The Wasilla wingnut is still in peak form:
Sarah Palin on Tuesday joined a growing chorus of Republicans calling for the impeachment of President Obama, writing in a Breitbart op-ed that the influx of young illegal immigrants over the southern border “is the last straw that makes the battered wife say, ‘no mas.’ ”
Mixed/careless metaphors aside, this is nothing but bad news for Republicans — especially four months until the 2014 election.
Palin is hardly the first GOP politician to raise the issue of impeachment over the past couple years. Others include Sens. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Tim Scott (R-S.C.), Reps. Blake Farenthold (R-Tex.), Kerry Bentivolio (R-Mich.), Michael Burgess (R-Tex.), Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) and Tim Scott (R-S.C.), former congressmen Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) and Allen West (R-Fla.), and the South Dakota Republican Party. Not all of these folks called for Obama’s impeachment directly, but all of them suggested that it is or should be on the table.
What none of these folks have, though, is a national following. That’s where Palin comes in. She’s the first Republican of any significant national stature to make this call. And she’s the kind of figure who could potentially recruit others to the cause — people who will want to be heard. Palin surely doesn’t carry the kind of weight she once did in the GOP, but she still has a significant tea party following and is highly popular among the conservative base.
If a significant pro-impeachment portion of the conservative base does materialize — and that’s a big “if” — it will put Republican lawmakers in the unenviable position of responding to questions about whether they, too, agree with the idea of impeachment.
Thanks, John McCain!
dmsilev
Does she realize that even if Obama is impeached and convicted, that doesn’t mean that she and McCain get the White House?
Hunter Gathers
I wonder which Very Serious Person will validate Palin’s word salad.
Southern Beale
’nuff said.
Why do we keep paying attention to these idiots.
gocart mozart
Reposted from the thread down below because it’s more on point here.
I think what it means is that Sarah was making pancakes and she got some of the batter on herself hence “battered wife” and then Todd exclaims “OMG, we’re out of bendy straws!” which causes Sarah to respond in mournful sadness “No mas?” At least that’s my best guess.
http://gawker.com/5516572/sarah-palins-speaking-contract-bendy-straws-lear-jets-and-deluxe-hotels
See also this: http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2012/09/new-internet-tradition
Kropadope
@Hunter Gathers: She said it, now it must be taken seriously by all who are Very Serious.
Citizen Alan
Personally, it always pleases me to see a reference to Breitbart because it’s a reminder that the son of a whore is dead and rotting in hell.
Violet
@gocart mozart:
As if. Sarah Palin wouldn’t be making pancakes because Sarah Palin doesn’t do work. Cooking is work. Todd wouldn’t be there to say anything because they essentially don’t live together anymore–she’s in Arizona most of the time and he’s in Alaska.
Best guess is her ghostwriter wrote the piece. Sarah might or might not know what’s in it.
Cervantes
“Crazy Lady Wants Attention” — and what do we think about those who keep obliging?
AkaDad
Please proceed, half-term Governor.
LAC
How’s that dummy bitchy thing working for you, GOP?
LAC
How’s that dummy bitchy thing working for you, GOP?
Cassidy
Hehehehehe….battered Sarah Palin. Sounds like porn.
KG
@Southern Beale: because a significant portion of the electorate still takes them seriously… so we have to at least pay attention to them so as not to be surprised by the stupid.
Iowa Old Lady
Again, it occurs to me that these people don’t know it takes 2/3 of the Senate to convict, so the GOP “taking” the Senate is irrelevant (to this, at least).
Amir Khalid
As I understand the order of succession, should the Republicans somehow manage to impeach and convict Obama and Biden of something, the Speaker of the House would become President. Do they like or trust John Böhner enough to give him that office? Or are they planning to ditch him as well, by some other means?
KG
@dmsilev: look, a grifter’s gotta grift and that’s about the only thing she’s been good at… and I’ve often been told you only can do what you know how to do well and that’s be you, be what you’re like, be like yourself, for Sarah, that’s grifting.
the real life politicians who actually have at least a theoretical understanding that they have an obligation to actually govern in concert with other elected and appointed officials know that this is stupid. but the political equivalent of people who call in to sports talk radio shows, and go to championship parades in the new championship t-shirt and hat, see impeachment and obstruction as a scoreboard thing. that’s why they got mad when Obama “spiked the football.” they want to do a touchdown dance and spike the ball now.
Karen in GA
Is she really that influential with anyone other than Breitbart readers and the bloggers that mock them, though?
pseudonymous in nc
The House of GOP Crazy could impeach Obama tomorrow if it wanted. Straight majority. No need to fuck about, just put articles to the floor “because reasons” and vote on it.
They’re just happy to tease and appease the base, like Queen Grifter of the Mooses.
Chris
@Iowa Old Lady:
That’s whay makes it perfect. The Republicans get to try, the mean Democrats shoot them down. They maintain credibility with their base without having to actually accomplish things.
satby
Some days I wonder when the shooting war will start once they realize an impeachment won’t succeed and will mean a landslide for the next Dem running for president.
SatanicPanic
@satby: They’ve been shooting themselves in the feet for the last six years
Hill Dweller
I see the Beltway and some local media are already calling the influx of young immigrants Obama’s Katrina. I think this is PO’s 9th(?) Katrina since taking office.
Kay
I think they definitely should go forward with this :)
It’s what comes after shutting down the government. right? That was my understanding.
Amir Khalid
Off-topic (sorry) but if any of the women here on Balloon Juice finds herself being wooed by a charming Nigerian man based in Malaysia, IT’S A SCAM!!
dmsilev
@Amir Khalid: That’s right. The sequence goes President->Vice President->Speaker of the House->President Pro Tem of the Senate. From there, it’s Cabinet Secretaries in the order in which their departments were founded (State is first). Senate Pres Pro Tem would be amusing; that’s a basically ceremonial post traditionally held by the most senior member of the Senate majority. It’s Pat Leahy right now; if the Republicans take the Senate, it’ll be Orrin Hatch followed by Thad Cochran.
SatanicPanic
Anyone remember how in 2006 the media kept asking the Democratic leadership if they would impeach Bush and they all kept saying no? Anyone think prominent Republicans will have that kind of discipline?
D58826
Well since we are talking about crazy, here is the Texas entrant to the dumbest congressman awards (yes I know a very crowed field) Louie Gohmert
That crafty devil Obama and from Louies mouth to the FSM’ ear – ‘That drives people to vote and it will ensure that Republicans don’t ever get elected again’.
Roger Moore
@dmsilev:
This isn’t about accomplishing anything positive; it’s about appeasing the wingnut id. It’s about showing that boy in the White House who’s in charge.
Higgs Boson's Mate
I was under the impression that the teahadists were going to bring the articles of impeachment and dare the rest of the House not to vote for them. To me, it isn’t “if” it’s “when.”
Roger Moore
@D58826:
The crowded field is for runner up; Rep. Gohmert has the title pretty well wrapped up.
NotMax
Each time she opens her yap an angel loses its wings.
Davis X. Machina
Look past this messenger and ask yourself, what would you do if it were Bernie Sanders, and the grounds advanced were extrajudicial killing, and the use of drones, and electronic surveillance, and invading Libya, and Chad, and Mali, and Jordan…
Impeachment for executive overreach for me, but not for thee.
Higgs Boson's Mate
@Roger Moore:
Not to mention being too busy with the important business of impeachment to produce their jobs or healthcare programs.
ETA: “We’re at war with Obama. You wouldn’t let down your party in the middle of a war, would you?”
Kay
@D58826:
They’re “Politicians Against Voting”
PAV
SatanicPanic
@Roger Moore: Gohmert might be historically stupid. I crown him DOAT (dumbest of all time)
MomSense
Does anyone else remember #sarahpalinfilmnames ?
https://balloon-juice.com/2011/05/24/coming-soon-to-a-theatre-near-you/
and
https://balloon-juice.com/2011/05/25/so-much-awesome-in-one-place/
Higgs Boson's Mate
@Roger Moore:
Gohmert may be more stupid than Doug Feith.
MikeJ
This is off topic, but I just saw the logo for the Republican running in WA-09. Wow. Just. Wow.
A flaming great seal of the US and all the text on the page in Star Trek type (SF Fourche).
gbear
@Kay: Obama’s fault!! Inpeach!!
Karen in GA
Okay, either both my posts disappeared or they’ll both show up. Whoops either way.
JCT
@Kay: Exactly – seems to me that this impeachment “thing” worked out so well for them in the 90″s. C’mon Sarah, you halfwit – just throw us in that briar patch.
Hell, might even get the Dems to the polls in Nov.
Violet
@MomSense: Those were fantastic threads. A completely geeky thrill for me when Paul Krugman used one of my suggestions to title his postabout our threads.
MomSense
@Violet:
Violet you were on fire in those threads!!
AkaDad
Liberals wanted to impeach Bush for trivial things like authorizing torture. Conservatives want to justifiably impeach Obama for being a Democrat.
Citizen_X
AAHHHA HAHAHAHAHA HHHHAAAAAAAA! HO HO, *wheeze* *cough* Palin, “stature!” Please proceed, assholes.
@MikeJ:
Who does he think he is, Katniss Everdeen?
Roger Moore
@MikeJ:
I think it’s trying to mimic the look of the Hunger Games movies. That’s the reason for the burning logo, and the icons look like the ones from that series.
Dolly Llama
@KG: Props for the They Might Be Giants reference.
Helen
@Iowa Old Lady: I actually read some of the comments (yeah I know)They know it takes 2/3 for conviction (kinda – they’re a bit confused) but a number of them think that they have found the solution: You see, because Harry Reid changed the rules on confirming judges then if the Rs take the senate the new R majority leader can simply change the rules. They don’t know they would need to change the constitution.
raven
@Helen: They don’t give a shit if it can be done or not. It’s fucking bullshit and their drooling followers are happy to cheer them on.
Iowa Old Lady
@Helen: You read some of the comments? Holy crow. You’re a stronger person than I am.
Also, for people who talk about the constitution all the time and whip it out of their pockets, they know very little.
Kay
@JCT:
Clinton’s impeachment had sex, too. What is this one about? He didn’t stop the children from crossing the border? You don’t have to answer. It doesn’t matter. I know that.
JPL
@Iowa Old Lady: You must forgive them because it took awhile to read the first and second amendment.
Kay
@Helen:
That’s what it’s really about. They want them to think if they take the Senate they can remove the President.
Pogonip
@Amir Khalid: Well, NOW you tell us.
Pogonip
@NotMax: Each time she opens her yap an angel loses its lunch.
Keith G
@dmsilev:
What she realizes is that by voicing such gobbledygook she gets more face time, more links, and at least a few more chances to pretend that she is historically relevant and not hysterically useless.
Unless she starts shitting gold bricks, I would rather not see her name on my device screens again.
danimal
If we’re lucky, another high-profile GOPer will join the parade in the next day or two. It’ll be the political equivalent of playing with matches on a hot windy day in a drought-stricken forest. They won’t be able to contain the fire damage.
Every summer, teh crayzee comes out from the conservosphere, impeachment will quickly become their new cause and Boehner, McConnell et al won’t be able to keep the flames from crossing the fire breaks.
Roger Moore
@Dolly Llama:
Sarah Palin is having a wonderful time, but she’d rather be whistling in the dark.
Villago Delenda Est
@Karen in GA: There are a few Villagers that do pay attention to her if only to attract the demented eyeballs of her fan base. Ratings are ratings, no matter how cretinous the audience.
Higgs Boson's Mate
FYWP
Donut
@Davis X. Machina:
Pffffffft. That’s all war-on-tear-a and olde-timey Muslim-y brown-people killin’, so nobody gives two fucks about that shit, let alone a single fuck. No point in even bringing up that stuff.
SiubhanDuinne
@gocart mozart:
Sarah’s pancakes would be burnt to a cinder on one side and raw batter on the other, because Sarah would have wandered off halfway through the job.
Donut
@Davis X. Machina:
Also, too: with that comment, your O-bot card has officially been revoked. Please surrender your credentials at the door on your way out. Kthanxbai.
SiubhanDuinne
@Amir Khalid:
I may be lonely, but I’ll be damned if I’m middle-aged!
Villago Delenda Est
The main reason why McCain should not die peacefully in his sleep.
raven
@SiubhanDuinne: Man, I got lost in deepest dark Gwinnett on Saturday and I never thought I’d get back to Athens.
SiubhanDuinne
@raven:
Us Gwinetians know, the county can be Big and Scary.
Roger Moore
@SiubhanDuinne:
Where would you like your intertube delivered?
maya
@Hill Dweller:
Actually, this is more like Obama’s Fukushima. Uncontrollable influx of immigrants oozing over the border polluting America’s racial purity.
Ricky
Palin’s hot.
Higgs Boson's Mate
@Ricky:
Why do I get the feeling that you’d fuck a snake if someone held its head for you?
Mike in NC
So this must mean Sarah has a new book due out for Christmas?
David Koch
@Ricky: you must be thinking of Julianne Moore
Villago Delenda Est
@Ricky: In a whore on Seventh Avenue sort of way.
rikyrah
the entire family is nothing but phucking vermin.
…………….
Did You Know That Antonin Scalia’s Son Is Sabotaging Wall Street Reform?
Eugene Scalia is quietly freeing big banks from the rules meant to keep them from crashing the economy again.
——By Patrick Caldwell
| July/August 2014 Issue
Ambrose Bierce once quipped that a lawyer is one skilled in the circumvention of the law. By that definition, Eugene Scalia is a lawyer of extraordinary skill. In less than five years, the 50-year-old son of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has become a one-man scourge to the reformers who won a hard-fought battle to pass the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act to rein in the out-of-control financial sector. So far, he’s prevailed in three of the six suits he’s filed against the law, single-handedly slowing its rollout to a snail’s pace. As of May, a little more than half of the nearly four-year-old law’s rules had been finalized and another 25 percent hadn’t even been drafted. Much of that breathing room for Wall Street is thanks to Scalia, who has deployed a hyperliteral, almost absurdist series of procedural challenges to unnerve the bureaucrats charged with giving the legislation teeth.
Scalia has “created this sense that we’re paralyzed, because if we write a rule we’re just going to be reversed,” says Lisa Donner, executive director of the watchdog group Americans for Financial Reform. The threat of more suits, she says, has “cast a real chill” over Wall Street regulators, particularly at the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
Scalia’s legal challenges hinge on a simple, two-decade-old rule: Federal agencies monitoring financial markets must conduct a cost-benefit analysis whenever they write a new regulation. The idea is to weigh “efficiency, competition, and capital formation” so that businesses and investors can anticipate how their bottom line might be affected. Sounds reasonable. But by recognizing that the assumptions behind these hypothetical projections can be endlessly picked apart, Scalia has found a remarkably effective way to delay key parts of the law from going into effect.
Former Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) says Scalia and the big banks are attempting an end run around the law he coauthored: “These are ideologues who want to kill the rules. They can’t say they’re unconstitutional. They are doing this because it’s the only possible way to knock them out.” (Scalia declined to comment for this article.)
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/eugene-scalia-court-antonin-financial-reform-dodd-frank
Villago Delenda Est
@maya: I’ve come to learn that the term “illegal alien” is a dog whistle for “ZOMG they’re brown!”
David Koch
@Villago Delenda Est: Lisa Ann (star of Who’s Nail’n Palin) is far better looking, plus she has a great sense of humor.
Higgs Boson's Mate
@Villago Delenda Est:
Whether someone uses “illegal alien” or “undocumented immigrant” is just as telling as the way people pronounced “Nicaragua” during the Reagan years. Those who pronounced the word properly were labeled by the Reagan-suckers as Com-symps who obviously hated America.
David Koch
3 day old zygotes are people. 3 year old Latinos are not.
kdbart
All this means is that the cash flow is running low at the Pakin household and they need a quick influx of cash to keep up the lifestyle. Must get back out there on the grift and fleece the rubes.
Dolly Llama
@Roger Moore: A woman came up to me and said “I’d like to close your mind”/With wrong ideas that appeal to you/Obama’s so unkind
catclub
@Higgs Boson’s Mate: The bill of particulars or whatever documents the charges will be interesting. Will it get beyond “Presidenting while Black”?
Howard Beale IV
@rikyrah: Actually, I blame Slick Willie for allowing himself to be rolled by Phil Gramm and repealing Glass-Stegal and signing GLBA and CFMA.
For Those of you who are fans of Babylon 5, substitute Phil Gramm for Mr. Morden and enjoy.
As far as Caribou Barbie is concerned, the sooner she’s ridiculed and attacked in the media for being the Whore of BabbleOn (or is it Babylon) that she is, the better.
catclub
This is one of the first times I have seen a Good news for John McCain/Romney item that is actually labelled truthfully.
Davis X. Machina
@Donut: Either that stuff is just par for the presidential course, or there’s a hell of a lot of special pleading going on. That level of executive high-handedness is either impeachable, or not, depending on the party of the president doing it, apparently.
Team spirit is good — in team sports.
Roger Moore
@Villago Delenda Est:
Nah. Calling people “illegal aliens” just means you’re a bit behind the times. The dog whistle for “ZOMG! They’re brown!” is calling them “illegals”.
karen
@David Koch:
It’s funny you said that because now the Teahadi are claiming that these are not “children.”
Mnemosyne
@karen:
Do they all have calves the size of cantaloupes?
karen
@Davis X. Machina:
Then you’d have every single President impeached. The way I see it, I’m not happy about everything he does but I’m happy with more that he does than what I don’t like. When you can find me a candidate who can win the Presidency who won’t ever torture then I’ll listen to you. Instead you decided you wanted to punish the Democrats and stayed home….
….and did so much damage by allowing the Tea Party invasion that can’t be undone because of gerrymandering.
Every women who died because she couldn’t get an abortion is on your head. Every right that has been taken from women is your fault. Every voting right removed from minorities is on your hands. You wanted to teach the Democrats a lesson but all you’ve done is scorch the earth. You PUMA firebaggers are no better than Teahadis.
karen
@efgoldman:
Are they mules?
Howard Beale IV
@efgoldman: BBC is also reporting the same kind of situation.
chopper
“In spite of the fact that obummer has deported more people than any president in history, he must be impeached for not deporting enough people”
Kay
@efgoldman:
I personally feel they destroyed impeachment as a mechanism or process the last time so I don’t consider it a credible threat. I don’t know what this does to John Boehner’s lawsuit, either. Suing the President is now the moderate, centrist position, I guess.
RaflW
@Kay:
It makes him look like a twerp, a piker, only interested in inflicting a flesh wound.
Go full-metal-impeachment, whisky-man! DO it!!
Lurking Canadian
@karen: DXM can defend himself, but I strongly suspect he’s snarking here.
James E. Powell
It’s more like Corporate Press/Media Still Love Giving Crazy Lady Attention
Who is she but the political equivalent of one of the Gabor sisters circa 1970?
catclub
@karen:
I suspect Jimmy Carter would like a word.
Kay
@RaflW:
Hah! He can’t win, can he? He just comes up the lawsuit idea and now Sarah Palin has upped the ante. Has this ever happened before? Has the loser of a presidential ticket ever stuck around for 8 years complaining every single day, with no actual job? I think it’s unprecedented. This not-job is the longest she’s ever stuck with anything.
GHayduke (formerly lojasmo)
@Davis X. Machina:
Considering none of those things are impeachable offences, while I wouldn’t accuse him of grifting, I would probably call him a clueless nattering douche.
FromTheBackOfTheRoom
@Southern Beale:
Preach It !
Donut
@karen:
I know you’re addressing someone else, but that person was responding to my snark, so it seems fair to respond to you.
Personally, I vote in every single election and I am proudly a life-long member of the Democratic Party. I’m a two-time Obama voter for President, and a one-time Obama voter for the Senate. I gave money to the guy, and lots of it. I would never punch a ticket that was not fully pro choice, and pro voting rights. I believe in the small “d” concept of democratic values, which is why I am fucking Democrat: human, civil and citizenship rights being to and should be protected for the greatest number of people possible. Full stop.
Now that I have, ahem, established my bona fides, let’s revisit this idea that anyone who is dissatisfied with the way we have let the Executive branch amok in this country is a Firebagger and a PUMA. Puh-lease. Is it still 2009?
Nope, I can fucking walk and chew gum at the same goddamn time. I can believe that Obama was/is the least worst choice in both 2008 and 2012, (and in 2004 when his best competiton for the Senate seat was Dan Hynes, who seemed/seems like a good guy, and who did a decent job as Comptroller of our fine state, but has all the political charisma of a cardboard box)
Anyway, I snarked on Davis X’s original comment because for some people (as your comment seems to show, unless I’m misreading you, then I apologize), it’s strictly and decidedly unkosher to say that Obama has done little to rein in the abuse of Executive branch authority that we’ve been treated to in these last several decades.
My issue with that lies in the fact that in 2008 he made quite the show of talkin about how he intended to do just that, and he deliberately drew a contrast between himself and the guy that preceded him the things that Davis X pointed to.
So I guess what I’m rambling on about is that while our guy holds the office, Executive overreach is simply not a topic that we Democrats want to talk about, though we really could and really should, and with no ill effects on our electoral prospects. We should be having conversations about what our presidents do well, and what they suck at. Obama has been great on the balance, but has also sucked, sometimes. It is incontrovertible fact that he’s carried on some really reprehensible shit that his predecessors initiated. It’s okay to talk about that, and still support him. Swear to god, it’s possible to feel more than one thing about the guy. He’s human, and he is at the mercy of a lot of deep, dark pressures and forces in our culture that I can’t even begin to fathom, but damn, I’m allowed to say it when I don’t like something he’s doing.
That’s all. Have a nice evening.
Mnemosyne
@Donut:
Here’s one thing I’ll say (sort of) in Obama’s defense: if the executive branch is overreaching, it’s because Congress has allowed it. Unlike, say, Reagan and Iran/Contra, there is no evidence that Obama is going beyond the limits of the current law. The problem is that the current law sucks and is way too broad.
So now what we have is a dilemma. Should Obama issue an executive order to curb his own executive power? Sure, he could do that, and we’d all feel real good, but executive orders are made to be reversed. The only way to make a change and make it stick is to make Congress do it, and they don’t want to, because they want the next Republican president to have all of those powers that Rand Paul is complaining Obama has.
The only way to rein in the executive’s power is to have Congress do their fucking job and rein it in. Any temporary policy change that Obama makes is just that … temporary, and easily reversed by the next executive. So if you want the surveillance state to be reined in, we need a better Congress, not a better president.
xenos
@Mnemosyne: A better way to put it would be abdication of Congressional power. Split control of houses without comity or respect between them leads to Congress being mostly ineffective. Presidential power then fills up that vacuum. Partisan-based impeachment then becomes impossible to succeed.
So why are Republicans bent on an impeachment they can’t win, even if they take a majority of the Senate? If you realize that the GOP is merely a source of material for the FoxNews and talk radio industry, then it makes sense. This is nothing good for the Republican party, but then again it is probably too late to save them.
And the issues of the surveillance state are correctly put by you – without Congress working together as a whole, any President has free reign. And even a largely benevolent President is going to go too far much of the time. His job is to go as far as Congress will let him, and Congress won’t do anything because Congress, as an bicameral entity, does not really exist as a matter of exercising power is concerned.
Mnemosyne
@xenos:
I think we pretty much agree. My argument is that pressuring Obama to restrict his own power is basically useless, because the power is still there, as duly granted by Congress, waiting for President Santorum or President Paul to scoop it up. Better to have Congress take that excess power away than to let each individual president decide how s/he wants to exploit it.
David Koch
@Donut: executive overreach? you mean like lying to Congress and secretly rejecting your enemy’s surrender so you can pass the 13th amendment?
or do you mean illegally arming countries in secret, spying on countries we’re not a war with, holding secret trials, building hideous weapons without public and congressional consent, provoking another country into attacking you, firebombing civilian populations, and imprisoning citizens in concentration camps?
we can talk about that.
Fred
@JCT: “Exactly – seems to me that this impeachment “thing” worked out so well for them in the 90″s. C’mon Sarah, you halfwit – just throw us in that briar patch.”
It didn’t work out for the GOPers in the ’90s but it may have paved the way for Dubaya to pose as representing the more honorable party, shaving enough votes to kick the election to the SCOTUS for the alley-oop play.
Never underestimate the deviousness of the Grifter’s Old Party. They know how to shamelessly spin the Big Lie. They’ve had plenty of practice ’cause it’s all they got.
Sherparick
The sad thing is that about 30% of the country agrees with her, they are so deep in their own derp and tribalism.
WaterGirl
@Donut: Really well stated.
Sherparick
@Donut: Yeah, you are right. As both JC, PK, and the guys and gals at LGM note, Obama is far from perfect, and he is not the second coming of FDR (of course FDR practically invented the modern surveillance state prepping for and fighting WWII, the Japanese-Americans being sent to concentration camps (by Executive Order no less!), and the compromises he made with neo-confederates Southern Democrats to get his program through was not perfect either, and he is still my beau ideal of a President). It is sometimes a short term electoral weakness in that we liberals are like cats being herded when it comes to supporting Democrats who we see have feet (and sometimes more) of clay, while the Republicans breathe a white heat of enthusiasm born of hatred and resentment and love of authoritarians for their leaders, but in the medium and long term we can correct or mistakes and errors. They can’t.
Lurking Canadian
@David Koch: Lincoln rejected a Southern surrender offer?
Rob in CT
@Lurking Canadian:
Sort of. Their “surrender” offer was hardly unconditional. It was still political trouble for Lincoln if it got out, because there were plenty of Northern squishes who would’ve happily agreed to return to the 1860 status quo ante.
LAC
@karen: well, at least daaaavid can do this: http://youtu.be/gXZeq9eXAys
And isn’t that what it is all about?
David Koch
@Sherparick:
Here’s the handy work of your ideal president
karen
@Donut:
I didn’t realize it was snark. It sounded like something srv and the resident PUMAs would say.
I don’t think that at all. Obama makes me pissed about a lot of things and like you, I voted for him as the lesser of two evils. I’m just very pragmatic. I know that what the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic and California calls Conservadem is liberal in Virginia downwards, the Midwest and the South and the West except for California. If I thought someone like Elizabeth Warren would win as the Dem candidate I would be so on board. But I don’t see it happening and I may have to hold my nose but I’ll vote for HRC.