For those of you keeping track, FDL’s Clown Princess has now decided that I am not only a misogynist, but a homophobe:
The best way to make Jane Hamsher look like an irrational, out of control buffoon is to give her a microphone.
And actually, I wasn’t telling anyone to shut up, as you can clearly read for yourself. I was merely suggesting the revolutionary idea of protesting the 40 or so Republicans who voted AGAINST the bill, rather than the guy who promises to sign the DADT repeal once it hits his desk. Crazy, hunh?
At any rate, now that it has been established that I hate women and homosexuals (and no, I really don’t), I just want to warn the African-Americans and other remaining minorities in the audience:
I’m coming after you next! MUAHAHA!
Midnight Marauder
The Negro Community frowns upon your shenanigans.
mikefromArlington
Careful or the firebagger minions will unleash their fury on you.
Felonious Wench
I’m thinking she doesn’t actually READ, just parses for outrage points and fires away. Context free, she is.
cleek
Hamsher needs to STFU
steviez314
Just don’t fuck with MY tribe (see: Sanchez, Rick).
Barb (formerly gex)
You all are going to help this hotheaded activist personality fix some of those hotheaded activist tendencies. I’m with you, Cole. Even if you are a homophobe! ;-)
Ron
Apparently reading comprehension is hard. I really want to sympathize some with people like Hamsher sometimes, but she has turned into the left-wing version of Sarah Palin.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Huh. I remember when Blackface Jane was very scornful of bourgies and plebes who didn’t get her totally sophisticated and edgy political satire.
I guess if I were to apply this stupid, self-aggrandizing vindictive nitwit’s standard’s to said nitwit, I would have to conclude that her opposition to Obama is based in her long history of public racism.
(Note to willfully satire-impaired Hamsherites: I do not believe this. I have actually said here more than once that I think Crazy Jane would be just as self-righteous and delusionally useless under hypothetical Presidents H. Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Biden, Dodd….)
TooManyJens
Wow. Just, wow.
Mark S.
“eleveninthemorningistooearlytobedrunk”
John Cole hates alcoholics!
Why don’t you just make fun of mentally disabled people in your next post?
The Grand Panjandrum
Jesus Babbling Christ! I think I’ll go have a microbrew … or six.
singfoom
So John,
When did you stop beating your gay African-American wife? Jane Hamsher and other inquiring minds want to know!
merrinc
Hamsher’s obsession with you is very, very creepy.
Chyron HR
Wow. That is some serious “cake:ink”.
mclaren
Wow. Always thought you were being a little unfair to Jane, but now I’ll have to rethink that. She’s jumped the shark.
Bubblegum Tate
I’ll admit it: “fagbagger” made me laugh.
John Bird
Okay, let’s profitably move this thread AWAY from Jane vs. John:
What’s a good and effective way to call REPUBLICANS to task for this? What’s a good way to do that protest you’re suggesting?
Because street/office protest is unlikely to work. The media won’t care. The Republican Congressmen and Senators won’t care. If we’re lucky, their Republican constituents won’t care, instead of showing up with illiterate signs and automatic weapons.
But you’re right, we do need to hammer the Republicans on this, and it seems the only one outside of LGBT activist groups who had that idea was Lady Gaga.
Bob Loblaw
I kind of want you both dead. I think it would be better for all involved.
Angry Black Lady
Holy fuck.
If she says you’re racist, tell her I made you an honorary Negro and that you can’t be racist.
ta-da!
she’s insane.
morzer
How long before Newt Gingrich sends Hamsher an award for being a Conservative Entrepreneur?
r€nato
@mclaren: it was there for all to see, for some time now…
Xboxershorts
I’m going to disagree with John in the strongest language I can possibly muster…
NO, ELEVEN IN THE MORNING IS NOT TOO EARLY TO BE DRUNK!
Queen Jane
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPPTJyDj9BA
I feel better now.
PS, be nice to queen jane, someone gave her a national microphone. That means she’s no longer required to fact check…
Martin
Let’s have a contest! We all take guesses at how long between when Cole say something about the shrill little voices on the left and when Hamsher accuses him of hating midgets. The winner gets a prize.
dmsilev
#fagbagger? Really? She’s given up trying to actually make sense.
I think I’ll go back to editing the nigh-incomprehensible first draft that someone handed me the other day; it’s far more coherent than that tweet (not their fault; good clear writing is hard, especially for someone who isn’t a native English speaker).
dms
John Cole
@dmsilev: My favorite part is that there are three people who retweeted it.
Scott
Can anyone be denounced with random epithets by Jane Hamsher? Do we have to donate money for it? Could we get her to call me a “two-headed soshialist ham-eating cow-fighting zamboni-washing long-legged melon-farmer”? Does she charge by the word?
ruemara
@Felonious Wench:
Well, it’s not like that doesn’t work.
Fuck Hamster. I regret cracking into my tiny savings for you.
@Bob Loblaw:
And quadruple fuck you too.
Paula
@r€nato:
Hey, I’ve been meaning to ask: do I get a reward for noticing that something was seriously wrong with these people since summer 2004. Like, the first time I visited their site? :D
John Bird
@John Bird:
mk3872
Jane & Co are nothing more than attention-whore loud mouths.
They are the Michelle Malkin, Pam Geller, et. al. of the lefties.
People like the readers & writers on Balloon Juice are what remains of the dwindling American middle.
Glenndacious Greenwaldian (formerly tim)
Oh John, you know you LOVE these interblog controversies; MORE HITS for all!!
That said, this fag got the sarcasm in your original “faggy” post.
But I still think you are a total Obot.
Angry Black Lady
She blocked my @AngryBlackLady account. I think I’ll give her a piece of my mind from my @stopthemadness account.
Rosalita
I refuse to go over there, but I’m sure that linky is to her blog so she can get some traffic over this. Does she actually attempt to quote you in some fragmented out-of-context way? or just offer a rant?
dmsilev
@John Cole: I noticed that. I suppose seeing a list of retweeters is a good way to add to a list of “mostly ignore, mock as needed” people.
dms
BR
Sigh. We’re going to once again get the government we deserve as a nation. I’m starting to believe the 2008 election was just a momentary random deviation from our downward trajectory.
Bring on the brawndo.
Abby
Please Mom and Dad dont fight each other.
There are nillions of Republicans, fight them.
taylormattd
So does blackface Jane actually think a signifcant number of people will believe her faux-outrage?
Bullsmith
Now that’s a lady who knows how to keep her reputation tarnished!
John Bird
Hey, to reiterate in the local language: I do not give a fuck what you and Jane have to say about each other.
If you think we need to protest Republicans, and I agree that this is a point where they grow more vulnerable daily, what are some suggestions as to how this can be done effectively?
trollhattan
@ John Cole, good news: You need not also be anti-coal miner. Massey Energy has that covered.
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/10/13-0
Cripes, twenty-nine in one year not enough for them?
LT
With the hopefully huge enough caveat to be noticed that hamsher is an asshole for saying you’re a misogynist and a homophobe, this:
equals: “Unclap softer!,” which could be said to be the same as “Clap louder!” IMO.
There is a crux of a point in here. They’re activists on LGBT issues. That’s what they do, for their own reasons, most of which are probably very personal to them. That’s okay. Why diss their efforts at all? If your answer is that you think it’ll hurt the balance of Congress, I’m sorry, that just doesn’t cut it. You’ve heard something similar already, I’m sure, but could you picture yourself saying this to Civil Rights activists pre-elections in the 1960s? I doubt it.
JMC in the ATL
“fagbagger”? WTF? Is that something she made up?
Seriously… fagbagger? Gah! I have no words for how offensive that is. Homophobic bitch.
ETA – Reading that was a huge punch to the gut. Someone please tell me that there’s a legitimate context for Jane using the word fag.
Carnacki
“At any rate, now that it has been established that I hate women and homosexuals…”
It’s all rather silly how people go out of their way to piss off allies.
maye
Ms. Hamsher is an extremely angry woman, and she likes to write. When plain old blogger ranting and raving doesn’t quite do it for her, she has to branch out. It’s really all about brain chemistry and what one needs to do to stay comfortable in one’s day-to-day life. Some are more high maintenance than others.
david mizner
I just read your post. Nowhere you do suggest that they ought to protest the GOP. The only point you make is that protesting Obama (the only person who could effectively) end DADT) hurts Dems.
That doesn’t make you a homophobe; it just makes you an overly loyal Dem who thinks principled criticism hurts the party and who fails to recognize that the radical activism of gay rights has been effective and is in the best tradition of the country.
dmsilev
OK, let’s start a betting pool to see what group John will “denigrate” next. Scanning through the comments, we have African-Americans, Jews, alcoholics, and midgets. I’m going to go with Gypsies.
dms
John Bird
@trollhattan:
On another relevant topic, does anyone else find it creepy as hell as the entire media apparatus, including Fox News, goes into (fully appropriate) romantic pro-worker mode as soon as it’s South American workers trapped by ‘Nature’ instead of South American workers fighting their greedy, corrupt bosses?
I mean, I saw Fox News anchors gushing how these guys have their own designated poet. Of course they fucking do, they know how to organize and they believe in what they do as inherently worthwhile instead of as a measure of their distance from that corner office that we supposedly all want.
LT
@JMC in the ATL:
You jut cancelled out Hamsher’s “homophobe” bullshit. Not really, but…
P.S. The “fagbagger” probably comes from “teabagger” -> “firebagger”->…
Paula
@dmsilev:
THE DUTCH. Holland, Netherlands — WTF.
[Too bad this ain’t a Randinho post.]
General Stuck
I have said it before senor Cole, if you are going to be a base honest actor, and I believe you are, then you are going to have to give up most notions of being friends with, or even basically respected by the likes of Hamsher et al, who rule the interwebs of the left. Like Harry Truman once said, if you want a friend on the blogs, get a dog, or two. So you should be good to go.
Fuck that gnarly witch
Angry Black Lady
ahhh.
that felt good.
60th Street
Bwaahaha! It’s totally cool when Jane says “fag” but Cole is the devil’s spunk!
This is the best war evarr!!
Pangloss
I stopped engaging in deliberate misquoting to provoke a schoolyard fight during my second year in graduate school.
Oscar Leroy
Way to answer your own proposal.
middlewest
So, lately Minnpost has been publishing selections from a new book about the Franken/Coleman recount, and it’s triggered a lot of memories for me. Does anyone else remember when all the low-information progressives declared MN Secretary of State Mark Ritchie their mortal enemy? I know I saw it on the DailKos and Firedoglake, probably elsewhere, too.
They claimed Ritchie was sabotaging Franken by moving too slowly on the recount. They called him a traitor when he stocked the canvassing board full of republicans. Every time he halted the recount to consider a legal question, people lost their damn minds. Not a day went by without someone demanding that Ritchie declare Franken the victor and end the constitutional crisis of an unfilled senate that was tearing our nation apart.
And of course, when it was all over, it was Ritchie’s careful, methodical, non-partisan conduct that made the recount untouchable in the Election Contest Court and stole all legitimacy from republican attacks on Franken’s victory. He also saved MN taxpayers millions of dollars from the projected cost of the recount. So from now on, whenever I hear people on the left shrieking about how the process is moving too slow and the democrats aren’t giving them everything they want right now, I’m going to remember Mark Ritchie.
Omnes Omnibus
@dmsilev: People with syndactyly.
Shinobi
@LT: I’m impressed with your ability to make that quote mean whatever would make you the angriest.
morzer
@Angry Black Lady:
Doesn’t blocking your African-American right of free speech prove her racist cred? At least, if we are going to operate by her own “standards”.
joe from Lowell
Hamsher’s constant, strained efforts to toy with the “-bagger” construction are an effort to deflect attention from the fact that this idiot proposed teaming up with Grover Norquist and the teabaggers to take down a Democratic president.
Anyone who describes the Tea Party as “anti-corporate” needs to eat with a cork on her fork like Steve Martin in “Dirty Rotten Scoundrels.”
LT
@david mizner:
What do the cool kids say? Oh yeah: This! Except for the “overly loyal Dem” part. That doesn’t hit the mark. Seems to be something else, which I can’t quite understand.
Rosalita
@Angry Black Lady:
can you share?
Shade Tail
@LT #40:
Well, you know what? So am I. It’s been my crusade for a while now, and I absolutely stand by Mr. Cole because I’m not an over-sensitive drama-king.
Oh for fuck’s sake. Mr. Cole has been excruciatingly clear on why he disses their efforts, and it has nothing to do with political balances. He’s dissing their efforts because **they keep attacking the wrong people**.
Defense Authorization bill with DADT repeal failed because of blatant GOP obstructionists? *GASP* ATTACK BARACK OBAMA AND HARRY REID!!
That simply makes no sense. And perhaps more to the point, since this is Hamsher we’re talking about, it’s clearly more about feeding their silly martyr complex and propping up their myths about Obama than about actually achieving LGBT equality.
John Bird
@david mizner:
Yeah, but SHOULDN’T we protest the GOP? ISN’T this something where all of them are unconscionably wrong and losing popular support for their position every year, week, day, as people slowly begin to realize that they don’t actually have a problem with gay and lesbian people, at least, doing whatever with their own lives?
I realize there is a lot of sourness between the Democrats and the LGBT community right now, but blame aside, the Democrats could stand to start at LEAST dealing some fiery rhetoric in some sort of public fashion. I am usually going to roll my eyes when people talk about the importance of words and images (they were somewhere near my pineal gland during the oil disaster) but in this case, the iron is fucking hot. Strike.
I think health care and financial reform could have seen real sustained boosts reflecting the original numbers if the interested Democrats had preempted the Republican attack strategy by getting louder and angrier beforehand, promoting these policies as attempts to secure human rights and punish criminals rather than calm exercises in collaborative governance.
Angry Black Lady
@morzer: ha. i can’t even make that kind of asinine freedom of speech argument with a straight face. http://tiny.cc/STFUJANE
LT
@Shinobi: Really, you think my interpretation was a stretch?
Whatever. Glad you’re impressed.
Scott
@dmsilev:
The incontinent.
Paula
So … are the FDL-ites coming over to wash over this random brain-fart with a wave of ever-so-serious concerns? I’m having trouble downloading all the mockery.
LT
@John Bird:
Because they have the WH and Congress right now?
wmd
Marcy remains engaged in rational discourse with John.
TBogg remains as he always was.
As for Jane, there’s nothing new to see there. Mildly amusing, but TBogg is much more fun.
Steve
What I really want to know is: if I say LGBT instead of LGTB, am I offending someone? What about GLBT? Those letters have 24 possible permutations and someone has to be last!
Andy K
This seems appropriate: Jesus Returns, Has ‘Come To Jane’ Moment
david mizner
@John Bird: \
Sure, absolutely, but if you’re looking to get publicity — which is inherently the purpose of the protest — it makes a lot more sense to protest the president, especially when he is nominally on your side. There’s a reason these protests have gotten attention.
LT
@Shade Tail:
That is simply wrong. As he makes very clear in the post.
toujoursdan
@Shade Tail:
What he said and I’m gay myself.
We all agree on the ultimate result, we just disagree on the method of getting there.
LT
@Shade Tail:
That is simply wrong. As he makes very clear in the post. And it’s not “the wrong people” if they’re the ones in power right now.
Midnight Marauder
@LT:
It’s called “allies who disagree with you on strategy.”
This is not hard to figure out.
TooManyJens
@John Bird: Going after their corporate funders (like the Target boycott) is one way.
Street/office protest won’t change their votes, but it may still be useful for getting them out of their bubble and reminding them that they have constituents other than the straight white Christian Real ‘Merikans.
Probably the only way to get through to them is indirectly. Cultivate pro-gay-rights Republicans. Reach out to the demographic groups they need (especially young people and people of color) with a pro-tolerance message, and keep asking them if they want to be associated with a party that practically defines itself by its intolerance. Make ’em lose. It’s the only thing they care about.
Crusty Dem
Good lord she’s out of her farking mind. Again.
John, the reason why I gave a WTF to “faggy microbrew” was entirely because I was concerned that idiots like Jane would try to use it to dismiss you as homophobic. What I didn’t realize was that she was already well past that and that you were deemed homophobic for merely suggesting a better tactic for fighting DADT.
My bad.
Andy K
@Paula:
Don’t get me started.
Mattminus
I always kinda assumed that Cole was queer…
david mizner
More generally, and then I’ll shut up, you (Cole) can’t have it both ways. He can’t say he supports dissent and then criticize people for criticizing.
Cole can’t say that what Obama is doing in the WOT is “evil” as he did a few weeks ago and then claim that criticism from other people undermines the party.
LT
@Midnight Marauder:
I’ve made that very point here and other places. That’s the problem – people think their disagreemtn on strategy trumps the issue – which they agree on! That’s nuts! And counterproductive. If Cole and others think the problem is Repubs and the focus should be there, fine – do it. And leave the others you agree with to do their thing.
LT
@Midnight Marauder:
I’ve made that very point here and other places. That’s the problem – people think their disagreemtn on strategy trumps the issue – which they agree on! That’s nuts! And counterproductive. If Cole and others think the problem is Repubs and the focus should be there, fine – do it. And leave the others you agree with to do their thing.
JMC_in_the_ATL
@LT: “Fag” engenders the same response in me that the “c” word does for a lot of women, the “n” word does for a lot of black folks, etc. I understand how “bagger” works – that’s not the part I have a problem with. But I’m guessing you already knew that.
Betty Cracker
Tbogg has been the only worthwhile read at FDL for awhile now. Disagreeing on tactics — even strenuously — is one thing. Viciously smearing a good man is another. She’s outta her gourd.
John Bird
And as to the wings of the party that this blog and FDL claim to represent, this may sound touchy-feely, but we need both of them at full strength, because our model of party strength is not the same as that of the Republicans.
Due to the influence of the civil rights movements, Port Huron, gay movements, feminist movements, and other overwhelmingly positive influences on the left, Democrats and liberals can handle criticism; they demand critical viewpoints from themselves and from others. That’s why left-wing blogs are so much more successful, I think, and left-wing talk radio so much less, than their counterparts on the right.
So I don’t really buy, say, Glenn Greenwald’s suggestion that the people queasily defending the White House on detention and assassination only saw civil liberties issues as hammers against the Right, not as issues that mattered. I think most of these uneasy tower guards don’t see an alternative to defending the only party that even pays lip service to these issues against what they see as internal attack.
They’re doing one job that’s necessary for the party to flourish, but they don’t see the other as valuable. I find similar attitudes among those critics pushing a third party movement – it might actually be a viable and smart option when and if we overhaul our voting system, but right now, trying to maintain one party’s moral integrity and structural integrity at the same time is a big enough task for the left.
It is a principled decision to choose support for the party’s influence over support for the platform that contains its ideals, and vice versa. You keep only the first and you end up with a quasi-Soviet exercise in leader-worship, the actual presence of the things that Obama’s harshest critics on both sides believe already exists. You keep only the second and you have a dissolute party that never has a chance to wield influence – quasi-anarchist instead of quasi-Soviet, or similar to America’s Marxist movements if you’re familiar with the left.
I, for one, am glad for the debate. And so I’m completely unimpressed with the personalized aspect of it when it rears its ugly head.
daryljfontaine
Jane’s got it way wrong, of course, he’s a homophone, you know, for that other Cole. The one with the insightful blogging about the Middle East.
@Mark S.: I thought he already was. /rimshot
@John Cole: Paul L., myiq, and… Bender?
D
morzer
@Angry Black Lady:
Hmm.. your hateful comment about straight people worries me. I may have to tweet about it, before Hamsher gets her claws on this opportunity….
Midnight Marauder
@LT:
This is unfailingly idiotic. Who is the party that made 60 votes the standard for every piece of legislation in the Senate because of their unprecedented level of obstruction? Republicans.
What party featured prominent “moderate” members declaring they wouldn’t filibuster a vote on DADT, only to turn around and do that very thing? Republicans.
You’ve got the entirety of the Democratic caucus in the Senate poised to strike a blow for equality and a handful of lying moderate Republicans standing in their way.
So, of course, you blame the people who are fighting on the side of equality.
Oscar Leroy
@LT:
“Because they have the WH and Congress right now?”
hehe )
Sure, President Boehner could suspend DADT with a stop-loss order, but that would be wrong because in 50 years people will care more about HOW it was done than about whether it was done at all.
LT
I am sorry for the double posts. The first was my fault – I thought I’d stopped the first one. The second I just don’t know.
John Bird
@LT:
Or what you said, which is a shorter and better version.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@LT:
They control Congress through the filibuster, and the White House can’t sign legislation that doesn’t pass Congress. Any more questions?
Nerull
@John Bird:
You do realize this isn’t your blog, right?
Shinobi
@LT: For future reference when you find yourself using nonsense phrases like “Unclap louder” you are definitely stretching.
MattR
@LT:
This only works to a degree. If you think the other group is doing things that will actually undermine your shared goal then you have a responsibility to say something.
LT
It was “unclap softer.” Which makes perfect sense.
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
I was unaware The Onion was a poster here.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@LT: SO the filibuster doesn’t really exist?
LT
@MattR:
And how exactly are they undermining it? If GBLT activists protested Republicans – who the hell would give a fuck? Who would even notice?
Mnemosyne
@david mizner:
You mean the fact that they feed the MSM meme that everyone hates Obama and thinks he’s doing a terrible job because he gets protesters from both the right and the left?
Oscar Leroy
@Midnight Marauder:
Well, let’s be honest here: Obama made a deal with Congress that he wouldn’t use an executive order to stop discharges under DADT if they passed it his way. They didn’t, yet he still refuses to use the power of his office because. . . well, what time is it?
geg6
@LT:
Well, having been around at the time, I never saw civil rights activists protesting against or spewing venom at any of the law makers or politicians that actually stated a commitment to vote for or sign legislation that furthered their cause. Like any activist with a functioning brain, they saved their brickbats for the people who were actively working against them.
Unlike the half-wits that John was speaking of yesterday and certainly unlike the Queen of the Half-Wits of the Left, Lady Jane.
LT
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
So the health care bill didn’t pass? (Even after all those evil destructive protests from FDL?)
John Bird
@TooManyJens:
Good suggestions, all. I just worry about how easy it is for the media to ignore left-wing protest. Markos Moulitsas generally expresses complete contempt for any sort of man-on-the-ground political theater, for instance, and while I think his method of involvement completely blinded him to the effectiveness of anti-war protest in bringing war opponents together, he makes some good points about media bias.
I am just thinking – if we can capture the media’s eye on this, it is a straight loser for the Republicans. They can’t even pretend to be moderate on this one, as they’ve forced their own moderate caucus into lockstep on the issue.
And the more of a loser the issue becomes for the Republicans, the more of a loser it becomes for Blue Dogs. Blue Dogs are, at their hearts, regionalists, localists, and opportunists. If something turns into a hot potato with net negatives, conservative Democrats will drop it in the nearest garbage can and claim they’re so bipartisan that don’t even know how to spell the name of the thing.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@LT: Which has what to do with the DADT vote last week?
Wile E. Quixote
@morzer:
About 10 seconds after she gets Grover Norquist’s dick out of her mouth. I’m wondering how long it’s going to be before Jane’s a frequent guest poster over at Big Hollywood. She and Andrew Breitbart are made for each other.
Uncle Clarence Thomas
.
.
For those of you keeping track, the balloonbaggers’ Clown Prince has now decreed that someone liberal is a Clown Princess.
.
.
Mark S.
@Oscar Leroy:
Do you have a link?
Cris
Who let all this riff-raff into the room?
John Bird
@geg6:
So it sounds like you, like Too Many Jens, think protests that are directed at the Republicans are productive, and you’d rather the attention be taken AWAY from the people you criticize.
This is a good time for all of us, since we all agree, to brainstorm ways to turn this issue against the Republicans.
@Nerull:
Absolutely any high-traffic resource I can hijack for fruitful discussion of an issue above and beyond its personalities, I will do so. This blog is far more popular than my blog, so there’s your answer, exactly the one you’d probably assumed.
Paula
@Cris:
They have to defend the fort, you know?
Oscar Leroy
Right. There’s literally nothing Obama can do unless legislation passes.
Well, he could sign a stop-loss order pertaining to DADT, but that would be bad because it might not last forever.
And, he could tell his Justice Department not to appeal an anti-DADT ruling but that would be bad because it might cause Sarah Palin to be less than honest and consistent (be a shame if she started behaving like that).
Wile E. Quixote
@John Bird:
Hamsher can’t. She’s probably banned as many people from her little cult of personality as Erick Erickson has at RedState.
LT
He cannot do that.
arguingwithsignposts
I believe lady Jane of the Left is just mad because she didn’t get a fancy NYT profile like Pam Gellar. Jealousy is such an ugly thing.
Mark S.
@LT:
It did, and it needed 60 for the first round. Were you in a coma during that entire process?
And yes, they used reconciliation later, but that was necessitated when Scott Brown won and they lost their 60th vote. And that wasn’t very easy either.
Anya
John, I’ve noticed that this blog does not have one black lesbian Muslim front-pager. Why do you hate these minority groups?
John Bird
@Wile E. Quixote:
Fuck Jane Hamsher, I didn’t mention Jane Hamsher, Jane Hamsher doesn’t enter into it except insofar as I have directed the same type of comments at her on her blog. Who the fuck cares about Blog Wars? Not me. I care, as I said, about the wings these blogs claim to represent.
Midnight Marauder
@Oscar Leroy:
Goddamnit, how about you just let the fucking process play out for once in your fucking life?! How about your just let the goddamn political process work in the ugly, fractious, disillusioning-until-you-finally-win manner that it is supposed to?!
You keep talking like the battle is already over, as opposed to stalled out before it hits its next phase. You are talking like everything that can be done has been done, when in fact, people are putting a plan in place to make the repeal happen before the end of the year. There are a lot of forces at work and the landscape is still HIGHLY FAVORABLE to the forces of equality. The repeal for DADT is already in the defense bill; now you just need to go out there and get a couple of votes.
Quit acting like people have stopped fighting on this issue and start joining the goddamn fray to get something done.
geg6
@John Bird:
I think that more and more efforts like Dan Savage’s “It Gets Better,” which has probably changed more minds of the mildly homophobic around me than anything else I’ve ever seen and more quickly than I would ever have thought possible, are where the LGBT community should be putting it’s energy. And they should make sure that other similar efforts make it clear who stands in the way of making it better for all Americans, those who are LGBT and those of us who are not.
I really think it’s the stupidest thing ever to constantly be bitching at the people who truly want to help and who have actually put the entire caucus on record as supporting LGBTs.
LT
@Midnight Marauder:
Heefuckinglarious. This whole argument is about protesters – who are going to ruin everything in the future!!!! Too fucking much.
Michael
Jane, you ignorant twunt.
John Bird
@Oscar Leroy:
I have to admit, I still don’t get this idea that a stop-loss order not lasting forever means it couldn’t effectively end the debate over the issue. I think it would.
I think it would. I don’t think that an integrated military is going to get resegregated in the same penstroke as UN funding for birth control, because of the drastic difference in the domestic nature and public face of the policy’s victims, and even if that did happen, I don’t think that long-term Congressional repeal would suffer a setback because of it, nor would Democrats and LGBT activists. I think it would just cause shit for the Republicans for doing something tone-deaf and foolish.
I think this has already become a losing issue for the Republicans nationally, just not among their caucus and constituencies in the federal legislature and state offices. And I think plenty of Republicans are willing to call it a day on substantial anti-gay activism if they can do it in a way that doesn’t force them to be called to task for it by the media outlets that set their agenda. They can move on to voting against a federal Harvey Milk Day or whatever and keep the same votes.
Stop-loss has always been advanced by pro-human-rights lawyers as part one of a one-two punch, the ‘two’ being the ease in displaying through media blitz, just a few months down the road, that X and Y and Z sailor, soldier, airman, or Marine is doing his or her job perfectly effectively now that the order is in place. If it can be done, I still think it’s potentially a very effective strategy.
Angry Black Lady
@morzer: wha? i don’t get it!
TooManyJens
@John Bird: The real question is: how do we either capture the media’s eye (which at first blush seems impossible for any progressive cause) or bypass them and talk to the citizenry in sufficient numbers to expose the Republicans for the hatemongers they so often are?
Big marches aren’t good for getting media attention. Part of this is that they really aren’t exactly news anymore — there have been approximately 38028301841294 protest marches since the 1950s, when they actually were still surprising and attention-grabbing. And of course, part of it is that grassroots support for progressive causes has to be downplayed by the media lest some Republican accuse them of having a liberal bias.
What we need is something that a) educates people about our causes; b) demonstrates our commitment to them; and c) is sufficiently out of the ordinary to turn heads (metaphorically if not physically speaking). I just don’t think marches accomplish all that anymore.
Oscar Leroy
@Midnight Marauder:
Let it play out? Are the Democrats going to gain Senate seats in the next 3 months? Is some Republican Senator going to decide to give civil rights to gay soldiers? What’s going to change?
A few months ago, people like you were calling me a complete idiot because I didn’t think the route DADT repeal ended up taking would work. “How could the Senate NOT pass a defense authorization? It’s going to happen! Not if, but when!” And here we are.
Andy K
@LT:
Sure, protesting the guy who’s itching to sign legislation that repeals DADT. I fail to see the wisdom in the protest in either the short or long terms.
Angry Black Lady
@JMC_in_the_ATL: THIS.
could you imagine the uproar if anyone started a hash tag n****bagger?
the level of vitriol i have for this woman is reaching unhealthy levels.
it’s the same white feminist bullshit. over and over and over. i’ve dealt with it for 20 years. the white feminist tent doesn’t include black people and other POC. the white feminist LGBTQ tent doesn’t include black people and other POC.
so black women and black LGBTQs are left standing by themselves, and when we try to raise issues that are particular to us (and by us, I’m speaking only as a black woman not as an LGBTQ–though some of my best friends are gay!) they tell us to shut up because they are looking out for our interests, and we need to wait our turn. i agree that DADT should be overturned. but the other pro-LGBTQ actions of this administration helps a wider swathe of people. but the Hamsters don’t want to talk about that. they just want to beat their fucking DADT drum and call everyone who doesn’t agree with them a homophobe.
so when i see that dimwit throwing the term “fag” around and posting pictures of joe lieberman in blackface, while proclaiming to the world that she is righteous and she speaks for “true progressives” i want to stab myself in the kidney.
the fact of the matter is, she speaks for herself and other middle class pearl clutching white women.
she doesn’t speak for me. and i’m a wealthy black person. she sure as fuck doesn’t speak for poor black women, much less poor black LGBTQ women.
i think it is important that john posts this shit because if he doesn’t, hamsher’s blatant hypocrisy would go unnoticed (by me, anyway, since she blocked me and has not once responded to any of my tweets. probably because she doesn’t have the brain power to go toe to toe with me (and let me tell you, my cocker spaniel Nate Dogg has the brain power to go toe to toe with me. i lose the argument about whether he should get more jerky treats ALL THE TIME).)
jane hamsher is an a-hole. she calls everyone misogynist and homophobic but can’t answer for the charges of racism being lobbed at her. i don’t actually think she’s racist. i think she’s too stupid to be racist. in either event, she deserves to be called out as an a-hole at every possible opportunity, and i will continue to call her racist until she responds to my (and others’) very legitimate questions about her associations with norquist, and the lieberman black face debacle.
/end rant
kc
At least you haven’t been accused of hating animals, yet . . .
Anya
@Oscar Leroy:
That’s apparent to anyone, except the “I want my pony now crowd.” We all want this horrible policy to end but it has to end by the legislators or it might deraill the process. Aside from being temparary, the stop-loss order will give the cowardly Dems in Congress an out and they will not address this as long as there is no public pressure.
I am not a lawyer but I am pretty sure that the President cannot tell his AJ not to appeal.
Oscar Leroy
@John Bird:
I agree. I was just playing Devil’s Advocate.
Ash Can
Don’t tell me, let me guess — Jane’s site gets about a quarter of the traffic this one gets, right?
John Bird
@geg6:
Agreed. It’s also a poor idea to attack LGBT groups for the ways they choose to advance the issues they were founded to advance; these will likely include criticism of Democrats until the end of time or the end of distinctions between gay and straight.
While you may not like what you perceive as a deleterious difference in tactics between this movement and the civil rights movements, it is the tactic that many LGBT organizations have chosen for a great many reasons, not the least of which is that they feel that they are less publicly visible and acknowledged as a movement by liberals than black civil rights groups were in the 1960s.
Midnight Marauder
@LT:
What the fuck are you babbling about? It’s a pretty direct connection to the article I linked to in my last post and the topic of this thread. You’ve got a shitload of activist who are IRATE at what they see as inaction on the issue of repealing DADT. They are IRATE that the Senate failed to get the job done. And they are IRATE because they think the Senate won’t get the job done, which would only be due to the fact that none of the “moderate” Republicans lived up to their word and filibustered DADT once again.
Meanwhile, in reality, one of the most prominent gay Democratic political figures in the country is trying to get out in front of the issue and encourage the DOJ to hold off on filing any appeal until the Senate can finish the job.
So what are those activist doing in the meantime? Are they traveling around the country shining a light on the two-faced obstruction of Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, and Scott Brown? Or are they continuing to put undue pressure on a president who would gladly sign the fucking bill once it gets to his desk? How many people around the country know about the reprehensible lies of Collins, Brown, and Snowe versus how many know that Harry Reid is an unmitigated failure for not passing a repeal of DADT becuase his colleagues lied right to his face?
Stop turning the people who are ultimately on your side into the public face of the opposition. Harry Reid’s name shouldn’t even come up on the list of villains responsible for the failure of DADT to be repealed. In fact, let’s see what such a list would look like:
And, of course, these two clowns:
Glenndacious Greenwaldian (formerly tim)
@Mattminus:
bingo
Quicksand
@wmd:
Maybe this is my rampant hamsherphobia speaking, but I’m THIS close to removing Marcy and TBogg from my feed reader.
I like their stuff, but I’m really loath to support the underlying brand in any fashion.
John Bird
@Anya:
Once again, I have yet to see a strong argument that a stop-loss order would ‘derail the process’, just assertions that potential instability on the issue would be bad for American progress.
Personally, I see any progress on this issue as likely to last.
And can we ditch the “pony” talk when we’re talking about some people’s desire for basic human rights now? It’s like calling the ballot for African-Americans a “pony” in 1955. Since we agree that giving people these rights is the only reasonable demand to make, we can profitably dispense with the rhetorical tactic of disparaging the demand as unrealistic.
Nick
Did she say the same thing to Glenn Greenwald who said it was wrong to ask the WH not to appeal the ruling?
LT
@Angry Black Lady:
Didn’t John just use “faggy” in a post? Does it make you hate him?
LT
@Angry Black Lady:
Didn’t John just use “faggy” in a post? Does it make you hate him?
Midnight Marauder
@Oscar Leroy:
Gator90
@John Cole:
I have vehemently criticized some of your statements about Obama and gay-rights issues. I think you can be a total dick regarding that topic. But you seem to be as free of bigotry as any person one is likely to encounter. Hamsher, whom I generally admire, is full of crap if she thinks you’re a bigot.
John Bird
@TooManyJens:
I simply do not think we can reach large amounts of people in America without the media.
America has a dwindling supply of civic organizations; most people, including all of us to a large and apparent degree, depend upon media outlets to tell us the opinions on issues that have larger pluralities behind them.
And for good or for ill, people depend on that knowledge – of what is sane and reasonable to believe on an issue according to their fellows – to question and shape and construct their own beliefs. It makes sense; they would be turning to their neighbors, or club members, or church members, or fellow workers for a dialogue, but that is not as likely nowadays.
I’d rather the dependence on the media be for good rather than ill.
Suck It Up!
@david mizner:
they get attention yet they don’t get results.
Paula
@Ash Can:
The would be interesting to know — but you’d have to account for the fact that Hamsher’s site consists of multiple blogs populated by a hundred or so permanent commenters each.
And the fact that Jane gets to go on TV and represent the progressive POV, and write about it in general news sites, and how much recognition she receives from that.
I’ve never seen Cole’s name in a byline on Huffpo, let alone be on TV.
So. Now that you’ve introduced the question …
Suck It Up!
@Nick:
of course not!
smell the hypocrisy.
Angry Black Lady
@LT: no, because i recognize sarcasm when i see it.
JRManning
John said: “The best way to make Jane Hamsher look like an irrational, out of control buffoon is to give her a microphone.”
Any PUMA will do the same.
Shinobi
@LT: Not to drag this up again, but uh, no, it doesn’t. Not to squash your freedom of artistic license of interpretation of speech or anything….
TR
Sweet Jesus. I find it hard to believe I was ever a regular reader of FDL. What the hell happened there?
Mnemosyne
@LT:
You mean the health care bill that passed the Senate back when we had 60 Democrats and now we only have 59? That health care bill?
And, yes, once we went down to 59, we had to do weird shenanigans like have the House pass the Senate bill with no changes and then making budgetary fixes through reconciliation so the Senate could dodge a filibuster.
If you can get the Senate back up to 60 Democrats to get your legislation passed, please do so. You’ve got no chance of passage otherwise, because the 41 Republicans who blocked are sure as shit going to keep blocking it.
eemom
there’s gotta be a “strawman” in here SOMEWHERE…..
different church-lady
John, you must be under the mistaken impression that when Jane tweets something about you, the subject of the tweet is you. It’s not — Jane is the subject.
les
@david mizner:
These words, I do not think they mean what you think they mean.
lol
@Midnight Marauder:
Lincoln and Pryor initially voted Yes. They changed their votes to No when it became clear it wasn’t going to pass, presumably for political reasons. So I think they’ll be on board for round 2. Pressure certainly wouldn’t hurt.
ruemara
@Angry Black Lady:
PREACH! *kicks you a hackysack*
Midnight Marauder
@lol:
Yeah, I remember that, and I’m not quite sure how I ended up listing Lincoln twice instead of Pryor in that previous post. Regardless, I do expect them to be on board during the lame-duck session, but knowing the tendency of those two, every ounce of pressure we can muster certainly would not hurt. I just really believe excoriating the people who were one vote away from ending an atrocious policy–and who are circling the wagons to try once again very soon–is one of the most asinine things I’ve ever witnessed in my entire life.
Scott Supak
Leanord Smalls went Galt!
LT
@Angry Black Lady: And that wasn’t sarcasm from JH? Come on.
Taylormattd
@Oscar Leroy: So anyway, back to the topic. Please explain your support of blackface Jane calling John a “homophobe”
Anya
@John Bird: I agree, DADT is a civil right’s issue not a trivial matter. My pony statement is to people who complain about everything Obama does. They want him to address all of their grievances in one sweep and that’s what bothers me. They should be smart enough to know that our legislative process is arduous and messy and the President is not a magician. They should be working with him, by pressuring those who are hindering the progress not attacking their allies. Why don’t we focus our ire on the Republicans, particularly, the Maine sisters and Scott Brown? Why not put a huge pressure on them and organize a phone campaign and rallies, instead of slamming the President at every turn.
LT
@Mnemosyne: Major parts of the health care bill passed in amendments and needed 50 votes. I’m simply responding to “Everything needs 60 votes” crap.
LT
And Dodd-Frank passed without 60.
geg6
@Midnight Marauder:
This, this, a thousand times, THIS.
les
@Oscar Leroy:
Can you explain how this helps? The status quo is a statute, passed by Congress, that cannot be overriden by executive order (unless you’re King George), stating that HOMOSEXUALS MAY NOT SERVE IN THE ARMED FORCES. Period, no exceptions. DADT is an executive order saying “well, can’t do anything about the statute, but the armed forces are not to seek out homosexuals in order to dismiss them.” So the solution is for Obama to rescind the executive order, so that military assholes (yeah, I’m assuming there are some) are free to actively seek out and harass gays? WTF? Do you have some secret about how gov’t works that you’d like to share?
thefncrow
@LT:
Incorrect. Dodd-Frank passed 60-39.
Wile E. Quixote
@geg6:
Yeah, as tactics go this seems to be about as effective as, oh, I dunno, invading Iraq to deal with the threat of Al Qaeda.
But this isn’t about being effective, these narcissistic assholes are in it for the media attention, nothing more. As others have pointed out they know that they won’t get any coverage protesting Republicans, so therefore they’re not going to do it. But they can protest President Obama say to all of their friends “Hey look, I was on the TeeVee” and then pretend that they accomplished something with the same pride and sense of achievement as a toddler who brings mommy or daddy into the bathroom to show them what he just did in the toilet.
Shinobi
@LT: Yeah, who would ever have thought that voting for something with the words “Consumer Protection” in the name would be deemed politically advantageous enough for to Republicans to actually vote for it.
In other words, the American people hate bankers more than they like gay people.
thefncrow
@les: That person is just confused, one of the many, many people who have gotten so confused that they think “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” is the policy banning gays from serving in the military.
This form of ignorance is so widespread that it’s essentially not worth fighting anymore, unfortunately.
les
@thefncrow:
Thanks; I know it somewhere, but occasionally the level of stupid in the discourse overwhelms me. I’ll now go back to pointing and laughing.
Wile E. Quixote
@John Bird:
John, I’m sorry, I wasn’t disagreeing with you, nor do I think you’re wrong I think you’re spot on. I was just using your post to take another shot at Jane Hamsher.
Mark S.
@LT:
Noooooooo
Angry Black Lady
@LT: no, it wasn’t, and if you can’t see that, i can’t help you. she didn’t just lob it at john. she lobbed it at several people who have criticized her “all obama bashing all the time” fuckery during the midterms.
Angry Black Lady
@les: THIS!!!!!!!
Wile E. Quixote
@Angry Black Lady:
He probably learned how to do this from President Obama who has hypnotized everyone except Jane Hamsher, who is the only one who can see the Truth!
Angry Black Lady
@ruemara: pass the j first, man!
LT
@Mark S.: Ope, sorry, I looked it up and that was the first version.
Archangel
Jeez, John, put out already will ya? She obviously has it bad for you.
eemom
@Angry Black Lady:
well, this middle-class, foul-mouthed, pearl-deprived white woman heartily Amen’s every word you’ve uttered. I am second to none in my contempt for that phony, lying, backstabbing fraud.
LT
@Angry Black Lady: I only saw it this once, and it seemed obviously sarcastic.
General Stuck
@Anya:
Yes, it is a civil rights issue, but one within a venue that the courts have long held as not always equal to society at large. Or, the special mission of the military contains elements not found outside of it. Like the old adage goes, the military does not practice democracy, it defends it. Doesn’t mean that basic constitutional rights are with held from people in the military, just that there are other considerations that sometimes trump those outside the military. And “unit cohesion” is at the top of that list, and anything that threatens that, or is perceived to threaten it, gets special consideration, even from civilian courts. But we are long past the basic realization that gays serving openly in the military will not greatly affect the military mission, and there is much proof of this throughout the worlds military’s/
But it is a different world, largely, the military one, and you about have to spend time in it to understand. It is tradition based culture that doesn’t change easily, therefor the struggle seems so ridiculous to those on the outside. It is full of politically right wing religious types that carry their bigotry and fears with them into the military. And Obama, or any president, but especially a dem, is going to tread cautiously through that political minefield, toward changing that culture and it’s inherent resistance to change.
But it really is over, when the Joint Chiefs Chairman testifies in public session that DADT needs to go. It is only a matter of time to bring the rest of the military in that direction.
JMC_in_the_ATL
@LT: Clearly it doesn’t seem sarcastic to the gay people in the room. And defending it as such is rather revealing. I mean, how can you get how horrific gay teen bullying is and not get this?
morzer
@Angry Black Lady:
Well, you did use the word straight, didn’t you?
j/k
shilohsmama
@Angry Black Lady: Nothin’ but net, girlfriend! We can turn off the lights and leave now…
Karen
John Cole hates dogs but loves puppies.
John Cole hates cats but loves kittens.
A cookie to anyone who gets the riddle there.
Seriously, it’s interesting how Jane Hamsher talks about homophobia and misogony when she became part of PUMA when the signs first showed that Hillary Clinton would not win.Then the talk about how Obama should have waited his turn aka stay in his place. I guess homophobia and misogony = evil bad. Racism = not a problem if only Obama wasn’t uppitty and the only reason he won was because ungrateful black people didn’t vote for Hillary, ad infinitum.
Does the name “Fannee Doolee” ring a bell? Yes, it’s a sign that two hours of sleep aren’t enough.
John Bird
@Wile E. Quixote:
Yeah, uh, you’re going to want to stifle the urge to portray LGBT activists as inchoate mental adolescents with literal Freudian anal fixations. Because, you know, that’s how gay people were characterized by medical science back when the official goal of therapy was to make them straight.
I realize that you didn’t know this, but you effectively just said the equivalent of “black community leaders may be articulate, but they’re so angry and lazy, and the best thing they can do to be taken seriously is stay away from white women”.
If you described anti-DADT activism like you did in front of a gay Marine, you’d be lucky not to get your ass kicked right there.
Ronbo
John,
Just as a crazy person doesn’t know they are crazy, you don’t see yourself for what you are. I bet you have some faggety friends and when they make your skin crawl, you merely spit on them. Good for you. Your sensitivity is unmatched!
gwangung
@Angry Black Lady: Preach, sister.
You’ve so nobly vocalized the crap I had to go through with some idiot white radicals back in the day. (note: most folks had the sense God gave to a turnip to shut up when they needed to)
chopper
jesus, hamsher’s a moron. and an anti-semite, too. why? because i said so! now i’m a tweet that! NOTED ANTI-SEMITE @JANEHAMSHER HATES JEWS!
El Tiburon
She was obviously taken out of context.
And off of her meds.
Lancelot Link
It looks to me like Obama is getting more grief from the left over DADT than Clinton ever did.
Karen
@Lancelot Link:
Ya think?
BruceFromOhio
That works for most irrational, out of control buffoons.
See Bachmann, Michele.
See also Gingrich, Newtonian.
Jeffro
Raising Arizona ftw!!
joe from Lowell
@John Bird:
I understand the argument you’re making here. I’ve watched it happen with my own eyes in Massachusetts with equal marriage, and it’s wonderful. There’s just one problem, though; it wouldn’t be an integrated military. It would still be a military in which gay people had to stay in the closet, because coming out at all could just mean getting drummed out in two or three years.
So, the acculturation you’re talking about wouldn’t be happening.
Dr. Squid
@morzer: After he sends another letter to the rotting corpse of Eazy E.
DickSpudCouchPotatoDetective
A bunch of us have already given you the only good advice you are going to get on this. Get a room with Jane and get it over with.
Since you obviously have no plan to do this, one has to assume that this ongoing mindfuck is just a troll.
Otherwise why on earth would you even acknowledge the existence of this person? She really is not worth your time.
Paula
@DickSpudCouchPotatoDetective:
LEAVE JANE ALONE!
[sob]
Angry Black Lady
@Wile E. Quixote: oh wow. obama hypnosis! that’s some subliminable shit, right there! hilarious.
Angry Black Lady
@eemom: i really really want to debate her. i don’t even know where she came from. what her educational background is. did she go to law school? has she taken any prelaw classes? read constitutional scholarship? why the hell is SHE on tv and not any of the number of remaining critically thinking progs?
is she gay? if she’s gay, i’ll hate her a little less. but if she’s not, it just seems like she’s a crab crawling on the backs of LGBTQ folk to get her more airtime on Fox, CNN, and MSNBC.
and then there’s the blackface thing. BLACKFACE! WHEN IS THAT OK? How is it that this person has become the spokesperson for so many idiotic progressives? how many of them even know what she did? her commenters are literally asking her to run for office. WTF?!
why is it that i’m more angry at her right now, than all the crazy ass tea partiers who are threatening to take over our government? the left is being undone from the inside and it pisses me right the fuck off.
she’s so loathesome that it makes me automatically balk at anything she says, and some of what she says (i.e., being pro-feingold) is cool with me, but i wish to Xenu she would shut.the.fuck.up.
i’m just going to keep retweeting my STFUJANE link. it may be petty, but i’ve been called worse things. and it makes me feel better.
BLACKFACE.
gottdamnit.
Angry Black Lady
@DickSpudCouchPotatoDetective: she’s worth the time because she is hijacking what should be a debate about asshats on the right and THEIR policies to a debate about How Obama Didn’t Call Me Back.
she and her crazyface supporters are wandering through our tent and tossing grenades and if you don’t agree, then you’re an obamabot.
fuck that and fuck her.
LiberalTarian
Ok, here is the worst I can do.
She doesn’t write well, either. Boring. Unintelligible.
I know that seems like damning someone with faint praise, but if someone said that to me I’d really freak out. The only thing worse than being crazy is being boring.
Just stop quoting her already. She’s wanting to jump a shark, and she’s hoping you’ll play shark. I know it makes you … well, responsive, I can’t say it makes you nuts cuz I don’t know, but you don’t deign to answer the likes of Michelle Malkin, so why bother with dingy Jane Hamsher?
Wile E. Quixote
@John Bird:
John, you’re a stupid bastard. Seriously, you’re as stupid as Jane Hamsher is. You don’t have any reading comprehension skills at all and you build strawman arguments such as asserting that I’m “…portray[ing] activists as inchoate mental adolescents with literal Freudian anal fixations.”. No John, I’m saying that this particular group of gay activists is a bunch of morons who have engaged in a completely ineffective protest.
What the fuck do these morons want the Democrats to do? It’s been explained over over again that President Obama can’t wave a magic wand, issue and executive order and make DADT go away. It’s been explained over and over again that issuing a stop-loss order is not the way to do this. It’s been explained over and over again that President Obama does not have the legal authority to overturn DADT, that only Congress does. It’s been explained over and over again that you had 60 Democrats who were willing to vote for a bill that would have overturned DADT but the Republicans wouldn’t let them.
These people are morons, just like you. And no, just because you’re GLBT or protesting for GLBT rights doesn’t give you some blanket immunity from criticism because of the rightness of your cause.
I did? Would you please explain that. Oh, and John, I realize that you don’t know this, but you effectively just said that you’re a Nazi who hangs around with Ray Iott, has a swastika tattooed on his left buttcheek and “property of Andrew Breitbart” on the right and is a member of Christine O’Donnell’s coven. Wow, you’re playing right out of the Jane Hamsher playbook. Ignore your opponent’s arguments and accuse them of racism/sexism/homophobia/apotemnophilia or whatever else you can throw at them.
If I met a gay marine who was protesting against President Obama and not protesting the Republicans who are keeping this policy in place I’d get right up in his face and say “Yo jarhead. You’re shooting at the wrong fucking target. The enemy is over there where the bullets are coming from. Why don’t you try shooting at them for a change?” And unlike you John, if I met a straight marine, or soldier or sailor who was saying the kind of stupid shit about keeping DADT on the books that the Republicans are I’d get right up in their faces and tell them that they’re full of shit. In fact I did just that when I was in the Army back in the 90’s, asking a bunch of these guys what the fuck their damage was and telling more than one of the homophobic assholes in my unit that I’d rather serve with a gay soldier any day of the week than someone like them who was cheating on his wife. I’d like to see you do the same, punk.
Protesting against President Obama because the Republicans in the Senate prevented DADT from being overturned is fucking stupid. It’s as if the civil rights protestors of the 1950s and 1960s said “Let’s ignore Bull Connor, Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, George Wallace and Orval Faubus and all of those other guys who are working their asses off to keep segregation going and instead go protest against Earl Warren, William O. Douglas and Lyndon Johnson because they haven’t magically made it go away.” Yeah, that would have been an effective tactic.
sparky
well.
fortunately for moi, i never read FDL anyway so i thought i would be spared this kind of stuff. oh well.
i don’t know what her motive was: traffic? bad day at the office? an effort to coin the next flavor of what the term “racist” can signify? don’t know, don’t care. smears are right up there with lying as a reason to dispense with someone’s opinion. bye, Jane, not that i ever read you anyway.
that said, i confess i am a bit perplexed by why this issue generates more light and heat than the fact of the military’s deployment in other countries, the military budget, and, as to civil liberties, the rather more pressing* issues of detention, torture and legalized assassination.
*in the sense that (a) sexuality isn’t much of an issue when you’re dead and (b) these other pesky issues apply to, well, everyone on the planet.
300baud
That’s possibly true, but they might also have reasons. As I mentioned in the previous thread, two crossed my mind.
One, as a matter of conscience, they might feel obliged to raise a ruckus until they have their civil rights. In that case, effectiveness isn’t the proximate goal.
Two, they might believe that the Democrats have taken them for granted, so it’s to their long-term advantage to be the squeaky wheel. Crossing the Democrats now doesn’t get them anything for the 112th Congress, sure, but if that were their expected outcome whether they played nice or not, then maybe acting up now means Democrats will take their concerns more seriously down the road.
If that seems irrational, read the great quote in the last thread from “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” where MLK wonders if the real problem isn’t the KKK, but white moderates who disapprove of direct action. He or the gay activists might be wrong, but they aren’t necessarily morons.
Wile E. Quixote
@John Bird:
Really, does this include the Log Cabin Republicans? I know you don’t realize it but what you’ve just said is that If an LGBT group founded with the objectives of promoting LGBT equality by overturning DADT, getting DoMA repealed and working to get gay marriage and domestic partnership laws passed in the 50 states said that they were going to raise funds for Tony Perkins and the Family Research Council, work to get Rick Santorum elected president in 2012 and take out ads on Fox News supporting Fred Phelps while burning Rachel Maddow and Anderson Cooper in effigy that you’d be totally OK with that and that no one should criticize them for their tactics.
And I suppose that you’ve been all over Dan Savage and Andrew Sullivan for criticizing the Human Rights Campaign for being ineffective and wasting money. I mean HRC is an LGBT organization, so therefore they’re beyond criticism, right?
Wow, you really are a patronizing leftist asshole, aren’t you? What you’re saying is, “No, no, gay people are oppressed and you mustn’t hurt their fee-fees by treating them like adults and pointing out when they do stupid things. So if they do stupid things like protest against the wrong people while giving a pass to the people who are fucking them over, or spew disgusting racist bile you must let them be and say ‘there, there LGBT person. It’s OK. I feel the pain of your oppression'”.
joe from Lowell
@JMC_in_the_ATL: You do get that John’s comment was MAKING FUN OF the sort of people who would call a microbrew faggy, right?
That he was holding out such people’s use of terms like “faggy” as a reason to make fun of them? You understood that, right?
joe from Lowell
@Wile E. Quixote: No, seriously, the image of the kid going through his anal phase (showing mommy and daddy what he did in the potty) was unfortunate.
There’s history there.
And I say this as someone who agrees with your general point about certain internet-based gay activists shooting their cause in the foot with tactics that promote their self-affirmation over strategic thought.