011 at 9:46 pm

    Oh, and that Politico article is beyond belief. It has the tone of some sort of tabloid expose but with most of the details invented out of thin air to fit a narrative. I mean WTF is this?

    The core of active Obamabots is small, prolific and rather secretive.

    Then they go on to interview some private citizen who posts tweets supportive of the President, and cast him as some sort of paid White House plant or the head of some cult because he doesn’t want to reveal his IRL name. My jaw literally dropped after reading just the first page.

  163. 163.

    Another Bob

    October 19, 2011 at 9:47 pm

    @Baud:

    I think that meme developed precisely because he did accomplish so much instead of just losing. Had he lost, a lot of these people would have just adjusted their criticism accordingly.

    Anybody who lived through the healthcare reform fight in the Clinton administration knows and respects the difficulty of the task. I’m sure that a lot of Obama’s most loyal supporters were infuriated by the dicking around of people like Kent Conrad and Evan Bayh. But the problem was that Obama’s team didn’t seem to be fighting the Republicans as hard as the Republicans were fighting him. To the extent that there were things going on behind the scenes, they seemed to too often consist of trading away things to Big Pharma or making secret deals with the insurance industry, who turned around and campaigned against reform anyway. I didn’t want a show of bipartisan comity, I wanted to see Republicans being driven to the wall.

  164. 164.

    Raven (formerly stuckinred)

    October 19, 2011 at 9:47 pm

    @Linnaeus: I’m just foolin around.

  165. 165.

    ABL

    October 19, 2011 at 9:47 pm

    @Keith G: so the block quote and the title saying “My post in the grio” didn’t tip you off?

    are you actually claiming that a “read the rest” tag embedded in a block quote at the end of a post (not the front page) of a blog confused you? you thought a “read more tag” in a post on Balloon Juice would take you to another page on Balloon Juice?

    do you need a handbook on how to navigate the internet?

  166. 166.

    FlipYrWhig

    October 19, 2011 at 9:48 pm

    @Baud: There are people who claim, at least, that they would prefer Fight Hard And Get Nothing to Fight Less Hard And Get Something. IMHO what they really want is Fight Hard And Get Everything, because they believe deep down that fighting hard is the way you get everything. But, maybe because I’m a pessimist by nature, I don’t think that works.

    And, you know, I always come back to this: when DADT repeal was attached to the defense appropriations bill, and Reid refused to remove it, and it was voted on, and it was voted _down_, the mood of the blogosphere was NOT “Hey, that’s exactly what we wanted, to draw a line, stand up for principle, and, win or lose, you get style points.” It was “Obama and Reid don’t know what they’re doing and fucked up yet again.” Fighting hard and losing gets criticism for losing _and_ for not fighting properly. So does making a deal. It’s always the same criticism. There was always a better way that would have gotten a better result, but they didn’t even try it. It gets old.

  167. 167.

    General Stuck

    October 19, 2011 at 9:50 pm

    @Corner Stone:

    Go crawl back in your troll hole you useless sack of agoraphobic jello.

    Oh, just go find some spiny black jism to slurp, you racist fucking psychopath that should have been banned a long time ago for being a fulminating pustule with legs and arms.

  168. 168.

    Baud

    October 19, 2011 at 9:50 pm

    @Another Bob:

    I didn’t want a show of bipartisan comity, I wanted to see Republicans being driven to the wall.

    Um, you do know that HCR did not get a single Republican vote. I know that there was talk of bipartisanship, but in the end, the Dems did it on their own. Any compromises were solely to get the conservadems and other assorted assholes on board.

  169. 169.

    Another Bob

    October 19, 2011 at 9:51 pm

    @boss bitch:

    For a group that goes on and on about speaking truth to power, dissent, and being able to criticize whomever whenever, you are all extremely thin skinned.

    What comments here constitute “thin skinned?” It seems like a pretty reasonable discussion to me.

  170. 170.

    Uncle Clarence Thomas

    October 19, 2011 at 9:54 pm

    .
    .
    @Belafon (formerly anonevent):

    @LT: No, hamsher hanging out with Norquist went over the line.

    No, President Obama consenting to be McConnellMitch’s bitch went over the line. And that was many lines ago.
    .
    .

  171. 171.

    LT

    October 19, 2011 at 9:55 pm

    It should be mentioned that it’s not just that people get shit from ABL et all for criticism, it’s that their motives are immediately questioned. Nobody, and I mean nobody, can agree with a criticism that GG makes and, in ABL’s view, be arguing in good faith. What the fuck do people expect when they do that?

    And just to note – I do not call people Obamabots. Not here, not on DKos, not anywhere.

    And further on an earlier comment: John Cole sometimes says things that GG would say, and, if GG said them, ABL would have a complete aneurism over. But she doesn’t. Because it’s selective (internet rage) masturbation.

  172. 172.

    Anya

    October 19, 2011 at 9:55 pm

    @Baud: Gawker is full of them. Also, I had such conversation today with two co-workers. I felt like screaming.

    At least Ron Paul has no prayer in hell.

  173. 173.

    ABL

    October 19, 2011 at 9:56 pm

    Why continue this whole Democrats-beat-on-Democrats thing at all? Time’s running short to get serious.

    did you not read the Politico article? it warranted a response. joy asked me to write one. i obliged.

    it seems pretty reasonable to me.

    (edited)

  174. 174.

    Baud

    October 19, 2011 at 9:59 pm

    @Anya: I don’t get it. Even if one doesn’t believe Romney would be that bad, in what reality is he in any way better than Obama on any issue liberals care about? I mean, at least with Ron Paul, there are two or three issues a liberal could focus on while ignoring the rest. But Romney? Where’s the beef?

  175. 175.

    Elie

    October 19, 2011 at 10:00 pm

    @General Stuck:

    Me, could care less about the fee fees of people who shit in their own tent, and expect the rest of us to take a deep breath.

    This…

  176. 176.

    Johnny Coelacanth

    October 19, 2011 at 10:00 pm

    “In Stuck’s mind, in ABL’s mind – they don’t even have to listen to what they say, or really to ANY critic.”

    I _do_ love a good mindreading act. Quick! Tell me what I’m thinking. Hint, the first three words rhyme with “you’re an asshole.”

  177. 177.

    Keith G

    October 19, 2011 at 10:02 pm

    @arguingwithsignposts:

    Third, it illustrates the whole “bully pulpit” argument in all its flaws.

    Not so fast

    An ABC/Washington Post poll this month saw Obama enjoying enormous gains across the board on the question of whether voters trust the president or Republicans in Congress more to create jobs. In September, 37 percent of independents said Obama, while 42 percent said Republicans. A month later, the poll was much better for the president, with 44 percent saying they trust Obama more and only 31 percent favoring the GOP. The new discipline is working with Democrats, too. After almost three years of begging Obama to drive home a consistent message on jobs, Democrats are starting to rally behind the president. Sixty-nine percent of Democrats in the ABC/Post poll trusted Obama on jobs in September. That number is now up to 79 percent

    Read more at The Hill
    Deciding to develop message discipline is a very good thing.

  178. 178.

    General Stuck

    October 19, 2011 at 10:03 pm

    @LT:

    And further on an earlier comment: John Cole sometimes says things that GG would say, and, if GG said them, ABL would have a complete aneurism over. But she doesn’t. Because it’s selective (internet rage) masturbation.

    You are some special kind of asshole LT, and full of what you propose others are full of. Sometimes Cole takes GG position on things, and those of us that disagree, including ABL, say what we think about that. But trying to draw any general comparison of Cole and GG for a debating point, just outlines what a mendacious little assclown you are. Cole doesn’t go around calling people he disagrees with a “Obama Cultist” and the like.

  179. 179.

    LT

    October 19, 2011 at 10:05 pm

    @Johnny Coelacanth: They “rhyme with ‘you’re an asshole'”?

    And nobody needs clairvoyancy to see their patterns.

  180. 180.

    Another Bob

    October 19, 2011 at 10:05 pm

    @Baud:

    Any compromises were solely to get the conservadems and other assorted assholes on board.

    It seemed that Obama was playing hardball with other Democrats who wanted a more liberal approach, people like Anthony Weiner who was arm-twisted into not insisting on an up-or-down vote on single payer, for example. But whether it was Republicans, Blue Dogs, the insurance industry or Big Pharma, Obama traded things away without getting much in return, and those parties betrayed the supposed good faith of the deals he made with them.

    But as FlipYrWhig said, we’ve been around the block on that before. The point is that such criticism — whether you agree with it or not — is motivated by principle, not by an uncontrollable urge to find things to hate about Obama.

  181. 181.

    Cliff in NH

    October 19, 2011 at 10:05 pm

    @LT:

    if trolls didn’t act trollish, they wouldn’t be trolls too.

    Facts wont make trolls debate facts though. Apparently nothing will.

  182. 182.

    Belafon (formerly anonevent)

    October 19, 2011 at 10:05 pm

    I think someone needs to be pushing back against stories that attempt to hype a division in the Democratic party, and against the people who make it possible, such as Hamsher. Krugman, while critical of the President, is not running around with David Brooks. If ABL wants to be that person, then she can have it.

    I do get tired of the fights in the party, that do nothing to advance the party’s objectives. I also think that those of us who only blog, at any liberal site, need to bow our heads in reverence to those who are protesting and having to deal with the police and whatever else. Not only are they changing the story, but they are finally pushing Obama. About the only thing the rest of us should be doing is making sure these people are praised and helped, and that we are amplifying their message.

    ETA: But we can still hate on Hamsher.

  183. 183.

    Odie Hugh Manatee

    October 19, 2011 at 10:06 pm

    @Uncle Clarence Thomas:

    FOAD.

  184. 184.

    Belafon (formerly anonevent)

    October 19, 2011 at 10:07 pm

    @Another Bob:

    Obama traded things away without getting much in return

    He got bills passed he wouldn’t have gotten otherwise. See, Nelson, Ben, and Omaha, Mutual of, during the health care debate.
    I suspect we’ll never agree about how much he didn’t have to give away, but as long as your willing to accept criticism of your view, I have no problem with being criticized.

  185. 185.

    LT

    October 19, 2011 at 10:08 pm

    @General Stuck:

    Cole doesn’t go around calling people he disagrees with a “Obama Cultist” and the like.

    Heh. John’s never made a mistake on his blog. Ever.

  186. 186.

    arguingwithsignposts

    October 19, 2011 at 10:09 pm

    @Keith G: Completely missing my point. I wasn’t talking about how voters felt, but how that gets framed. Exhibit A is that article.

    I’m personally glad the president is taking it to the Republicans. I doubt it will accomplish much legislatively, but might as well go into the election swinging.

  187. 187.

    Uncle Clarence Thomas

    October 19, 2011 at 10:10 pm

    .
    .
    @General Stuck:

    Me, could care less about the fee fees of people who shit in their own tent, and expect the rest of us to take a deep breath.

    You apparently believe that your tent is the tiny pocket of the political career of President Obama, whereas others believe that their – and your – tent is much much bigger, and encompasses such things as democracy, peace, social and economic justice, the Constitution, doing the right thing, fairness, transparency, accountability, freedom, privacy, and so on and so forth.
     
    You are the one you’ve been waiting for to shit in your own tent.
    .
    .

  188. 188.

    Cliff in NH

    October 19, 2011 at 10:10 pm

    @Belafon (formerly anonevent):

    Yay a sane person!

  189. 189.

    General Stuck

    October 19, 2011 at 10:11 pm

    @LT:

    Try your obtuse clown trolling on someone else. you haven’t made a single statement in good faith.

  190. 190.

    General Stuck

    October 19, 2011 at 10:11 pm

    @Uncle Clarence Thomas:

    Shut up you nasty piece of shit.

  191. 191.

    Litlebritdifrnt2

    October 19, 2011 at 10:12 pm

    OT – my good friend Foggy (aka Bill) of the birfer busting forum Fogbow has been struck by a seriously nasty illness. He is in the hospital and is undergoing treatment that is costing serious bucks. He has no health insurance. We are currently running a fundraiser to gather the funds to pay for his treatment. If any of you feel the need please go over to The Fogbow and hit the contribute button. All of the donations that normally pay for transcripts of trials and other paperwork are currently being diverted to Foggy’s medical bills. I have contributed what I can, as have the other FB posters, we are at $5K+ right now but it is going to take a lot more than that. Please if you feel the need go over to The Fogbow and contribute. Foggy and the others do absolutely stellar work tracking down and debunking the birfers, as well as securing transcripts and pleadings, enabling right minded people to examine them and debunk. Thanks for your help.

  192. 192.

    lol

    October 19, 2011 at 10:13 pm

    @Another Bob:

    How much credit did Obama get for trying and failing to pass the tax cut deal without the ones for the rich? Remember? It was up for a vote and failed. It was after that that the whole thing was renewed.

    How much credit did Obama get for trying and failing to pass the DREAM Act? Or anything else that passed the House and died in the Senate?

    None. The Firebagger left gives no credit for trying, period.

  193. 193.

    Keith G

    October 19, 2011 at 10:13 pm

    @ABL: In the past others (Kain for example) have duplicated a duo post in its entirety here and if it was broken up with a ‘read more’ jump, it still stayed on this site. Your’s was unusual which is why I found it surprising.

  194. 194.

    lol

    October 19, 2011 at 10:14 pm

    @Another Bob:

    Nothing in return… except for the bill actually passing and becoming law.

  195. 195.

    Another Bob

    October 19, 2011 at 10:14 pm

    @Belafon (formerly anonevent):

    He got bills passed he wouldn’t have gotten otherwise. See, Nelson, Ben, and Omaha, Mutual of, during the health care debate.

    Was kissing Ben Nelson’s ass really the only way to get something done? There are sticks as well as carrots. If Obama didn’t try sticks, then you can’t claim he tried everything.

  196. 196.

    Belafon (formerly anonevent)

    October 19, 2011 at 10:15 pm

    @Another Bob: Fair enough. What stick would you have used?

    ETA: Maybe Obama could threaten to campaign for Nelson if he doesn’t cooperate.

  197. 197.

    Uncle Clarence Thomas

    October 19, 2011 at 10:16 pm

    .
    .
    @Odie Hugh Manatee:

    @Uncle Clarence Thomas: FOAD.

    I do grow weary of the racist balloonbagger attempts at a high-tech lynching of yours truly. You do represent your impotent ilk fittingly, however, as I shall report to President Obama so he can include it in his next groundbreaking speech on incivility.
    .
    .

  198. 198.

    lol

    October 19, 2011 at 10:16 pm

    @Baud:

    There was a Firebagger clown here a couple months ago who claimed Reagan had a better record on gay rights than Obama.

  199. 199.

    Uncle Clarence Thomas

    October 19, 2011 at 10:18 pm

    .
    .
    @General Toilet:

    Shut up you nasty piece of shit.

    No. Care to bark your command accompanied by another death threat to me?
    .
    .

  200. 200.

    I_D_Inuse

    October 19, 2011 at 10:21 pm

    @Cliff in NH: You are so misreading me. ABL has so much to say but snark is good among friends but does not gain a legit point of view except among friends. We so need ABL. She is front page, you and I are confined to the pps file on a footnote.

  201. 201.

    General Stuck

    October 19, 2011 at 10:22 pm

    Care to bark your command accompanied by another death threat to me?

    Death Threat? for the undead. unpossible. Step away from the crackpipe.

    Oh, and shut up you nasty piece of shit.

  202. 202.

    lol

    October 19, 2011 at 10:22 pm

    @Another Bob:

    Sticks only work when you can tell any half dozen Senators of your party to eat a bag of dicks and still pass legislation without them.

    When any single Senator can torpedo the whole deal and is perfectly fine with the status quo, they have all the negotiating power. Sure, you could threaten their committee seats or back a primary challenger. And then you never get their vote again.

    Somehow, this simple fact manages to elude the Firebagger left.

  203. 203.

    Another Bob

    October 19, 2011 at 10:22 pm

    @lol:

    None. The Firebagger left gives no credit for trying, period.

    That doesn’t seem like an honest critique of people who criticize Obama over specific, principled things. Of course there are things he deserves credit for. But it’s not fair to equate principled criticism with “Obama-hatred” or to dismiss it all as “The Firebagger Left.” In fact, it comes off as kind of whiny and emo in and of itself.

  204. 204.

    Odie Hugh Manatee

    October 19, 2011 at 10:23 pm

    @AA+ Bonds:

    Firebaggers actually aren’t real and although “firebagger” is a Koch-enabling Republican-esque propaganda term that you shouldn’t repeat unless you want the Democrats to lose, a FDL member coined it so consider the source.

    Fix’t.

  205. 205.

    Cliff in NH

    October 19, 2011 at 10:24 pm

    @Another Bob:

    yes, unfortunately, it was the only thing that could get any thing done in the very short term.

    Reality sucks. Deal with it.

  206. 206.

    Another Bob

    October 19, 2011 at 10:25 pm

    @lol:

    When any single Senator can torpedo the whole deal and is perfectly fine with the status quo, they have all the negotiating power.

    Would Ben Nelson be perfectly fine with losing a chairmanship, or trying to accomplish an already-difficult re-election with active opposition from the White House? Maybe it’s because there’s no price to be paid that leads people like Ben Nelson to think that there’s no price to be paid for resisting the president over such an important issue.

  207. 207.

    BruceFromOhio

    October 19, 2011 at 10:28 pm

    I asked the homeless guy living on the steam grate at the corner of E9th and Superior what he thought of the Politico.

    He said, “What?”

  208. 208.

    LT

    October 19, 2011 at 10:33 pm

    Greenwald -> Obama: http://bit.ly/q1ckBL

  209. 209.

    Another Bob

    October 19, 2011 at 10:33 pm

    @Cliff in NH:

    Reality sucks. Deal with it.

    And using similar logic, I could tell you that you’re a thin-skinned whiner who can’t handle a little dissent, and then say, “Reality sucks. Deal with it.” But that’s not actually what I’m saying. I’m just using it as an example.

  210. 210.

    David M

    October 19, 2011 at 10:37 pm

    @Another Bob: Senate chairs for Dems are determined by seniority. That’s part of the reason Dems don’t have as much party unity as the GOP.

    It’s kind of silly to think the Obama Administration would have had this option but just wasn’t using it.

  211. 211.

    LT

    October 19, 2011 at 10:37 pm

    Since I gave substantial credit to Obama yesterday for the release of the memos and believe even more so today that he deserves it (despite finding the anti-prosecution case as corrupted and morally bankrupt as ever), I want to return to the issue of Obama’s actions.
    […]
    In the United States, what Obama did yesterday is simply not done. American Presidents do not disseminate to the world documents which narrate in vivid, elaborate detail the dirty, illegal deeds done by the CIA, especially not when the actions are very recent, were approved and ordered by the President of the United States, and the CIA is aggressively demanding that the documents remain concealed and claiming that their release will harm national security. When is the last time a President did that?

    http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/04/17-7

  212. 212.

    Belafon (formerly anonevent)

    October 19, 2011 at 10:42 pm

    @Another Bob: That would be on Reid’s shoulders, wouldn’t it? Could he do it to all of the Democrats who voted against Democratic bills?

  213. 213.

    Uncle Clarence Thomas

    October 19, 2011 at 10:44 pm

    .
    .
    @General Stuck:

    Death Threat? for the undead. unpossible. Step away from the crackpipe. Oh, and shut up you nasty piece of shit.

    I see. You believe that I was once dead, but arose to post on balloon-juice.com. And therefore you believe that this lends you credibility, because it doesn’t sound like you are on mind-altering drugs?
     
    Please be advised that I will never shut up for you, just as you will never answer the substance of my argument. Now, please attend to your paid ratfucking activities, Republican-lite racist troll. Or not.
    .
    .

  214. 214.

    Another Bob

    October 19, 2011 at 10:49 pm

    @Belafon (formerly anonevent):

    Could he do it to all of the Democrats who voted against Democratic bills?

    Why are Republicans magically able to achieve party unity when Democrats can’t? I think it’s because they fight to win. It’s how Tom DeLay got his nickname “the hammer” when he was the Republicans’ House whip. It’s not like you have to punish each and every one once the trend becomes clear. I don’t claim to be an expert on Congressional vote strategy, but I doubt that the Republicans have some kind of magic that’s not available to Democrats.

  215. 215.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    October 19, 2011 at 10:52 pm

    @LT:

    They won’t dare go after figures too respected. Hamsher and GG are safe for them. When Digby, Krugman, Atrios say the exact same thing as them – ABL and gang won’t go near it.

    The hell? “too respected”? The only person on your list who has a modicum of name recognition, much less “respect” outside of the left blogosphere is Krugman. I quit looking at Eschaton more than a year ago, so maybe things have changed, but Atrios, petulant “I’m gonna blame Obama for what I don’t like about the American political system” blogger? Um… yeah.

  216. 216.

    wilfred

    October 19, 2011 at 10:54 pm

    President Obama is a man of extraordinary vision and brilliance approaching to genius, but he can’t get anyone to notice. He is like a great painter or musician who is ahead of his time, and who unveils one masterpiece after another to a reception that, when not bored, is hostile.

  217. 217.

    Belafon (formerly anonevent)

    October 19, 2011 at 10:58 pm

    @Another Bob: I’ll agree with you there, but I blame Reid for that, not Obama. The problem is, until we get Warren in the Senate, I don’t know of a Democrat who will be like that. I had hopes for Schumer, but he’s mellowed out getting too close to the top. I would love to see some of Lyndon Johnson’s tactics in the Senate.

    I also, though, blame the Democratic voters. If we want Democrats to act like Democrats, then we’ve got to stop letting Republicans win. The reason Cantor feels like he can be a dick is that he won’t lose. He knows he could lose the primary, but a Republican won’t lose the seat. Democrats currently don’t believe that, so they are out there trying to be everything to all people, including the Republicans in their district. I don’t like this arrangement, but the voters are playing this way. Until Democrats start showing up even in off election years to vote, we’re going to end up with wishy-washy Congresscritters.

  218. 218.

    Cliff in NH

    October 19, 2011 at 10:59 pm

    @Another Bob:

    so the blue dogs will suddenly turn into democrats on demand? what is the magic word? send it to whitehouse.gov if you know it!

  219. 219.

    David M

    October 19, 2011 at 11:01 pm

    @Another Bob: The Democratic chairs are determined by seniority, while the GOP’s aren’t. It basically forces much greater party unity for the GOP.

  220. 220.

    ChrisNYC

    October 19, 2011 at 11:02 pm

    @Another Bob: I believe Tom DeLay got the votes because he decided who got the checks. Nothing to pine for.

  221. 221.

    lol

    October 19, 2011 at 11:04 pm

    @Another Bob:

    So you take away his chairmanship or whatever and your bill doesn’t pass. Now it’s time to debate your next piece of legislation that you want to pass. How do you get Nelson’s vote now? You probably don’t ever get it again, actually.

    Hardball tactics only work when you have lots of potential votes, can fuck over individuals and, this is the important part, *win without them*.

    It’s one of the reasons Pelosi had a much easier time in the House. A couple dozen blue dog could go piss up a rope and Pelosi would still pass the bill.

    Pissing off people who know that you absolutely have to have their support? You’ll never pass anything.

  222. 222.

    Mnemosyne

    October 19, 2011 at 11:05 pm

    @Another Bob:

    It seemed that Obama was playing hardball with other Democrats who wanted a more liberal approach, people like Anthony Weiner who was arm-twisted into not insisting on an up-or-down vote on single payer, for example. But whether it was Republicans, Blue Dogs, the insurance industry or Big Pharma, Obama traded things away without getting much in return, and those parties betrayed the supposed good faith of the deals he made with them.

    And this is what drives me nuts about this perspective: We won.

    I’m going to repeat this again, because you don’t seem to have realized it: We. Won. Democrats did what had never been done before, which was to get health insurance reform passed as federal goddamned law.

    We. Fucking. Won. We didn’t win pretty, and we didn’t make all of the field goals, but we goddamned fucking won. And it drives me up the wall to see how many people keep insisting two years later that, no, it was somehow a loss even though we fucking won.

    We did not lose the fight. We won. Please accept that we had a victory and move on to something that still needs to be fought over, like the jobs bill.

    This is like the people who keep insisting to this day that Obama should have ended DADT with an Executive Order — it doesn’t matter anymore, because we won. Accept the victory and move on, people.

  223. 223.

    General Stuck

    October 19, 2011 at 11:06 pm

    @Uncle Clarence Thomas:

    Please be advised that I will never shut up for you, just as you will never answer the substance of my argument

    Well, in that case. Shut up you nasty piece of shit.

  224. 224.

    Uncle Clarence Thomas

    October 19, 2011 at 11:06 pm

    .
    .
    @wilfred:

    Damn you, wilfred, that caused SUPER COKE! to exit my nostrils! :) Ginni, clean up on Aisle 9! I’m going to have to put “Dear Mr. President” by Pink – apparently a timeless classic – on the turntable now.
    .
    .

  225. 225.

    Another Bob

    October 19, 2011 at 11:10 pm

    @David M:

    The Democratic chairs are determined by seniority, while the GOP’s aren’t. It basically forces much greater party unity for the GOP.

    Can’t they change the rules then? I want to see some goddamned ruthlessness from time to time. As long as it’s for a good cause and all . . .

  226. 226.

    Uncle Clarence Thomas

    October 19, 2011 at 11:10 pm

    .
    .
    @General Stuck:

    Well, in that case. Shut up you nasty piece of shit.

    Why are balloonbaggers always so emo?
    .
    .

  227. 227.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    October 19, 2011 at 11:13 pm

    @Another Bob:

    Can’t they change the rules then?

    No. Not all Democrats are progressives. In fact, in the Senate, most aren’t. Why is this so hard for some people to understand?

  228. 228.

    Another Bob

    October 19, 2011 at 11:15 pm

    @Mnemosyne:

    we goddamned fucking won.

    I was glad it passed at the time and still think it’s better than what had been the status quo. I’m not convinced that the Dems couldn’t have gotten more if they’d been smarter and more ruthless about it, though. And I think it’s probably too early to declare that our side won. The game’s not over yet, and how the insurance industry handles their end of the bargain in the long run remains to be seen. I will hope for the best nonetheless.

  229. 229.

    Thymezone

    October 19, 2011 at 11:17 pm

    ABL, good post.

    BJ commentariat: Find another hobby. The debate between Obama as SuperNegro who can outfox any opposition versus Obama as PhonyWuss who can’t get anything done is just bloggorrhea bullshit. Obama is just a human being with totally human attributes, doing the best he can with pretty good personal resources and pretty good intentions.

    The fact that this truth is not good enough for shitheads on both ends of the political shithead bell curve says more about the shitheads than it says about Obama.

  230. 230.

    Mnemosyne

    October 19, 2011 at 11:21 pm

    @Another Bob:

    I’m not convinced that the Dems couldn’t have gotten more if they’d been smarter and more ruthless about it, though.

    So what? Did the Florida Marlins refuse to accept their victory over the Cubs after a guy in the stands interfered with a play? Hell no. If you win, you take the win even if it wasn’t perfect.

    And I think it’s probably too early to declare that our side won.

    Jesus fuck, no wonder we lost in 2010. I give up. Yes, you’re right, it was a total defeat, we should never try to change anything because the Republicans will just try to change it back. Congressional Democrats were right to run away from their signature accomplishment because it wasn’t a perfect and definitive victory.

  231. 231.

    Uncle Clarence Thomas

    October 19, 2011 at 11:23 pm

    .
    .
    @Thymezone:

    Obama is just a human being with totally human attributes, doing the best he can with pretty good personal resources and pretty good intentions.

    I do not believe that he is doing the best he can, or that he has pretty good intentions, or that he is a Good Man. By your own emo logic, that makes you a shithead. You may wear the self-defined title proudly, along with General Stucky, who will be along momentarily.
    .
    .

  232. 232.

    lol

    October 19, 2011 at 11:24 pm

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    It’s the same reason the whole “Reid just needs to fire the parliamentarian and pass the bill with 50 votes” plan doesn’t work – there aren’t 50 Democrats who will vote away their own power.

  233. 233.

    Uncle Ebeneezer

    October 19, 2011 at 11:27 pm

    Thank you ABL, for so eloquently putting into words what many have us have been struggling to say since the great Firebag Rebellion.

  234. 234.

    The Spy Who Loved Me

    October 19, 2011 at 11:28 pm

    Lucky Grio readers, they don’t get subjected to all the CAPS and EXCLAMATION POINTS!!!!!! that you normally so kindly provide to the readership here.

  235. 235.

    FollowtheDough

    October 19, 2011 at 11:29 pm

    Does anyone else want to say it? No? Okay. Why agree to a piece from Politico? Good heavens, how could Ben Smith do that! What a tabloid sensationalist grifter he is! Or maybe it’s the fault of those who allowed Ben Smith to do a piece on them UNLESS.. it was just to gain exposure & visibility to the cause. That would NEVER be the case. (BTW…you can follow the trackback to the various places I write at because it’s dire if you do not participate in my manifestos why I am more credible than certain progressives, Please listen, guys! I mean it this time!!)

    But I assure you the right wing is cackling it’s head off at prag prog/emoprog/nemoprog/dragprog/tagprog/lagprog/frogprog/mogprog/cogprog/jogprog and whatever else the fuck you want to identify as subsects of progressives as. Because make no doubt about it, the GOP crave for the dissent to grow. And guess what? It looks like politico is interested in that as well.

    The tragic comedy that is unfolding is to make this into a bigger issue than it is. The myopic hysteria of the same “progressive troublemakers” that we should pay attention to all this bullshit.

    I can tell you this: we are headed for a trainwreck with this division. Not Obama not you, not me, not anyone can stop it. Just remember to dive out of the way when everything crashes into each other.

  236. 236.

    FollowtheDough

    October 19, 2011 at 11:29 pm

    Does anyone else want to say it? No? Okay. Why agree to a piece from Politico? Good heavens, how could Ben Smith do that! What a tabloid sensationalist grifter he is! Or maybe it’s the fault of those who allowed Ben Smith to do a piece on them UNLESS.. it was just to gain exposure & visibility to the cause. That would NEVER be the case. (BTW…you can follow the trackback to the various places I write at because it’s dire if you do not participate in my manifestos why I am more credible than certain progressives, Please listen, guys! I mean it this time!!)

    But I assure you the right wing is cackling it’s head off at prag prog/emoprog/nemoprog/dragprog/tagprog/lagprog/frogprog/mogprog/cogprog/jogprog and whatever else the fuck you want to identify as subsects of progressives as. Because make no doubt about it, the GOP crave for the dissent to grow. And guess what? It looks like politico is interested in that as well.

    The tragic comedy that is unfolding is to make this into a bigger issue than it is. The myopic hysteria of the same “progressive troublemakers” that we should pay attention to all this bullshit.

    I can tell you this: we are headed for a trainwreck with this division. Not Obama not you, not me, not anyone can stop it. Just remember to dive out of the way when everything crashes into each other.

  237. 237.

    Another Bob

    October 19, 2011 at 11:32 pm

    @Mnemosyne:

    Yes, you’re right, it was a total defeat, we should never try to change anything because the Republicans will just try to change it back.

    You guys always end up going too far. Did I say it was a total defeat, or even use the word defeat? No, I did not. That’s you getting hysterical about it.

  238. 238.

    Thymezone

    October 19, 2011 at 11:44 pm

    @Uncle Clarence Thomas:

    I really shouldn’t be sharing these secrets with you, but when you shift the context from Obama to me, you have lost the argument. It’s a pretty standard deal. Sorry. You lose by rule. You really are terribly bad at this.

    We’ll have to just disagree on whether Obama is doing the best he can, has good intentions, and is a good man. In my view, there is no evidence to the contrary, and plenty in support. I’m sure you’d have another view. But yours will be, as I know from reading your idiotic screeds in the past, based on this approach: Obama made a mistake I really hate him for, or advanced some policy with which I disagree with every fiber of my phony being, therefore, he is no good, he is a Bad Man, and all who have any integrity must revile him as much as I do, or else I will harass them until hell freezes over.

    It’s a pretty absurd, and frankly revolting, position, but I must say, you do give it your all.

  239. 239.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    October 19, 2011 at 11:45 pm

    Since the definition of “progressive” is probably more debatable than “not-progressive”, here is my subjective, off-the-top-of-my-head list of Dem Senators in that latter category: Dianne Feinstein, Harry Rein, Max Baucus, Mark Udall, Michael Bennet, Ben Nelson, Tim Johnson, Mary Landrieu, Mark Pryor, Joe Lieberman, Tom Carper, Mark Begich, Daniel Akaka, Bob Casey, Kent Conrad, Kay Hagan, Daniel Inouye, Joe Mancin, Claire McCaskill, and Bill Nelson, Jon Tester, Jim Webb, Mark Warner.
    20, give or take, and depending on the issue. That’s leaving out Blanche Lincoln, Evan Bayh, Byron Dorgan, Robert Byrd and Arlen Spector, who was probably more liberal than more than half the people on this list. And Russ Feingold, who was a total wild card depending on how strong his dose of sanctimony was on the day of a vote. Does that clear up for anybody why the Democrats “don’t just X…”, or why childish fantasies about LBJ-style “ruthlessness” are pointless?

  240. 240.

    FollowtheDough

    October 19, 2011 at 11:48 pm

    BTW LOL to the person who did the Life of Brian reference

    It’s becoming soooo close to that.

  241. 241.

    FollowtheDough

    October 19, 2011 at 11:48 pm

    BTW LOL to the person who did the Life of Brian reference

    It’s becoming soooo close to that.

  242. 242.

    FollowtheDough

    October 19, 2011 at 11:48 pm

    BTW LOL to the person who did the Life of Brian reference

    It’s becoming soooo close to that.

  243. 243.

    David Koch

    October 19, 2011 at 11:49 pm

    @LT:

    They won’t dare go after figures too respected.

    Paul “NAFTA” Krugman is respected? By whom? By the people who lost their jobs when the multi-nationals shipped them overseas thanks to NAFTA and PNTR (“Free Trade” wth China), which Krugman tirelessly promoted?

    If hilarious how people like you deify Krugman even though the elitist Princeton professor stabs the 99% in the back every chance he gets.

    As for Atrios, nobody even fucking knows who he is. His blog traffic is a measly 32K per day. Compare that to say Rachel Maddow who has 1 million viewer per day.

  244. 244.

    Thymezone

    October 19, 2011 at 11:51 pm

    no wonder we lost in 2010

    We lost in 2010 mainly because of 42% voter turnout. Our side pretty much cut off its nose to spite its apathetic face. Sat out the election and now spends the next two years berating a government it didn’t have the balls to go to the polls and vote to change. Left the election to the hillbillies and the people who think that gay marriage is America’s biggest threat, and now want to bitch about how bad the government is every day.

  245. 245.

    Uriel

    October 19, 2011 at 11:53 pm

    @wilfred: Oh, wait! I see what you did- you replaced the word ‘Bush’ with the word ‘Obama’ in that quote! How bitingly witty and trenchant! And it’s even more insightful tonight than it was last night, when you posted the exact same thing!

    You plan on bringing any new material soon, or is this your ‘My Sharonna’ of political commentary?

  246. 246.

    Karen

    October 19, 2011 at 11:56 pm

    Thank you ABL, it’s nice to know I’m a pragprog. As opposed to a pragfrog. I just think I’m a realistic pragmatist who knew who Obama was when I voted for him.

    I don’t get the emoprogs because they’re not consistent.

    For example, Jane Hamsher is a liberal’s liberal. The most liberal liberal a liberal can be. Yet, she crawled into bed with Grover Nordquist. I don’t understand how emoprogs don’t find that revolting? I don’t understand how they don’t find her near endorsement of Ron Paul disgusting. She hates the President so much I think that she’ll tell her followers to just stay home or vote for Ron Paul if Obama is the candidate. Jane Hamsher hates Obama so much she’s willing to throw the election (like the emoprogs did in 2010) believing like the Indian Goddess Kali that the Democratic party has to be destroyed to be rebuilt into something she and her fans find palatable.

    When President Obama was elected, it was already known he wasn’t a partisan. It was common knowledge that he was a compromiser.

    Okay, I understand that the emoprogs wanted Hilary Clinton and believe Obama did her wrong. However, they say Obama is a warmonger. Hilary Clinton is a hawk. Not a dove. And I don’t believe that the GOP would have been any more cooperative with her. However, I know emoprogs won’t be happy unless President Obama, kneels before them and apologizes for winning the election. Then commits hari kari for the crime of even bothering to run when Hilary Clinton declared Obama was unelectable. She had the crown and was entitled. The emoprogs want revenge and they want it yesterday.

    Pragprogs like me don’t worship Obama. We are realists who have yet to vote FOR someone and are used to voting against someone else. I voted for Clinton because Tsongas lost. I voted for Dukakis out of lack of choice. I voted for Obama because, John Edwards lost, and yes, it’s embarrassing but I fell for his sympathy for the poor. We look at the forest instead of just each tree and we think about what’s the better choice. If I thought a liberal that emoprogs would be in love with had a chance in hell to win the election, I’d gladly support them. But pragprogs look at the big picture and I think that’s why emoprogs would love if we just disappeared off the face of the earth. We know Obama is far from perfect and that he’s a centrist. But we also know what will happen if the GOP gets in. And emoprogs can say Obama is Bush and maybe in some ways they have a point.

    However, as bad as Bush was, the GOP candidates who are up for election are a million times worse. Emoprogs and pragprogs are fighting two different wars. Emoprogs are fighting to have the perfect candidate and everything about them has to be FDL and KOS approved.

    Pragprogs are fighting against what is worse. It has nothing to do with worshiping Obama, at least on my end. It has everything to do with hating the GOP.

  247. 247.

    General Stuck

    October 20, 2011 at 12:03 am

    @FollowtheDough:

    UNLESS.. it was just to gain exposure & visibility to the cause.

    “the cause”?. There is no fucking cause for ABL and the rest of the so called Obamabots. There is only a handful of us on the internet that insist on using factual arguments AND AT LEAST A SCINTILLA OF PERSPECTIVE if you feel you must criticize President Obama, and it would be nice, though not required, to ponder that it should be the normal, or default pos for anyone claiming to be “from the left”, to maybe give the prez of their OWN FUCKING PARTY the benefit of the doubt before going apeshit firebagger at every word that first crosses the transom. That is the fucking cause, and it is highly uncomplicated in such context.

    And know that it is all zero sum, the bullshit does not disappear into space, but lands either on your side, or the other side. Or some kind of nonsense like that.

    That is what ABL is trying to pound into you knuckleheads.

  248. 248.

    David Koch

    October 20, 2011 at 12:09 am

    @Karen:

    I don’t understand how they don’t find her near endorsement of Ron Paul disgusting.

    Really. For non FDL readers, like me, is she peddling Ron Paul over at her blog?

  249. 249.

    Cliff in NH

    October 20, 2011 at 12:09 am

    @Karen:

    Yay! Another sane person!

  250. 250.

    magma

    October 20, 2011 at 12:19 am

    @wilfred:
    John “Assrocket” Hinderaker ?

  251. 251.

    Lysana

    October 20, 2011 at 12:20 am

    One of these days, I will remember to make a pie before I read an ABL comment thread this long. Certain parties make me hungry.

  252. 252.

    Odie Hugh Manatee

    October 20, 2011 at 12:22 am

    @General Stuck:

    Unctuous Tommy: “… just as you will never answer the substance of my argument”

    Substance? OMFG that is hilarious. The only relationship that overused asswipe has with substance is the abuse of it.

    Probably meth. Rats will chew on anything they find.

  253. 253.

    Corner Stone

    October 20, 2011 at 12:27 am

    @FollowtheDough:

    Does anyone else want to say it? No? Okay. Why agree to a piece from Politico?

    There was never any doubt as to why. See the Griftio.com “response” piece as proof of concept.

  254. 254.

    Corner Stone

    October 20, 2011 at 12:29 am

    “Pragprogs”?
    WTF, did we hit a timewarp where I’m waiting for a fight to break out between the preppies and the goths during lunch hour?

  255. 255.

    brewmn

    October 20, 2011 at 12:31 am

    @Thymezone: That was awesome.

  256. 256.

    ABL

    October 20, 2011 at 12:33 am

    Or maybe it’s the fault of those who allowed Ben Smith to do a piece on them UNLESS

    what is this “it” that is purportedly my fault, precisely?

    Why did I agree to the piece? Emily S. called me and said she was writing a piece about Obama supporters on Twitter and would I be interviewed. I said yes.

    dunh dunh DUNNNNNHHHH.

    i mean good grief, what are you even talking about?

  257. 257.

    ABL

    October 20, 2011 at 12:35 am

    @Thymezone:

    .

    .

    needs

    .

    .

    more

    .

    .

    punctuation

  258. 258.

    Karen

    October 20, 2011 at 12:35 am

    @Corner Stone:

    WTF, did we hit a timewarp where I’m waiting for a fight to break out between the preppies and the goths during lunch hour?

    I bet you were a goth.

  259. 259.

    Thymezone

    October 20, 2011 at 12:37 am

    @brewmn:

    He’s such an easy target. But thanks.

  260. 260.

    Thymezone

    October 20, 2011 at 12:39 am

    @ABL:

    Don’t hate me, but I don’t know what this means.

    add: I am having some stomach flu today, so I am a little off my feed.

  261. 261.

    ABL

    October 20, 2011 at 12:40 am

    @The Spy Who Loved Me: wake me up when you come up with some new material.

  262. 262.

    Odie Hugh Manatee

    October 20, 2011 at 12:41 am

    @Karen:

    I look at it this way:

    – Someone is going to be president.
    – That someone is going to be a Republican or a Democrat.
    – Regarding our economy (and many other issues), a Republican president will NEVER sign anything that would benefit a voter like me. Emphasis on NEVER.

    As a result of the bleak but honest assessment above, the Democrat gets my vote for president. End of story.

    There’s no other option, none. Especially now with the mess we are in. Will the Democrat do everything I want? Fuck no. Will they do things that piss me off? Hell yes. Will they do things that are actually good for the other 99%?

    Hell yes, and that’s something a Republican president will NEVER do. They are owned by the 1%, lock, stock and barrel.

  263. 263.

    David M

    October 20, 2011 at 1:05 am

    @Another Bob: Yes, they can and should change the rules. Unfortunately, it’s up to the Senate or House to vote to change the rules, Obama really can’t do anything about it.

    Goes back to why 90% of my complaints while Obama has been president are directed towards Congress.

  264. 264.

    Uncle Clarence Thomas

    October 20, 2011 at 1:07 am

    .
    .
    @Thymezone:

    I really shouldn’t be sharing these secrets with you, but when you shift the context from Obama to me, you have lost the argument. It’s a pretty standard deal. Sorry. You lose by rule. You really are terribly bad at this.

    That is truly a secret, because that “rule” is not written anywhere. In other words, it is not a “rule.” Balloonbaggers such as yourself believe that if you say something, you make it true just by saying it. However, that also is not a rule. You were hoist on your own petard, which of course you do not like, as is true of all hypocrites, balloonemo or not. I am perfectly satisfied for you to say whatever you wish, and I will allow you the corresponding satisfaction of my exercise of my scintillating free speech rights.
    .
    .

  265. 265.

    FlipYrWhig

    October 20, 2011 at 1:09 am

    @Another Bob:

    Why are Republicans magically able to achieve party unity when Democrats can’t? I think it’s because they fight to win.

    It’s because Mitch McConnell rounded up his guys after they were reduced to the smallest number of Republican senators in a generation and he made a pitch. It was probably something like this:

    “Listen up, guys. I’ve been thinking. If we obstruct everything, all the time, with every weapon we have, we’ll damage the president so badly that we’ll be able to bounce back in no time.”

    “But, Mitch, won’t those kinds of shenanigans frustrate the public too? Why won’t they blame us?”

    “Trust me. No one’s ever going to explain it to them. And what do you have to lose? It’s not like we can get _fewer_ of us elected.”

    “What if he wants to draw upon Republican ideas, though? If we vote for those, we get them, and isn’t that the point, to get the country to work the way we like? For God’s sake, what about tax cuts? We’re supposed to vote against tax cuts just because the president wants them?”

    “Remember Bill Clinton? Who got the credit when he incorporated Republican ideas? He did, that’s who. We’re not going to let that happen again.”

    “We can’t even vote for things we believe in? Why should we do that?”

    “Our most important priority is to make him a one-term president. What’s the worst that can happen?”

    It’s basically a suicide pact.

    It worked.

  266. 266.

    Uncle Clarence Thomas

    October 20, 2011 at 1:10 am

    .
    .
    @ABL:

    @Thymezone: ..needs..more..punctuation

    The periods are not used for punctuation, as should be obvious to even the most casual observer. Your comment leads me to understand better why you were drummed out of the legal profession, so I thank you for that.
    .
    .

  267. 267.

    RK

    October 20, 2011 at 1:16 am

    I’m wondering who will have more impact on the presidential election, emos and prags or klingons and tribbles.

  268. 268.

    FlipYrWhig

    October 20, 2011 at 1:16 am

    @David M:

    Yes, they can and should change the rules.

    If the goal were to advance progressive goals by any means necessary, they can and should do a lot of things. But they don’t. Because a lot of them don’t believe in progressive goals. And a lot more of them are more interested in protecting their own perks and powers than in helping the president, a president, any president.

  269. 269.

    cxs

    October 20, 2011 at 1:37 am

    @Another Bob: Yes, Joan Walsh. Calling her an “Obama hater” would dignify her in that such an epithet would imply a level of principle and thought not in evidence.

  270. 270.

    Uriel

    October 20, 2011 at 1:44 am

    @Uncle Clarence Thomas:

    The periods are not used for punctuation, as should be obvious to even the most casual observer.

    Oh, no, we all know what the periods are for-they’re the ASCII sweat produced as you furtively try to massage your flaccid ego into something that seems more… let’s say, tumescent.

    The real issue is that no one cares, apart from the fact they’re so very mockable. The fact that you seem to think anyone should lend your little tick anymore attention than that says way more about you then it does your detractors.

  271. 271.

    Thymezone

    October 20, 2011 at 1:44 am

    Okay, I still have no idea what you are talking about. There are no extra periods in my posts as visible from here. If you are referring to someone else’s periods, you would have to point them out to me and explain your remark, otherwise I am at a loss. Or maybe you are mistaking another commenters use of “spacing periods” in reference to something I said. Or maybe you are just drunk? I have no idea at this point. Not sure you do either.

    Also, I have never been in “the legal profession” nor have I ever claimed to have been. So I have no idea what that means. Maybe you have me mixed up with someone else?

  272. 272.

    Thymezone

    October 20, 2011 at 1:48 am

    @Uncle Clarence Thomas:

    Give it up man, you are so full of shit you couldn’t possible sit down without squirting all over yourself.

    I can’t believe they let you post here. You’re like a flat wheel on a grocery cart, clunk clunk clunk.

  273. 273.

    Allan

    October 20, 2011 at 1:50 am

    @Uncle Clarence Thomas: That’s adorable. It thinks it has a First Amendment right to type whatever it wants on a private citizen’s website.

  274. 274.

    Thymezone

    October 20, 2011 at 1:54 am

    @Uncle Clarence Thomas:

    my exercise of my scintillating free speech rights.

    You have no free speech rights here. You post at the pleasure of the blogowners.

  275. 275.

    boss bitch

    October 20, 2011 at 2:55 am

    @Another Bob:

    Why are Republicans magically able to achieve party unity when Democrats can’t? I think it’s because they fight to win.

    are you kidding? Democrats JUST LIKE Liberals see honor in going up against the party/man/establishment. And they waste no time running to the press and their supporters about how they ‘told off the president’. Give me a break.

  276. 276.

    FollowtheDough

    October 20, 2011 at 3:12 am

    @ABL:

    What am i talking about? I am talking about your obvious transparent attempt to gain attention or sympathy when you engage in the same “emo” tactics of those that you are accusing in this response. It’s a ploy/tactic/gimmick, call it what you want.

    Don’t you see that pattern with your work? Or are you oblivious to that? No one on the Obama supporter side is seen as EMO, that’s hysterical to me. Just a sign of the obvious hypocrisy that you and others won’t admit to who share a common passion. It’s hypocritical to the highest.

  277. 277.

    FollowtheDough

    October 20, 2011 at 3:34 am

    You know what politics has become on the internet? Hyper Attention whoring. I really can’t believe I see the same names screeched over and over again that are somehow disturbing the harmony of political pragprogmagick.

    God forbid we do that.

  278. 278.

    AxelFoley

    October 20, 2011 at 4:08 am

    @JWL:

    To those with wax in their ears, Obama campaigned as a conservative, and not a moderate.

    FTFY

  279. 279.

    AxelFoley

    October 20, 2011 at 4:16 am

    @Too Many Jimpersons (formerly Jimperson Zibb, Duncan Dönitz, Otto Graf von Pfmidtnöchtler-Pízsmőgy, Mumphrey, et al.): @ post #24

    This, this, this, so very much THIS!

  280. 280.

    AxelFoley

    October 20, 2011 at 4:19 am

    @lol: @ post @37

    And this, this, this, so very much THIS, too!

  281. 281.

    Odie Hugh Manatee

    October 20, 2011 at 5:07 am

    @Allan: @Thymezone:

    That the asswipe thinks he has a constitutional right to free speech here tells me all I need to know about him; Unctuous Tommy is a ratfucker, more than likely of the teahadist variety.

    They ALL think the first amendment means that they can say whatever they want, wherever they want. It’s like a nervous tic with them.

  282. 282.

    Ecks

    October 20, 2011 at 6:16 am

    Er, typo police:

    the article was no all sound or fury, signifying nothing.

    Surely.

  283. 283.

    kay

    October 20, 2011 at 7:03 am

    @Keith G:

    Deciding to develop message discipline is a very good thing.

    I think crediting that uptick to “message discipline” (or Obama, actually) is a mistake.

    Republicans ran the field at the state level in 2010:

    Republicans won smashing victories in state legislatures yesterday, capturing an outright majority of the nation’s legislative seats and the largest majority for the party since 1928. As of noon Eastern Time, Republicans had taken about 18 legislative chambers from Democrats, with more statehouses hanging in the balance. Democrats hadn’t picked up a single chamber from Republicans.

    They got in, then they went fucking crazy. Anti-union campaigns, insane anti-abortion campaigns, voter suppression in 30 states, closing clinics, the vitriolic attacks against public schools and teachers, and on and on and on.

    There were FOUR statehouses that were full of protestors after 2010; Wisconsin, Indiana, Ohio and (to a lesser extent) Michigan. To put the cherry on the toxic conservative sundae, Republicans didn’t do ONE THING on jobs at the state level in the statehouses they captured.

    State law changes are immediate, or close to it. They directly affect people’s lives. The Tea Party and Far Right conservatism was a nice theory, but it’s ugly in practice.

    I completely understand why national commentators focus on a national theme, and always, always assume it’s all happening at the federal level, but you can’t look at government without looking at states, particularly now, when more states are run by conservatives than at any time since 1928.

    Obama is benefitting because Democrats and liberals are coming together at the state level. He had a jobs plan and a good message when that happened, but he didn’t create it. It was organic. A reaction to having the other side in power at the state level.

    I credit Obama with changing the conversation on taxes, actually, not jobs. I think that’s ALL him. I also think it’s a huge achievement. “Fair share” WON. That’s his argument. He did a beautiful job there. I didn’t even realize he was winning it until I heard the language shift, nationally. Those are his words.

  284. 284.

    Omnes Omnibus

    October 20, 2011 at 7:11 am

    @Uriel: The Knack also had a hit with “Good Girls Don’t.”

  285. 285.

    arguingwithsignposts

    October 20, 2011 at 7:12 am

    @kay:

    capturing an outright majority of the nation’s legislative seats and the largest majority for the party since 1928.

    Parallels in history are eerie sometimes.

  286. 286.

    kay

    October 20, 2011 at 7:23 am

    @Keith G:

    I would also credit Democrats at the state level for pushing back hard. In Indiana, legislators left the state over Right to Work and general union-busting. In Wisconsin, they left the state AND ran recall elections. In Ohio, they put two citizen vetoes on the ballot and are getting ready to do a third. In Maine, Tennessee and South Carolina, they’re fighting voter suppression laws.

    The mystery to me is Florida, and maybe I’m uniformed, but I don’t see any resistance there, which is baffling. Their governor is a loathsome criminal-type, unpopular, and as far Right as they come. I would think he’s vulnerable as hell. I don’t know why they aren’t organizing against him, or maybe they are, and I missed it.

  287. 287.

    kay

    October 20, 2011 at 7:40 am

    @arguingwithsignposts:

    Maybe it’s because I’m a lawyer, but I think the resistance to looking at states or focusing on state-level organizing and law on the Democratic and liberal side comes from a sort of knee-jerk rejection of “states rights”.

    It’s like we’ll all turn into members of the Federalist Society or libertarians if we admit state law matters, or shift gears when we lose at the federal level and concentrate energy there, at the state level. It’s my single biggest complaint about liberals and Democrats: what I consider the obsessive, singular focus on federal government and federal law.

    We can do two things at once. Really. Liberal legislation and ideas can come from the states UP or the federal DOWN. We have an advantage there, over conservatives. We don’t have to pretend we’re “federalists”. They do. They aren’t, but they have to pretend they are.

  288. 288.

    Richard Bottoms

    October 20, 2011 at 8:45 am

    You go ABL.

    Kick ass and take names.

    The whiners will moan about the good old days if the GOP takes over again instead on nutting up and backing their guys, you know the Democrats? Every fucking one of them.

    Choose your team, there is no middle option.

    You back the Democratic president, or you don’t.

  289. 289.

    RJPJR

    October 20, 2011 at 9:02 am

    The problem with this whole debate is that the Obamabots believe they can avoid having to substantively engage any criticism of the president’s actions by using the excuse that things are really hard for him because of Republican obstruction, the weak economy, etc. There is no one who denies this, but that does not mean that the administration has not made things worse through many of its poor choices. Rather than actually respond to the specific criticisms that have been offered, the Obamabots just default to the same old excuse about how bad poor Barry has it. A real argument would look something like this:
    When the critics of the President say that the administration should have asked for a larger stimulus and not pretended that the one that asked for was the perfect size, the Obamabots should respond by saying either that the stimulus was not too small; or that it was good that they pretended it was the right size to be effective. I mean maybe that pander to independents and Republicans was worth it, even though it set the stimulus up to be portrayed as a failure, making any further stimulus impossible to obtain, dooming us to the weak economy we now face; all at the same time leading to the President’s approval rating among independents dropping like a rock. None of this denies that the President has had to deal with tough circumstances, but that fact cannot justify what clearly were bad choices which the administration did in fact have alternatives to.
    When the critics of the President say that he should have pushed harder for a Public Option in the health care debate, even if he failed to get it; the Obamabots should respond by saying- no it was better for Obama to be perceived as selling out his base because that will really do a lot to help him with independent voters. I mean if he hadn’t done that than his approval rating among independent voters would be horrendous and not just abysmal.
    When the critics of the President say that he should not have extended the Bush tax cuts without getting a raise in the debt ceiling in return, the Obamabots should say- no it was good to allow the Republicans to blackmail him and force spending cuts that are both inhumane and bad for the economy.
    I think everyone agrees that the President has been dealt a bad hand, but that does not excuse the poor choices he has made in response to that. The Obamabots are referred to as the Obamabots because they don’t defend the President’s actions, they defend the President and attempt to rationalize his choices no matter how transparently bad, and no matter how clear alternative choices which are better have been set forth by a variety of sources. The greatest irony is that they do this rationalizing in large part by appealing to the fact that the President has to win over independent swing voters; yet ignore the fact that much of the criticism of the President’s choices deal with the fact that they have not been successful in increasing his appeal to independents as proven by all public polling data. Obamabots are not pragmatic progressives. Pragmatic progressives would have no problem selling out the base for political gain. Obama has the selling out the base part down, but he seems to be coming up short on the political gain part. (Something even he himself seems to realize given his recent populist revival.) If the Obamabots want to respond that the President would be doing worse with independents if not for his previous choices, well then all they would have proven is that it is probably impossible for Obama to win them over; at which point trying to do so would be both a bad strategy, and a morally indefensible even from a pragmatic point of view.

  290. 290.

    Scott

    October 20, 2011 at 9:05 am

    Late to the party, but you’ve got my support a hunnert percent, ABL. Greenwald and the rest of them being willing to talk to a right-wing rag like Politico would, in a sane universe, mark them permanently as GOP stooges.

  291. 291.

    RJPJR

    October 20, 2011 at 9:24 am

    @Scott:
    ABL talked to Politico too. I guess she must be a right-wing stooge as well.

  292. 292.

    salacious crumb

    October 20, 2011 at 10:05 am

    so ABL,

    Amy Davidson of the New Yorker questioned Obama’s administration killing of Anwar Awlaki and his son..is she racist? I mean she supported Obama but now no starry eyeD adulation for him because she feels some constitutional questions need to be asked and a President of the USA should be challenged..be it Bush or Obama

    So I suppose it was ok to ask those questions of Bush because that would hasten his defeat …but the racism cudgel is pretty effective when it comes to well intentioned people questioning their President..

    is she racist? I mean she has to be right? NO ONE SHALL QUESTION DEAR LEADER OBAMA!!

  293. 293.

    eemom

    October 20, 2011 at 10:10 am

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    The Knack also had a hit with “Good Girls Don’t.”

    if I tell you that I have that song on my ipod, will you forgive me for The Clash?

  294. 294.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    October 20, 2011 at 10:23 am

    @RJPJR: Wow. Judging by the amount of time you spent typing that, it appears you think you said something coherent, even insightful.

  295. 295.

    Paul in KY

    October 20, 2011 at 10:45 am

    @Another Bob: I think Nelson would think ‘active opposition from White House’ might actually help him.

    Pres. Obama ought to have threatened to kiss him on live TV.

  296. 296.

    Paul in KY

    October 20, 2011 at 10:52 am

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: Fucking Lieberman (ILL – Tel Aviv) is not a Democrat.

    The weasel does caucus with us on leadership stuff, but that is all.

  297. 297.

    Paul in KY

    October 20, 2011 at 10:57 am

    @FlipYrWhig: You must have been hiding in the cloakroom.

  298. 298.

    FollowtheDough

    October 20, 2011 at 11:58 am

    @RJPJR:

    No, that just means that “I had no idea Politico would make this so one sided! I thought Ben Smith was the Jim Leher of the internet!”

    And to add to that: If Greenwald/Sirota/Cornel West or any of the dreaded emoprogs had a feature on politico, there would be a blog post “Well lookie here, look who spoke to Politico w/ Ben Smith” Not to mention the cheer leading squad wouldn’t even notice. This shit is all so insincere & fake.

  299. 299.

    harlana

    October 20, 2011 at 12:12 pm

    I realize Joan Walsh is critical of the President at times, but why is she in par with Hamsher? I must be missing something. While I have seen her criticize the President on the teevee, I have also seen her time and again defend the President. I just don’t consider this Obama-bashing. Has she turned radical or something? Just, what?

  300. 300.

    FollowtheDough

    October 20, 2011 at 12:14 pm

    @salacious crumb:

    Definitely there was no other way, we protected our country and we are morally justified to do this. Look at my Eagle silkscreen t-shirt,see? Nuff said. Smedley Butler’s theory of “War being a racket” still to this day should be heralded or at least acknowledged by anyone calling themselves a “patriotic american”

  301. 301.

    Ben Cisco

    October 20, 2011 at 12:15 pm

    ABL, REALLY late to this, but thank you for saying what needed to be said.

  302. 302.

    harlana

    October 20, 2011 at 12:15 pm

    We do not blog for pay and we do not blog in order to increase our advertising revenue; nor are we selling books or attempting to leverage ourselves into television appearances on MSNBC, CNN, and Fox.

    Oh, now I get it.

  303. 303.

    Singular

    October 20, 2011 at 12:24 pm

    Another Bob makes a lot of sense. Criticism of Obama is often principled. I realise a lot of you guys pride yourselves on your pragmatism, but surely there is still a place for basic principles?

    Some things are just plain wrong. Obviously there aren’t a lot of Greenwald fans here, but he’s taken an especial interest in the treatment and eventual fate of Bradley Manning, and Obama’s continuing crackdown on whistleblowers & pushing of a surveillance state. Can anyone really say he’s wrong with this? Does nobody care about imprisonment without trial? Are you all gonna give up your values for security?

    And the double-down on the war in Afghanistan. Sometimes it seems as if liberal Americans (and Brits) don’t give a shit how many foreigners they bomb as long as long as some social legislation concerning healthcare and DADT gets passed. In some parallel universe where Ron Paul got elected president, things are awful for Americans and a bit better for the rest of the fucking world.

    I’m fairly sure that when Digby & Krugman and various others go to the ballot box, they will vote for Obama – because they realise that there is always a better.. and a worse. But they are entitled to try and hold him to account, the only way they can.

  304. 304.

    FollowtheDough

    October 20, 2011 at 12:31 pm

    @Scott:

    The nerve of Greenwald talking to politico! What a shill for cato! I knew it! Oh wait, nevermind. It was some anonymous man with a black cat avi over +170,000 tweets self promoting himself,ABL & a few of the new CHOSEN politically enlightened that we should not question because these are professionals & we can only dream to ascend the heights of greatness in political wonkery. Don’t you see the 11 dimensional chess being played for our benefit? I am in awe of their virtuosity. How could you know of the greatness that will soon be upon us all?

    To put it in perspective, talking to Politico is like talking to TMZ. I am so shocked that Ben Smith would be interested in fracturing the left further.

  305. 305.

    FollowtheDough

    October 20, 2011 at 12:44 pm

    @Singular:

    Singular, you are missing a crucial point. This is 11 dimensional chess because the pragproggers told us it was. And we know how we can trust the political establishment because of examples in past american history. Because if it’s one thing I know, it’s that the political establishment has the BEST interests of the american public. All we gotta do is be involved on every level of politics! We can take Wallstreet’s money & skillfully navigate the waters. Don’t worry because the pragproggers got this. Emo’s gotta have a seat!

  306. 306.

    RJPJR

    October 20, 2011 at 1:04 pm

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:
    Jim, from myour response to what I said is is absolutely apparent that you didn’t.

    But thank you for proving my point. Just another post from an Obamabot that actually refuses to defend the actions of the adminstration, but would rather engage in ad hominens against those actually willing to asess those actions in a realistic faction.

    At least you are foolish enough as your name suggests to not try to make an argument when it is so clear you are bad at it.

  307. 307.

    Odie Hugh Manatee

    October 20, 2011 at 1:24 pm

    I hope you firebagging jerkoffs are enjoying triumphantly high-fiving and back-slapping each other at the end of an old thread.

    Pathetic, but what else can anyone expect from you vapid fucks. Carry on.

  308. 308.

    metricpenny

    October 20, 2011 at 1:57 pm

    Gurrrrrrrrrrrrrl, you ain’t never lied!

    Give ’em hell, ABL! Give ’em hell, ABL!

    Thanks for being my voice against the petty Professional Left.

    Going now to figure out how to work that twitter …

  309. 309.

    les

    October 20, 2011 at 3:38 pm

    @Keith G:
    get back to me when the jobs bill passes, because of bullpitting.

  310. 310.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    October 20, 2011 at 3:46 pm

    @RJPJR: If you’d like to take another run at making a coherent point, maybe I’ll respond. Two friendly suggestions: Less is more, and try reading your words out loud to see if they make sense to you when you hear them. No more word salads.

  311. 311.

    ABL

    October 20, 2011 at 5:23 pm

    @Thymezone: you quoted UCT who tends to use weird punctuation when he’s vomiting his nonsense in the comment section here… unless he’s not using them anymore. sorry for the confusion!

    @FollowtheDough: “maybe it’s all ben smith’s fault.” you define “it” as my purported cry for attention. i’m sure the fact that your subsequent points are entirely non-responsive to my question is beyond your comprehension. i’ll chalk it up to another victim of ABLDS.

    @Odie Hugh Manatee: it’s so typical, innit? i hope we get upgraded trolls soon. i’m bored with the current slate.

  312. 312.

    FuzzyWuzzy

    October 20, 2011 at 9:12 pm

    @Brian S: so, to be pragmatic progressive you have to approve of:
    extrajudicial killing of American citizens alleged in secret courts to be terrorists and their children.
    bank bailouts
    free passes for criminals of certain sociopolitical classes and leanings-bankers, politicians, insurance, real estate frauds. Only Madoff goes down, because he ripped off well connected people.
    torture through proxies/subcontractors
    Cancel the 4th amendment
    Cancel the War Powers Act
    More flying robot death machines
    War on a whim anywhere, anytime
    GOP economics on tax cuts
    endless high unemployment
    health care on the Romney plan
    Free trade with everybody
    No EFCA, no support for workers displaced by free trade for everybody

    That’s Winning!

  313. 313.

    FollowtheDough

    October 20, 2011 at 11:17 pm

    @ABL:

    How is it your fault? If you don’t know Politico’s M.O. by now you really are quite naive. Ben Smith lives to create political tension. Just take a look at their headlines for godsakes. Of course he was going to refer to you as a “O Bot” He wants to cause a stir and generate more comments/more responses.

    And no, i dont suffer from your imaginary syndrome. I just find it amusing you lecture others on how to behave in politics. When it is abundantly clear that you could take your own advice times 100. The problem is your friends/fans don’t want to tell you that you have gone completely over board w/ your fixation/obsession of anyone that doesn’t fit your definition of a “credible progressive” Jesus christ, the constant squawking of the same offending names over and over. That’s not being pragmatic, that is being Emo to the fullest.

  314. 314.

    FollowtheDough

    October 20, 2011 at 11:19 pm

    @FuzzyWuzzy:

    Man, I can’t wait to get my pragmatic letter jacket.

  315. 315.

    Corner Stone

    October 21, 2011 at 12:04 am

    @FollowtheDough:

    Of course he was going to refer to you as a “O Bot” He wants to cause a stir and generate more comments/more responses.

    There is no such thing as bad press for those on the grift.
    Of course ABL knew what was going to happen. What do you think her echo chamber on twitter is about? It’s a distribution center.
    And the “response” to the Griftio.com? So completely predictable it can’t be put into words.
    She’s monetizing clicks in at least 3 sites, and needs some sweet victimization card to play to feed the grift.

  316. 316.

    William Hurley

    October 21, 2011 at 1:16 am

    The evidence continues to mount. Poll after poll, dwindling job openings, persistent decline in hours worked and hourly pay, growing ranks pf un- and under-employed, cozier ties to Wall St’s campaign slush fund, record numbers of deportations, and on and on.

    Steep, Rapid Decline in Americans’ Living Standards over the past 3 years
    http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2011/1019/A-long-steep-drop-for-Americans-standard-of-living

    The time is nearing when the chance to save the nation and the Democratic Party will have passed – leaving the Democratic Party with a DOA Presidential candidate and dozens of House and Senate candidacies dragged down in the under-tow.

    Don’t let evangelical o-bots sacrifice the nation and the Democratic Party on the alter of their fact-phobic magical thinking.

    OWS = unBama.

  317. 317.

    Uncle Clarence Thomas

    October 21, 2011 at 1:21 am

    .
    .
    @Uriel:

    The real issue is that no one cares, apart from the fact they’re so very mockable.

    I agree wholeheartedly that balloonbaggers love to mock those with physical disabilities such as my eyesight. I’ve explained all this before but balloonbagger heels such as yourself will always persist in your pettiness. I use the periods for my own purposes, and they do not hamper your use of this site, so there is no basis for your sociopathy, no matter how instructive of your character it is to decent people.
    .
    .

  318. 318.

    Uncle Clarence Thomas

    October 21, 2011 at 1:33 am

    .
    .
    @Thymezone:

    Give it up man, you are so full of shit you couldn’t possible sit down without squirting all over yourself.

    I can’t believe they let you post here. You’re like a flat wheel on a grocery cart, clunk clunk clunk.

    Having stated those two paragraphs, they must therefore be true, as all balloonbaggers fiercely believe. Perhaps you will win next time.
    .
    .

  319. 319.

    Uriel

    October 21, 2011 at 2:39 am

    @Uncle Clarence Thomas: Really? Nearly 24 hours later, and this is the best you can come up with? How very… tedious.

    I notice you seem to have managed to read and respond to all manner of posts fairly easily in the absence of of any self-indulgent attention getting devices. I wonder what it is about your posts, and yours alone, that requires such conspicuous and obnoxious flag-waving for you to locate.

    (Just so we’re clear here, I’m calling you a liar, and a fairly transparent one at that. But you are fairly shameless in your lying, which I guess is something…)

  320. 320.

    Uriel

    October 21, 2011 at 3:02 am

    @Corner Stone: And that said, compared to this response, Unca Tommie’s blatant attempt at pity trolling is the ’12 Monkeys’ of internet bull-shiting.

    Christ, man, if you’re going to wait an entire day to phone it in like this, why bother? Aren’t there more recent threads where you can post the exact same thing you’ve posted for weeks? Why waste your talent for redundancy all the way down here?

  321. 321.

    Thymezone

    October 21, 2011 at 3:05 am

    @Uncle Clarence Thomas:

    Maybe I will win next time? That’s more than anyone around here can say for you, Mister Potatohead. Let’s take a poll. Has anyone here ever seen you win an argument?

  322. 322.

    RJPJR

    October 21, 2011 at 8:27 am

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:
    Jim- a friendly suggestion for you. Next time you have a hard time understanding something you read, you might want to consider the possibility that this is more a reflection of your limited ability to comprehend than it is a reflection of the writer’s ability to communicate effectively.
    I will try to dumb down what I am saying, and eliminate any attempt to support any of my assertions with illustrative reasoning, and eliminate any attempt to preempt any potential objections to my position. In other words, I will word in it a form that you Obamabots are more familiar and hence more likely to understand.
    Defending Obama with the claim that he has faced extremely difficult circumstances in office is not an adequate response to the fact that he has chosen to reject many alternative choices which would have led to better results. A real defense of Obama would need to specifically justify why the choices he made were in fact better than those alternatives, not simply try to paint any criticism of Obama as unfair due to the difficulty of his circumstances. Furthermore, the claim that one is a pragmatic progressive because they defend Obama is absurd. Pragmatic progressives would support compromise as a means of gaining political advantage. Obama’s compromises haven’t done that as evidenced by his continually declining support amongst swing voters and independents.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Political Action

Postcard Writing Information

Recent Comments

  • Roger Moore on Open Thread (Mendacious Menendez and More) (Sep 28, 2023 @ 1:29pm)
  • Scout211 on Open Thread (Mendacious Menendez and More) (Sep 28, 2023 @ 1:28pm)
  • Alison Rose on Open Thread (Mendacious Menendez and More) (Sep 28, 2023 @ 1:26pm)
  • mrmoshpotato on Open Thread (Mendacious Menendez and More) (Sep 28, 2023 @ 1:26pm)
  • WaterGirl on Open Thread (Mendacious Menendez and More) (Sep 28, 2023 @ 1:19pm)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
What Has Biden Done for You Lately?

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Talk of Meetups – Meetup Planning

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Cole & Friends Learn Español

Introductory Post
Cole & Friends Learn Español

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!