Dead To Rights

I’d say Frank Rich has these guys pegged pretty accurately.






149 replies
  1. 1

    Is there any way possible to not buy shit that the Kochs get a taste of? If I’m willing to spend a couple of bucks extra to buy cat food at the grocery instead of target because the high-ups there get their gay hate on in public, I’m willing to go the same distance or more to give the Kochs the financial middle finger (stubby though it may be).

  2. 2
    Mike in NC says:

    Second the idea to boycott the kochroach brothers and everything they are part of. Can somebody point to a list?

  3. 3

    Should help send pitying looks towards every teabaggers you know. “Played for a sucker, huh? Tsk tsk.”

    @Incertus (Brian): Love the dea, but I think they are the flour in the pie with their chemical interests.

  4. 4
    JAHILL10 says:

    @Mike in NC: As far as I can find so far are the paper products they produce, but here is a start for your boycott list:
    Georgia-Pacific’s familiar consumer brands in North America include Quilted Northern®, Angel Soft®, Brawny®, Sparkle® , Soft ‘n Gentle®, Mardi Gras®, Vanity Fair®, and the Dixie® brand of tabletop products.

    I like how on their website they prominently feature all the stuff they are doing to help the environment, by that I guess they mean help it into an early grave.

  5. 5
    leinie says:

    Ha. There’s the Goldline ad, right there at the NY Times, when I follow this link. Bet the Kochs have their evil stubs in that as well.

    This country is so fucked, that these people can’t look at that con man Beck and see him for what he is. Now, I guess he’s gonna be our spiritual leader too? And like Rich says, the Kochs just laugh their way to the bank whaler all these idiots chant against the idiots best intrest and agitate for the rich who are hurting them.

  6. 6

    @WereBear (itouch):
    Exactly. Were we to boycott every rich industrialist who was an asshole, we’d be wearing hemp shirts and eating nothing but CSA/farmer’s market food (not that there’s anything wrong with that).

  7. 7
    demo woman says:

    @WereBear (itouch): They purchased Georgia Pacific. Besides wood they also produce paper products such as Angel Soft toilet tissue.

  8. 8
    Uloborus says:

    Yeah, that Obama. He’d rather go with a strategy that doesn’t involve drawing public attention to the Kroaches and does involve getting historic legislation passed at a time when the country is teeting on the brink of collapse. Darn him!

    Ahem. Sorry, my Obot hackles went up there. Other than that one single sentence, I thought this was a very good article. I think he underplays the fact that the Kochs are deranged racist paranoids because he prefers to paint them as merely greedy, but hey, it’s one of those ‘team stupid’ or ‘team evil’ situations. Any media attention to the fact that the tea party is bankrolled and serving the interests of the corrupt super-rich is very worth having.

    EDIT – also ‘Kochroaches’ is way better than my name.

  9. 9

    @demo woman:
    You can have my toilet paper when you pry it from my cold, dead hands!

  10. 10
    jwb says:

    @arguingwithsignposts: Yes, and if you read the bumper stickers on the trucks of the farmers at the farmers market, you’ll start thinking twice about whether you want your money going in that direction too.

  11. 11
    SiubhanDuinne says:

    The mindhive at work: I’ve been wondering for days if there’s some kind of comprehensive list of Koch Bros financial interests and especially consumer products so I can — as much as humanly possible — consciously refrain from putting my money into their political interests. It’s probably not 100% possible but I’m up for giving my best boycott shot. Is this the kind of thing Media Matters does? I know they’re pretty good at identifying advertisers on specific programs, but this is a bit different and may not come under the MMFA mandate.

    Regardless, I’ve bought my last roll of Brawny paper towels!

  12. 12

    @SiubhanDuinne: Isn’t it Color of Change that did the Beck boycott? Might be a better place to start than MMFA.

  13. 13
    PeakVT says:

    Man, that was a good column. My only quibble is Rich’s characterization of Soros as a publicity hound, which doesn’t match my impression. But, wevs.

  14. 14
    jwb says:

    @SiubhanDuinne: Yes, it would be nice to have a list. I’ve already sworn off Target and all things Fox (even the Fox part of the NFL package and college sports).

  15. 15
    Violet says:

    @SiubhanDuinne:

    Regardless, I’ve bought my last roll of Brawny paper towels!

    Yeah, I’m using my jumbo pack of Brawny paper towels and it bugs me whenever I go to the cabinet to pull out another one. I’ve got about five more to go.

    If we boycotted everything associated with evil people, I think we’d be growing our own cotton and weaving our own clothes and growing/eating our own food. That’s not all bad, but it’s hard, hard work.

  16. 16
    Wannabe Speechwriter says:

    I guess what I will never get about these billionaires supporting the tea partiers is how selfish these people are. No matter how high the tax rate is, these people will still be living better off than most people on this planet. I know plenty of people struggling to get by who would gladly pay more in taxes if it meant schools stay open and everyone got health care. We often talk about the hateful elements of the tea party folks but I do think the selfishness element is just as important-and it does nicely intertwine with the hate part. Selfishness and hate-two things I’m sure Martin Luther King would have loved to celebrate…

  17. 17

    @Violet:
    And sadly, it would have no effect on their bottom line, because stupid consumers are stupid, and like their cheap shit. If the Wal-Martization of ‘Murika has proven anything, it is this.

  18. 18
    morzer says:

    @jwb:

    I find that atdhe.net generally matches my needs. Or I might even drag myself to a sports bar, if the game were big enough.

  19. 19
    Corner Stone says:

    @Uloborus: This was the part you didn’t care for?

    And Obama? So far, sadly, this question answers itself.

  20. 20
    Cat Lady says:

    If the Kochs have slithered through polite NY society without their social peers knowing who and what they are, then Meyer’s article may hit them where it hurts them most – their reputation of social respectability, at least I can hope. I can just imagine the contempt they express at their fancy society gatherings for the hoi polloi they exploit so completely. Not buying paper plates isn’t going to hurt them financially, at all, but by all means do it if it makes you feel better.

  21. 21
    valdivia says:

    so happy I prefer Bounty paper towels….

  22. 22
    jwb says:

    @Uloborus: I also think Rich plays down the racist paranoia because he knows very well that Obama can’t go after them on those grounds, and, whether you disagree with Rich or not, the whole point of the article was that last sentence, which was: “Mr. President, you ignore this at your and the country’s peril.” We were arguing about this on one of the threads last night, and the consensus seemed to be that, because of the racial issues, it would indeed be difficult for Obama himself to intervene in the manner Rich seems to want. But I think everyone was in agreement that the Administration and really all of country who does not want to be ruled by the wingnuts have to figure out a way to effectively engage and neutralize these guys.

  23. 23
    Corner Stone says:

    @jwb: I’m not sure why it has to be an either/or decision.

  24. 24
    Corner Stone says:

    And I think people who frame it that way are essentially propagating the “Nothing can be done!” mentality.

  25. 25
    Kate says:

    I know I’m old and my cultural references make most people go. “huh?”, but I can’t read about the TeaBaggers, Becks and soft white males in the news these days without having a flashback to America of the early last century. All the arguments today are retreads of the anti-Roosevelt era – Communists! Dirty furriners! Union organizers! – and all come from the same place, the top tier, financially. It probably goes back even further than that, but I’m not that old.

    Why oh why don’t we have the press we deserve? But, really, the question is, have we ever? Has there ever been a widely-read newspaper or magazine that put this kind of thing in perspective for us? By their very nature now, the press is part of the oligarchy and will not tell us what we need to know.

  26. 26
    roshan says:

    Soak The Very, Very Rich! (NewYorker article)

    At the moment, we have a system of tax brackets well suited to nineteenth-century New Zealand. Our system sets the top bracket at three hundred and seventy-five thousand dollars, with a tax rate of thirty-five per cent. (People in the second-highest bracket, starting at a hundred and seventy-two thousand dollars for individuals, pay thirty-three per cent.) This means that someone making two hundred thousand dollars a year and someone making two hundred million dollars a year pay at similar tax rates. LeBron James and LeBron James’s dentist: same difference.

    This makes no sense—there’s a yawning chasm between the professional and the plutocratic classes, and the tax system should reflect that.

  27. 27
    MikeJ says:

    @Kate:

    Why oh why don’t we have the press we deserve?

    Sadly, we do.

  28. 28
    Pancake says:

    Hmm. I don’t believe that I saw Rich make any comment on the tens of millions that billionaire lefties, such as convicted felon George Soros, have given to left-wing groups such as Media Matters, Think Progress, etc.

  29. 29
    cleek says:

    @Uloborus:
    yes, Obama is glorious and awe-inspiring. but his majestic works may be for naught, if the GOP can repeal them. which they might, if they can win big enough in 2012 (or even, FSM-forbid, in 2010).

    which is yet another reason Obama and the Dems should be taking the fight to the GOP instead of hoping things will just work out somehow.

  30. 30
    cleek says:

    from the article:

    Many of them tried to change the subject to George Soros, the billionaire backer of liberal causes.

    and here’s @Pancake, right on schedule.

  31. 31
    jwb says:

    @Corner Stone: I need you to fill in your work here. Where’s the either/or and how exactly does that lead to “Nothing can be done!”

  32. 32
    scav says:

    @Pancake: undoubtedly because makeup can’t read.

  33. 33

    @Pancake: Convicted felon? link please?

  34. 34
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Pancake: Dipshit, the piece mentions Soros by name. Troll fail.

  35. 35
    harlana says:

    All this hoo-hah, it’s just all about distraction, not letting the Bush tax cuts expire, plain and simple.

  36. 36
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @Pancake:

    Actually, if you bothered to read the article, he does mention Soros.

  37. 37
    Loneoak says:

    Ya’ll shouldn’t be using paper towels anyway. Cut down a tree so you can throw wipe up some schmutz in the kitchen? That’s what old t-shirt rags are for.

  38. 38
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @arguingwithsignposts: Insider trading verdict in France with a $2 million + fine in 2002-ish.

  39. 39
    morzer says:

    @Loneoak:

    I use old Pancakes, but sometimes they just don’t absorb enough….

  40. 40

    @jwb:

    Yes, and if you read the bumper stickers on the trucks of the farmers at the farmers market, you’ll start thinking twice about whether you want your money going in that direction too.

    If I have to give money to a psycho, better one who can only do limited damage with it.

  41. 41
    Corner Stone says:

    @jwb: I was adding on to your response to Uloborus. He said:

    He’d rather go with a strategy that doesn’t involve drawing public attention to the Kroaches and does involve getting historic legislation passed at a time when the country is teeting on the brink of collapse. Darn him!

    ISTM the implied there is one strategy has one outcome, or the other strategy has a different outcome.
    It’s why I separated my comments into two posts. The first was an add on to your response, and the second was a stand alone not directed at you.

  42. 42

    @Omnes Omnibus:
    thanks for the link. interesting.

  43. 43
    Corner Stone says:

    @jwb: Additionally, the “Nothing can be done!” is a pervasive mindset among some here who feel that fighting for anything/pushing back is a useless endeavor and should be discarded as a strategy.
    Hence, the pushing back against Koch Bros would have led to less legislative accomplishment and therefore should not be done.
    Nothing can be done!

  44. 44

    @Wannabe Speechwriter:

    I guess what I will never get about these billionaires supporting the tea partiers is how selfish these people are. No matter how high the tax rate is, these people will still be living better off than most people on this planet.

    That’s not good enough for them, though. More than the poor, these people really hate the middle and upper-middle class, because they’re the ones getting airs. What good is it to be so stinking rich you can eat lobster for every meal if that yokel can eat it even once in a while? The poor are useful to them–the middle classes are a threat.

  45. 45
    cmorenc says:

    @John Cole

    I’d say Frank Rich has these guys pegged pretty accurately.

    It’s one thing to peg “these guys” accurately, quite another to nail them with deadly effective accuracy, to substantially weaken their ability to promote their objectives.

    Of course their wishful objective is to construct a more or less permanent controlling uber-conservative governing hard-right oriented coalition. Much sound analysis has been written on why the current approach of the GOP and the tea-baggers effectively trades short-term success for medium and longer-term demographic failure.

    WHAT’S REALLY IMPORTANT is to understand their alternative objective, one which has much better chances for long-term success: to gain control of all three branches of government just long enough to not only effectively wreck the feasibility of any further progressive objectives, but to financially force the rollback of much or all of everything that has been built ever since the New Deal. They want to reestablish the version of American government at all levels which prevailed in the 1920s, or even better early pre-Teddy Roosevelt 1890s. Again, they want to do so by making it a practical, fiscal impossibility for government to do any more or any different.

    How long would they need? Look how vast the amount of wreckage they succeeded in causing in eight years of the Bush Administration (concentrated mainly in the first four to six years), when they came worrisomely close to succeeding with that objective from a rare starting point of both government solvency and economic prosperity (the “recession” of 2000-2001 was an extremely mild one). They might only need another four years like that to complete and seal the job for an indefinitely long future.

  46. 46
    Pancake says:

    @arguingwithsignposts: Here’s a Link for a story that appeared in The New York Times right after the Soro’s conviction was upheld by France’s highest court.

    And, of course, Rich mentioned the name of Soros, but without any of the nasty inferences he attached to the others named in his silly piece.

  47. 47
    jwb says:

    @Corner Stone: ok, I see. And I agree with you about the “Nothing can be done!” mentality. It’s one of the things that drives me nuts about Nick.

  48. 48
    Chyron HR says:

    @Pancake:

    Is “convicted felon George Soros” code for “filthy Juden”? I keep forgetting.

  49. 49
    timb says:

    @Mike in NC: You couldn’t do it. A lot of the products are industrial, so they are in everything. But, I’m betting someone on this blog will post a list of their consumer products, eg “stainmaster’ carpets.

  50. 50

    @Loneoak:

    using old t-shirt rags to mop up stuff:

    But what if you have to wear your old t-shirt rags?

  51. 51
    scav says:

    must chafe their hides summat fierce to have to rely upon the dirty French for their so-called moral high ground. not that their “no international tribunals for ‘MERCANS!” ever meant much if you weren’t the right kind of ‘Mercan. They really do have to apply that much makeup to even appear human any more.

  52. 52
    Pancake says:

    @Chyron HR: Based on the views generally expressed on this site by countless commenters, you might ask that question of THEM. In fact, if memory serves, you are one of those typically leading the charge with anti-Semitic rantings anytime Palestine or Israel comes up.

  53. 53
    ChrisNYC says:

    What Rich doesn’t point out — and I wish to hell he had because the gloom and doom and defeatism among Dems is just getting to be too much for me to stomach — is that none of these movements has ever, umm, worked. FDR got FOUR terms and created the modern America we live in. McCarthy was beaten and died powerless and wrecked. Goldwater crashed and burned. Nixon got the prize and then, you know. GWB was a disaster, of course. The only success of this long campaign by the right was Reagan. So it might be smart to hold off on the “the end is nigh” stuff.

    I think the big picture shows that the right has a hard time getting into power and when they do manage it, they immediately and tragically overreach and screw it up.

  54. 54
    Chyron HR says:

    @Pancake:

    In fact, if memory serves, you are one of those leading the charge with anti-Semitic rantings

    No, actually, you’re thinking of Tea Party leader Mark “Exterminate the Juden Rats” Williams.

    P.S. You know who else thought rich Jews like George Soros were plotting to destroy his country?

  55. 55

    @Pancake: just out of curiosity, how does it feel to have your movement represented by a bunch of pasty white evangelicals (and a Moron Mormon)?

  56. 56
    Corner Stone says:

    @ChrisNYC:

    GWB was a disaster, of course.

    GWB was a disaster for the country, true. But I believe you would be hard pressed to say he was a disaster for the interests he served that are aligned with people like Koch Bros.

  57. 57
    kay says:

    @Pancake:

    Hmmm.

    This:

    PARIS — The highest court in France on Wednesday rejected a bid by George Soros, the billionaire investor, to overturn a conviction for insider trading in a case dating back nearly 20 years, leaving the first blemish on his five-decade investing career.

    Or this:

    The images still haunt his sleep. Danielle Smalley: 17-year old was packing for college the day she was killed. Moments after Danny Smalley watched his daughter drive off in the family pickup, he heard an explosion. Then he saw the bodies. Smalley’s 17-year-old daughter, Danielle, and her friend Jason Stone, also 17, were burned nearly beyond recognition when a cloud of butane spewing from a high-pressure underground pipeline ignited. “I mean, it was like hell had opened up,” Smalley later testified in a lawsuit he filed against the pipeline company, Koch Industries Inc. “I was hoping it wasn’t my daughter, that it was something else. And then I seen the truck, and I knew that my baby had been killed.”
    Jason Stone: Danielle’s friend, also 17, had stopped by to wish her well. Until Aug. 24, 1996, he had no grasp of the peril that lurked just beneath the surface, 200 yards from his mobile home. He didn’t know there was a high-pressure pipeline carrying an explosive gas, much less that it had a history of corrosion problems dating almost to the minute it was put into the ground. Or that the electrical system intended to inhibit corrosion was not working properly. Or that Koch had told some families who lived near the pipeline — but not the Smalleys or the Stones — what to do in case of a leak. By the time Smalley found all of that out in the course of litigation, it was too late. His lawsuit against Koch asked for $100 million in damages, but a Kaufman County jury ordered the company to pay Smalley $296 million — nearly three times the amount he had sought.

  58. 58
    Corner Stone says:

    @ChrisNYC: IMO, what Rich was slightly pointing out was the fact that beatdowns were successful to some degree for those under attack by these powerful and rich forces.
    He’s wondering when or if the same kind of push is going to emerge from this administration, or if Obama really will be the actual Black Jimmy Carter.

  59. 59
    SenyorDave says:

    The problem I have with Obama is that he has become somewhat tone deaf. You can talk all the time about going for tyhe long haul (which is the correct thing to do, IMO), but he really doe appear to be somewhat out of touch. A gesture would be good occasionally – something useless that would show he’s serious, like saying all earmarks should be part of the normal budget process. That would have the added attraction of screwing the red and red-leaning states (and really screw Alaska , where real murricans live, the type who depend on fed gov’t handouts).

  60. 60
    jwb says:

    @ChrisNYC: It’s just fatalism about the disastrous election that is looming in November. That too shall pass. On the other hand, wingnuts only have to get it right once, and only for a limited period of time to do immense damage. That’s why you can’t take wingnut threats lightly.

  61. 61

    Additionally, the “Nothing can be done!” is a pervasive mindset among some here who feel that fighting for anything/pushing back is a useless endeavor and should be discarded as a strategy.
    Hence, the pushing back against Koch Bros would have led to less legislative accomplishment and therefore should not be done.
    Nothing can be done!

    Pure unadulterated firebagger bullshit. The topic at hand has to do specifically with dealing with the tea bag incipient racism and nativiism, and not about legislation or policy, because the tea baggers have none and could care less about either. It is also pure bullshit that Obama can personally get involved with leading a populist charge against the xenophobia people like Beck and his followers are injecting into the pol discourse. It would play precisely into the wingnuts hands, it is what they hope for to make this a race war, that they would win.

    And JWB has it exactly right, and Rich’s terrific column is marred only by the final suggestion it should be Obama leading the charge, when it is all the rest of his supporters that should be, which has always not included the Corner Stones, and seemingly now, the Cleeks of the world, who would rather keep the prog war on Obama going as a means to fight the wingnuts. Which is stupid, imo.

  62. 62
    kay says:

    @Pancake:

    How can the buyer beware in our unregulated libertarian paradise when the corroded pipe is underground?

    Maybe Koch Industries can make a fat tax-deductible contribution to set up a burn unit near their operations, and Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin can make pastoral visits.

    That’s a free market solution. A win/win.

  63. 63

    @Corner Stone: Yeah, what was that quote Michael Moore immortalized in Fahrenheit 911? “Some people call you the elite. I call you my base.” But Michael Moore is fat.

  64. 64
    The Commish says:

    Great column!

    Benen linked to another good takedown of Beckapalooza yesterday, a more visceral takedown to go with Rich’s hammering the manipulative scam aspect of the tea party: Leonard Pitts Jr.

  65. 65
    Corner Stone says:

    @General Stuck: Whether you choose to deal with reality or not, Obama and his administration/allies have a problem.
    The people you and flipyrwhig see as carping are not some one off nobody.
    There’s a real problem and it is not being addressed.

    If you’re too stupid to see that (you are), that does not make that issue go away.

  66. 66
    ChrisNYC says:

    @Corner Stone: Yeah, I see that and I hear it, to a certain extent. But, I don’t accept the premise. Is the choice really for Obama to make his presidency a war against the Koch brothers and Beck or to become the “Black Jimmy Carter”? How about instead he ignores them until they actually get in his way and gets his agenda done? We have HCR, troops coming out of Iraq, no war on Iran, financial reg. And one in five GOPers believe O is a Muslim and suspect he is not a natural born citizen. And Beck and Palin are raking in $$$. That’s a trade off that seems ok to me.

  67. 67

    The cartoon alone is awesome.

  68. 68
    Corner Stone says:

    @ChrisNYC: I for one do not buy into the BJC bullshit.
    But that does not mean that there is not a real set of problems to be addressed that are not being addressed.
    And when those issues are brought out into the daylight there is a substantial portion of people who start whingeing that with the present circumstances Nothing can be done!
    And others say, how bout we fight to change those circumstances?
    Contd. have to work for a little while.

  69. 69

    @Corner Stone: Well, I do my tiny part calling bullshit on whoever dumps it on this little blog, and Obama is doing his by getting bills passed in an environment with zero help or even participation by the wingnuts, and getting backstabbed by a handful of conservadems. And then there is the professional left spreading butthurt and tears every step of the way.

    And the DNC, and the DCCC are busy preparing to take this to the wingnuts and pin the tea tard racial/religious crapcrud to the GOP’s ass.

  70. 70
    ChrisNYC says:

    @Corner Stone: Actually, I would say he was a disaster for the interests he represented. I have NOTHING to prove this but I think GWBs presidency inflicted lasting trauma, partly his own making and partly the result of circumstances beyond him. Look at the casualties — the neocon reshape the world idea, the faith in the stock market, the faith that CEOs and bankers know what the hell they’re doing and are acting in good faith, the faith that if you play by the rules everything will work out, the idea that government is useless, the whole tie between wealth and virtue. I guess what I’m saying is that libs seem to give the right a fresh canvas each time — as though voters forget everything that’s gone before.

  71. 71

    @Corner Stone: Not at all. I think something can be done–but not by Obama for various reasons. He is already taking a stance against corporations and whatnot, if he were the one to start going on and on about class warfare, it would immediately get turned into an issue of race. In addition, he is the president of the country, not the leader of the DNC. The DNC can do shit about it if they so choose. Other Dems in power can do shit about it. We can do shit about it. Obama, on the other hand, can continue to be firm on what it is he wants to get done, be firm that we won’t cow to corporations, and then try to get shit done.

    @ChrisNYC: I agree with you. Not Obama’s job. I rather he do his actual job and stay firm in his convictions (which, by the way, means stepping it up in the civil rights area) and not have to play douse the teabagger fires.

    @General Stuck: I’m glad for the link you provided. They are the ones who need to get the message out.

  72. 72
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @General Stuck:

    And JWB has it exactly right, and Rich’s terrific column is marred only by the final suggestion it should be Obama leading the charge, when it is all the rest of his supporters that should be

    Exactly. It’s people like Frank Rich who should be leading the charge, and he does, but then he weakens the column by suggesting that Obama should be doing Rich’s job. And Rich should be expanding his column to talk about–by coprorate and personal name–the non-Fox media enablers of Fox, Murdoch, the Koch brothers et al.
    I like Rich, but I don’t think he ever goes far enough in exploring the punditocracy’s role in creating and poisoning the political environment, then he blames Democrats for not fighting that environment. It’s not just a post-2008 problem. I think that was the major problem with his book on the Bush-Iraq debacle. He paints the press as weak and gullible (I agree) but I don’t think he really acknowledges the active complicity with the right-wing noise machine. It’s been a few years since I read it, but that’s the impression I have.

  73. 73
    Bill Murray says:

    @General Stuck: so the only possibility is a populist demagogue campaign against the populist demagogues? I think you are trying to create a Bushian dichotomy to absolve the President of the obligation to lead. There is quite a bit of ground between nothing and Full Metal Sharpton, especially when his side is lacking in enthusiasm. He’s never going to get the tea partiers to his side, so unless you are enamored of pointless bipartisanism, there is considerable upside to doing this well, and not too much downside.

  74. 74
    jwb says:

    @ChrisNYC: And yet, here we are two years later, with at least a plausible chance that the Goopers might take over the House and an outside chance of getting the Senate as well. So I don’t doubt that GWB inflicted great trauma on the country and his cause, but it’s a funny sort of trauma that people seem to easily forget. I guess we’ll see in November how easily they forget.

  75. 75
    Sly says:

    @Chyron HR:

    Williams called Bloomberg a “Judenrat,” which has a specific meaning with respect to the Holocaust. A Judenrat was a council of Jews who, under the direction of the Third Reich, were charged with administrating the ghettos in the occupied territories (most notably Poland), supplying the Nazis with slave labor, and ultimately coordinating the mass deportation to the death camps. Some of these councils secretly resisted, but most did not, thinking that their collaboration would save lives.

    Williams also called him a “sonderkommando,” which was the designation the Nazis gave to Jewish prisoners who were forced to work in the death camps. This reference seems much less consistent with the notion that Bloomberg is directly assisting the murder of Jews for his own political benefit… but whatever.

    So I wouldn’t characterize his remarks as antisemitic. Just ugly, stupid, and obsessively xenophobic.

  76. 76
    burnspbesq says:

    Lest anyone forget, the President is the public face of his party.

    It’s past time for Obama to roll up his sleeves, get on the road, and campaign for Democrats. He can kick ass in ways that no one else can.

    I am not OK with him sitting back and creating a situation where he gets to run against a do-nothing Republican Congress in 2012. Shit needs to happen between now and then.

  77. 77
    frosty says:

    @Kate:

    Why don’t we have the press we deserve?

    If we ever had a decent press in this country, it was a brief interregnum.

    If you get a chance, read some newspaper histories. There was one on the LA Times that came out in the 70s, I think. Harrison Gray Otis, who started the paper, was a union-busting big-money right-wing SOB and everything in his paper followed that tack, right through the 50s, IIRC. Up until the Chandlers (2nd generation) decided they wanted to be part of respectable LA society and toned it down.

  78. 78

    @Bill Murray: I like how Obama leads, not perfect, but good enough. I think you are confusing substance with style, and nearly every speech Obama gives he talks about economic justice and the rich paying their fair share, basic litbtardism. You are not upset so much about Obama’s leadership as with the direction he leads in. That is fine, but don’t couch your complaints in terms of weak or non existent, because that is bullshit and actually is a Bushian dichotomy, or more precisely right wing framing of inadequate black man. He is not the dream dogma driven firebrand you want, but he is what I want, and roughly 90 percent of what liberals want around the country. A mainstream liberal progressive, that is low key, persistent, and competent. Albeit imperfect.

  79. 79
    ChrisNYC says:

    @jwb: I get you. I guess I just think there is risk in taking these “threats” too seriously as well. On the internets, the right totally defines what liberals talk about. And, as a result, I feel like the lib response to O’s presidency has been one “all is lost” fit after another. And all is not lost. These supposed movements have all fizzled out. It’s a mistake to give the other side so much credence. Maybe the barking from inside the house is a tape recording and not a Dobermann.

  80. 80
    Corner Stone says:

    @General Stuck:

    And then there is the professional left spreading butthurt and tears every step of the way.

    Yep. I’d suggest bashing the professional left and conservadems a little more as impediments to action.
    That’s going to win people to your cause.
    “They’re mean to me!”
    It’s a winning slogan.

  81. 81
    Corner Stone says:

    @asiangrrlMN: The point of the Rich article was historical action items that fought back against powerful, rich forces determined to destroy them. That was why he spent so much time profiling the Koch Bros.
    Obama doesn’t have to come out and slap his mighty pen!s on the dais to make his point. But absentia isn’t going to get it done either.

  82. 82

    @Corner Stone:

    That’s going to win people to your cause.

    I long ago wrote off the tiny number of left wing internet blowhards and pundits for winning them to any cause. They can suck eggs for all I care. Flies in the ointment, no more, no less.

  83. 83
    Corner Stone says:

    @ChrisNYC:

    I have NOTHING to prove this but I think GWBs presidency inflicted lasting trauma, partly his own making and partly the result of circumstances beyond him. Look at the casualties—the neocon reshape the world idea, the faith in the stock market, the faith that CEOs and bankers know what the hell they’re doing and are acting in good faith, the faith that if you play by the rules everything will work out, the idea that government is useless, the whole tie between wealth and virtue.

    Just look at your examples. Neocons still have two wars going and look to expand to Yemen if possible and keep their eyes peeled for Iran as the dreamshot.
    Stock market? C’mon man.
    CEO’s and banksters still make millions with impunity, and at the lowest tax rates in the industrialized world. The CEO of Potash (I think, may be wrong) stands to make like $450M if BHP Billoton buys his company. Yeah, here. Not a US CEO but still part of the uber class.
    GWB did what he was supposed to do. Look at any metric that displays wealth.

  84. 84
    ChrisNYC says:

    @jwb: Now I’m just being annoying but I appreciate the back and forth because it’s helped me to get clear on what I think. Yeah, the GOP looks like it is not as immediately doomed as it appeared in Nov. 2008. They have a 10-20% chance of taking the Senate and a plausible chance of taking the House. But, they don’t have anything more than that, which is totally getting lost. They are way lucky that Dems are so willing to agree with them that O is the problem. (Just an Obot swipe there. Not directed at you.)

  85. 85
    Corner Stone says:

    @General Stuck: How about the 40% of the unemployed people that are long term unemployed?
    Write them off too, amigo? The people that have been HAMP’d?
    Write them off?

  86. 86
    someguy says:

    @Chyron HR:

    P.S. You know who else thought rich Jews like George Soros were plotting to destroy his country?
    Reply

    Well, a lot of the neo-cons are wealthy, but Andrew Sullivan’s calling them out is another matter entirely.

  87. 87
    TuiMel says:

    @Cat Lady:
    I had this same thought. Boycotts of GP products, Stainmaster carpeting, etc. are not going to touch the bastards at the top (although I will keep the Kochs in mind when I make purchasing choices). Unlike Target, the Koch empire does not seem to be cultivating a cohesive corporate image that is vulnerable to a boycott for corporate actions in apparent opposition to image. I don’t see boycotts moving Dave and Charlie much; it will simply hurt people who work in Koch entities.

    Negative publicity and public scorn for them personally (as opposed to a corporate image) MIGHT do the trick. But, alas, I am not hopeful. When someone is as wealthy as the Koch brothers, he/she can basically take a “I could not care less what you think” attitude. And, I don’t think the NYC Ballet will be sending back David Koch’s checks. Nor do I see the Metropolitan Museum of Art or the Lincoln Center turning their backs on his largesse.

  88. 88
    Uloborus says:

    @Corner Stone:
    Alright. Let me explain. I never agree with you and Cleek, but it IS nice to have debates with people who are intellectually honest. It’s why I come here.

    My assertion is that Rich’s assertion that Obama needs to call out these men has been empirically answered. Obama’s strategy is one that seems counterintuitive to him and to you. But it works. It’s worked very, very well. He has accomplished incredible things against ridiculous opposition in a short time. Everything the Kochs have thrown at him has failed. We got HCR and Finreg. The Tea Party Movement is the only reason we can’t be absolutely sure the GOP will make massive gains in November. In any regular year it would be obvious, now it’s just up in the air. Obama’s speak softly campaign has worked, no matter how you think it shouldn’t work.

    It is just possible that it is not an either/or and he could also have targeted the Kochs or done any of the loud screaming he is frequently called on to do while still obtaining his other goals. Even assuming this is true, I feel it is a very cheap shot to be sarcastically disapproving of a strategy that has worked better than any other in living memory, just because it’s not the one you imagine will work better.

    This ‘you’ is a general ‘you’, and may or may not include you specifically, Corner. But that is my intent here. Not that we HAVE to pick, but that making an issue of whether or not he does it is to miss the forest for the trees. It is giving massively, even ungratefully short shrift to a very successful strategy because it’s not the one you thought would work.

  89. 89

    @Corner Stone: Building straw men will not make you anything but what you are amigo, a puma firebagging fool with a keyboard that can’t stand Obama and never could. Again, 85 to 90 percent of liberal dems approve of Obama’s presidenting, and now it is election time, so time to put away the anti O matches and fight the wingnuts yourselves before casting stones at anyone.

    Otherwise, you are part of the problem and not the solution.

  90. 90
    roshan says:

    The masses have never thirsted after truth. Whoever can supply them with illusions is easily their master; whoever attempts to destroy their illusions is always their victim.

    ~ Gustave LeBon

  91. 91
    jwb says:

    @ChrisNYC: When the teabaggers first started up, I thought the proper response of the left was to ignore them except in working to uncover and report the not incidental details of who was funding them and why. I did not think the dominant response of mocking them would be effective, though I did enjoy the mockery and feel it was well earned. But all the mockery did was keep the movement in the limelight and made sure we were talking about what their puppet masters wanted to talk about even if in ridicule. The cost: we haven’t been talking much about the issues we want to talk about. So we’ve mocked and ridiculed the movement to the point where we are today.

  92. 92
    Corner Stone says:

    @General Stuck: Again, I’m sorry that you are too stupid to understand what this election will be about.
    90% of the +/- 20% of eligible voters who self-ID as Liberal is great.
    What about the 15 million+ unemployed, and the 6M+ who have been unemployed for over a year?
    Please try and tell them about Lily Ledbetter, HCR, FinReg, etc.
    I’m sure they will enjoy being told they are strawmen.

  93. 93
    ChrisNYC says:

    @Corner Stone: The war in Afghanistan wasn’t a neocon war. Whether you want to recognize it or not, combat troops are out of Iraq. If you want to leave Afghanistan, you’ve got to say what’s going to happen there. Also, do we throw Pakistan away as well? What does India do then? They’re going to need some help if they get Afghanistan version 2 with nukes right there on that western border. On Iran, what’s the likelihood that the country will go along this time? I’d say, zero percent.

    On the stock market, what do you think the chances of the GOP pursuing that we move Social Security into the market now? You think that’ll go over well? I think it would be a failure, which is probably why they’re not pursuing it. I don’t get what the connection to GWB is of the CEO of a Canadian company making ungodly amounts in a deal with an Aussie co. It is truly a terrible thing and unprecedented in world history for the rich and powerful to become more rich and powerful and genius GWB pulled it off, I guess. Anyway, I don’t care if CEOs make a lot of money. It’s a much better world where CEOs and Bankers are looked at as greedy bastards (which is now) than as virtuous masters of the universe. Ultimately, I just think you and I are never going to see things the same way. I think GWB was a massive failure for the US and for his own constituency. You don’t.

  94. 94
    Corner Stone says:

    @ChrisNYC:

    Anyway, I don’t care if CEOs make a lot of money. It’s a much better world where CEOs and Bankers are looked at as greedy bastards (which is now) than as virtuous masters of the universe. Ultimately, I just think you and I never going to see things the same way. I think GWB was a massive failure for the US and for his own constituency. You don’t.

    One of your claims was that GWB failed because of public perception of “CEO’s”. And my response is that they couldn’t give two shits less. They’re rich biatch!
    GWB’s tax cuts gave some $3T out of govt coffers according to estimates. The Iraq/Afghan war another $3T +/-.
    Where do you think that money went?

    Perception of Wall Street, CEO’s, and everyone else who profited by GWB’s reign is irrelevant. They got the fat cash. The distribution of wealth at the upper most levels has not been this great since 1929.
    This can not be disputed.

  95. 95
    Corner Stone says:

    @ChrisNYC:

    I think GWB was a massive failure for the US and for his own constituency.

    My contention is that these two classes are very different things. I separate them but you seem to not.

  96. 96
    Corner Stone says:

    @ChrisNYC:

    Whether you want to recognize it or not, combat troops are out of Iraq.

    How much do you think it costs to keep 50,000 +/- troops and support staff in Iraq per year?
    It’s not insignificant.

  97. 97

    @Corner Stone:

    I’m sure they will enjoy being told they are strawmen.

    LOL, you are becoming a self parody dude. Of course I did not call them straw men. You did, by interjecting another unrelated topic into this thread and equating them with my comments about the pro left, in a thread about tea baggers and how Obama and us should respond to them.

    Dems and Obama have been and will continue to fight for those unemployed and getting them relief, but are being obstructed every step of the way by the wingnuts. August is almost over and congress will be back, and the campaign will start in earnest with the usual pol theater with dems calling votes and such on popular bills, to paint the wingers for what they are, obstructionists and responsible for cutting off the unemployed and a whole host of negligence.

    And Obama will be on the campaign trail about every day for those candidate who request his presence.

  98. 98
    jwb says:

    @ChrisNYC: Hey, I’m an Obot, myself. I just feel like we’re in a basketball game down 20 half way through the second half and I’m not seeing a strategy coming from the White House, DNC or, for that matter, the Professional Left on how we might close the score and make a game of it. (And the Professional Left seems to be playing a different game entirely.) Then again, I imagine that the Administration sees the midterms more as half-time (2012 being their ultimate goal), and they are just shooting to go into the locker room without being too far behind.

  99. 99
    Sly says:

    @Corner Stone:

    One of your claims was that GWB failed because of public perception of “CEO’s”. And my response is that they couldn’t give two shits less. They’re rich biatch!

    It ultimately depends on the industry, but it is generally true that CEOs (and other corporate officers) don’t care if they have a reputation for greed. In many sectors, in fact, having a reputation for greed is actually beneficial, like any sort of investment management. A greedy hedge fund manager will probably make his investors tons of money.

    CEOs do care, however, if they have a reputation for incompetence. Stupid managers lose money for their shareholders and investors. The larger the venture is, the more catastrophic the loss. Only part of the story of the past decade, when it comes to economic, is incalculable creed. The other part is complete stupidity. And it is much more the latter that has endangered the Corporate Citizen narrative.

  100. 100
    liberal says:

    @Wannabe Speechwriter:

    I guess what I will never get about these billionaires supporting the tea partiers is how selfish these people are.

    “All for ourselves and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind.” — Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations, Book 3, Ch 4

  101. 101
    ChrisNYC says:

    @Corner Stone: I agree with you that GWB was as successful a president as Hoover.

  102. 102
  103. 103
    liberal says:

    @ChrisNYC:

    Whether you want to recognize it or not, combat troops are out of Iraq.

    Actually, there are 50,000 troops in Iraq. Simply redefining them as trainers/advisers/whatever does not make them non-combat.

  104. 104
    Corner Stone says:

    @Sly:

    CEOs do care, however, if they have a reputation for incompetence. Stupid managers lose money for their shareholders and investors. The larger the venture is, the more catastrophic the loss.

    Haven’t seen this bother any of them so far. Carly Fiorina, anyone?
    How rich is she again? And the dude who just resigned due to sexual harassment and fraudulent expense reports to cover it?
    Yeah, he’s going to suffer.
    How about Robert Nardelli of Home Depot with his $210M parachute? Oh yeah, he left HD in disgrace and became CEO of Chrysler.
    I could go on.

  105. 105
    liberal says:

    @Corner Stone:

    I could go on.

    If you went on, you’d have to include the bankster CEOs.

  106. 106
    Corner Stone says:

    @General Stuck: The unemployed, or the banks holding those mortgages?
    Because if the admin was helping the unemployed they would do something about getting them a fucking job, not a payment to the bank for an interim.

  107. 107
    ChrisNYC says:

    @Corner Stone: You’re changing the metric, though. You incorrectly asserted that we had two neocon wars going, in response to my claim that GWBs admin destroyed the neocon dream of rebuilding the world in its image. It’s not our war in Iraq anymore. I stick with my claim that neocon foreign policy is dead in this country. Because PUBLIC PERCEPTION turned against it. You disagree. Fine. Time will tell.

  108. 108
    Corner Stone says:

    @liberal: Or the fact that bonusii at the bankster realms are at record levels.

  109. 109

    @Corner Stone: You are a bottomless pit of Obama hate. I wonder why.

  110. 110
    Corner Stone says:

    @ChrisNYC: This is silly. Of course we had and have two wars still going. And the focus is shifting to Yemen as we speak.
    If you want to think we have 50K troops there and it’s not our problem anymore then there isn’t much that can be said to you.

  111. 111
    Corner Stone says:

    @General Stuck: Because he’s black. Obviously.

  112. 112
    ChrisNYC says:

    @Corner Stone: Here’s why CEOs care about public perception, for incompetence or for bad faith greed — because it makes it harder to argue that govt is the enemy and that if we just deregulate everything, the masters of the universe will lift all boats. That idea, I say, is gone. The financial crisis killed it.

  113. 113

    @Corner Stone: If you say so. I honestly don’t know why unless the hilbot butthurt is that strong to persist all this time.

  114. 114
    Corner Stone says:

    @ChrisNYC: What world do you live in?

  115. 115
    ChrisNYC says:

    @Corner Stone: Ok, I give up because you’re changing the game. You said we had two neocon wars going on. We don’t. The operative word was neocon. I will wait for the American public to rally for war in Yemen. Maybe they have WMD?

  116. 116
    JAHILL10 says:

    @ChrisNYC: This! If there is one thing I know about the MSM these days is that they have their fingers firmly on the pulse of Washington insiders and meme makers, NOT the American people. I think all the gloom and doom is premature AND I think people need to give Obama more credit. How many times during the presidential campaign was he declared dead in the water and lo and behold he kept coming back? Remember how last August health care reform was dead in the water? How many times did I read that on the interwebs? ALL THE TIME! and guess what, now we have health care reform. Don’t let the “silly season” as they call it in Britain fool you. These idiots always over reach, they can’t help themselves.
    Which is not to say a shitty economy is not going to cost the Dems some seats, but I don’t see how they lose their majorities to these do nothing wingnuts.

  117. 117
    Corner Stone says:

    @General Stuck:

    If you say so. I honestly don’t know why unless the hilbot butthurt is that strong to persist all this time.

    Because no one could possibly strongly desire other decisions or outcomes unless they were racist, or a PUMA, or firebagger or whatever junk epithet you have to dish out today.

  118. 118
    JAHILL10 says:

    @Corner Stone: Hey, didn’t you bet me last month that there would still be 90,000 troops on the ground in Iraq at the end of August? Pay up with a written acknowledgment of reality, if you please.

  119. 119
    Brachiator says:

    @frosty:

    If you get a chance, read some newspaper histories. There was one on the LA Times that came out in the 70s, I think. Harrison Gray Otis, who started the paper, was a union-busting big-money right-wing SOB and everything in his paper followed that tack, right through the 50s, IIRC. Up until the Chandlers (2nd generation) decided they wanted to be part of respectable LA society and toned it down.

    Close, but no cigar. Harrison Gray Otis started the paper, which bumbled along as part of the nascent Los Angeles establishment in the 1880s. Harry Chandler married Otis’ daughter and led the Southern California plutocrats who made Los Angeles what it is. The “steal the water” scheme at the heart of the movie Chinatown is based on efforts of the Chandlers, the Mulhollands and others to make gazillions out of their property holdings in the San Fernando Valley in the 1930s. The Chandlers controlled LA city hall and in the 40s backed Richard Nixon’s early political ambitions. It wasn’t until the 1960s, under Norman Chandler and his son Otis, that the Times began to separate itself from narrow interests of the WASP ruling class (including right wing Chandler relatives who were members of the John Birch Society). A link to a recent public television documentary on the Chandlers can be found here … http://www.pbs.org/kcet/inventing-la/

    @ChrisNYC:

    These supposed movements have all fizzled out.

    No, it’s more that these movements were actively opposed and fought down, not that they were occasional fevers of bigotry that just had to run their course. And at their height, while resistance was building, people had their lives ruined.

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    Exactly. It’s people like Frank Rich who should be leading the charge, and he does, but then he weakens the column by suggesting that Obama should be doing Rich’s job. And Rich should be expanding his column to talk about—by coprorate and personal name—the non-Fox media enablers of Fox, Murdoch, the Koch brothers et al.

    Agreed. Not just Rich, but the editorial board of the NY Times and other publications, as well as the Democrats on the political end, need to oppose the Kochs and other oligarchs.

    As others have pointed out, this should not be Obama’s sole or primary responsibility.

  120. 120

    @Corner Stone:

    Because no one could possibly strongly desire other decisions or outcomes unless they were racist, or a PUMA, or firebagger or whatever junk epithet you have to dish out today.

    And you still think Hillary’s decisions would be more to your left wing liking. Hell, she may well have nuked Iran by now. And you have never had a single word of praise for anything Obama has done, nada, nothing , zip, from day one of the primary through the general in 08 to the present. I don’t get it, really. That is not responsible dissent, that is scorched earth opposition.

  121. 121
    ChrisNYC says:

    @liberal: It sure made a hell of a difference in Vietnam. There were about 2300 US deaths up until 1965 (deaths of people classed “military advisors”), when we sent combat troops in after the Gulf of Tonkin. You’ll recall that the total was about 58,000. Seems like a difference to me.

  122. 122
    Yutsano says:

    @JAHILL10:

    Which is not to say a shitty economy is not going to cost the Dems some seats, but I don’t see how they lose their majorities to these do nothing wingnuts.

    Couple this fact with the fact that Dems won seats in places where they hadn’t in decades due to the Obama enthusiasm wave, and yeah they’re gonna get set back some. But watch very carefully where exactly those losses take place. My guess is there won’t be a huge number of surprises in largely red or blue areas. Plus incumbency is still the strongest weapon a sitting Congressman yields. Hell it’s why I still have to deal with that moron (but he brings home bacon like nobody’s business) Doc Hastings.

  123. 123

    @JAHILL10:

    Pay up with a written acknowledgment of reality, if you please.

    You might as well try and squeeze blood from a turnip. And that is a full service analogy.

  124. 124
    Corner Stone says:

    @JAHILL10: I already did in a previous thread where you mentioned this. If you’d bother to check it.

  125. 125
    Brachiator says:

    @frosty:

    If you get a chance, read some newspaper histories. There was one on the LA Times that came out in the 70s, I think. Harrison Gray Otis, who started the paper, was a union-busting big-money right-wing SOB and everything in his paper followed that tack, right through the 50s, IIRC. Up until the Chandlers (2nd generation) decided they wanted to be part of respectable LA society and toned it down

    A first reply is stuck in moderation, but here are some key points that I wanted to bring up.

    Harrison Gray Otis started the paper, which bumbled along as part of the nascent Los Angeles establishment in the 1880s. Harry Chandler married Otis’ daughter and led the Southern California plutocrats who made Los Angeles what it is. The “steal the water” scheme at the heart of the movie Chinatown is based on efforts of the Chandlers, the Mulhollands and others to make gazillions out of their property holdings in the San Fernando Valley in the 1930s. The Chandlers controlled LA city hall and in the 40s backed Richard Nixon’s early political ambitions. It wasn’t until the 1960s, under Norman Chandler and his son Otis, that the Times began to separate itself from narrow interests of the WASP ruling class (including right wing Chandler relatives who were members of the John Birch Society). A link to a recent public television documentary on the Chandlers can be found here … http://www.pbs.org/kcet/inventing-la/

    Exactly. It’s people like Frank Rich who should be leading the charge, and he does, but then he weakens the column by suggesting that Obama should be doing Rich’s job. And Rich should be expanding his column to talk about—by coprorate and personal name—the non-Fox media enablers of Fox, Murdoch, the Koch brothers et al.

    Agreed. Not just Rich, but the editorial board of the NY Times and other publications and media outlets, as well as the Democrats on the political end, need to oppose the Kochs and other oligarchs. As others have pointed out, this should not be Obama’s sole or special responsibility.

  126. 126
    jwb says:

    @JAHILL10: I can think of lots of ways the Dems could lose. All you have to do is look at Nate Silvers’ projections and you will be very concerned (even if he has an economic incentive, as do all folks who are selling their reading of the polls, to make the election look somewhat more “interesting” than it actually is). I will agree on one point in particular: the die is not yet cast and it is completely unknown which lever people in the booth will pull as they are deciding between the sucky economic status quo and batshit crazy. And that to a large part depends on how crazy the sucky economic status quo has made the particular voter.

  127. 127
    Corner Stone says:

    @General Stuck:

    And you still think Hillary’s decisions would be more to your left wing liking. Hell, she may well have nuked Iran by now. And you have never had a single word of praise for anything Obama has done, nada, nothing , zip, from day one of the primary through the general in 08 to the present. I don’t get it, really. That is not responsible dissent, that is scorched earth opposition.

    You are the only clown who still mentions HRC as President. Please notice I never do.
    I deal with reality, not some fevered dreams I think may be the case.
    And I have mentioned several times when I agreed with the actions taken by this President and his admin.
    But it’s not my job to slavishly slob the knob like you do.
    I don’t make excuses for the most powerful man in the world.

  128. 128
    jwb says:

    @General Stuck: I know you are just pushing Corner Stone’s buttons, but I sincerely doubt that HRC would have nuked Iran if for no other reason than our military is in no position to deal with the consequences and she is a very smart lady and would recognize that. McCain, on the other hand, is another story.

  129. 129
    Corner Stone says:

    @jwb: He likes to wank on like this when he’s got nothing. You’ll notice who mentioned HRC. He always does, as it’s a fixation for him.

  130. 130
    JAHILL10 says:

    @jwb: I think this is where the complete lack of a plan (aside from “Impeach Obama!”) will hurt the Rethugs. Even Joe Sixpack can see that that ain’t going to get him a job. They got nothing to animate the voters but racist hatred — the 27 percent we keep hearing about). That’s not enough to get the independents. If Dems will get off their whining butts and GOTV, I predict tears running down J. Boehner’s orange face in November.

  131. 131

    @Corner Stone:

    You are the only clown who still mentions HRC as President. Please notice I never do.
    I deal with reality, not some fevered dreams I think may be the case.
    And I have mentioned several times when I agreed with the actions taken by this President and his admin.
    But it’s not my job to slavishly slob the knob like you do.
    I don’t make excuses for the most powerful man in the world.

    Cool, so yer one of those independent thinkers orbiting us dweebs with some hard nosed clear eyed critique of er “reality” in selfless service to the truth, justice, and murrican way. A Taskforce Ranger, Texas Division. Dude, you ARE reality,

  132. 132
    JAHILL10 says:

    @Corner Stone: As always a gracious loser. Thank you.

  133. 133
    jwb says:

    @JAHILL10: I hope so. But I vacillate on the point, and it really depends on how much hurt Joe Sixpack feels when he’s in the booth. If he’s feeling that anything has got to be better than the status quo, then he’ll vote batshit crazy even if batshit crazy tells him it will fuck him over six ways till Sunday. My gut tells me that things are not that bad, and that the Dems are actually going to do much better than predicted, but I haven’t trusted my gut since it betrayed me badly in 2004.

  134. 134
    Corner Stone says:

    @JAHILL10: I’m not sure what you want from me? I suggested a number and it was wrong. You brought it up and I acknowledged I was wrong.
    Is there some horsehair somewhere I should start braiding?

  135. 135
    Corner Stone says:

    @General Stuck: What i find funny is this:
    You slavishly stick your nose up John Cole’s buttcrack even though he voted for GWB TWICE.
    I supported a different D candidate in a D primary race 2 YEARS AGO, and haven’t mentioned HRC in any way as President, or a better President, or a better choice, or a better decision maker or executive or anything. At all.
    And yet, somehow that makes me the most destructive force in the D party. But you, who is not even a registered D, and didn’t really give a shit about politics til after 2000 is some kind of Party Arbiter of what is real in the D party.
    You’re the guy that’s going to make sure good things happen. Tell me, how many house parties did you host as fundraisers for D candidates in the 2006 and 2008 elections?
    Because I have a pretty good feel it’s 3 less than I did.

  136. 136
    Frank says:

    My favorite part:

    Do any of the Fox-watching protestors at the “ground zero mosque” know that Fox’s profits are flowing to a Obama-sympathizing Saudi billionaire in bed with Murdoch? As Jon Stewart summed it up, the protestors who want “to cut off funding to the ‘terror mosque’ ” are aiding that funding by watching Fox and enhancing bin Talal’s News Corp. holdings.

    So, according to FoxNews, bin Tala is a terrorist. So by their own logic, all FoxNews viewers are aiding and abetting a terrorist.

  137. 137
    Yutsano says:

    @Frank:

    So, according to FoxNews, bin Tala is a terrorist. So by their own logic, all FoxNews viewers are aiding and abetting a terrorist.

    Owned by a foreign-born (but white!) megalomaniac but it’s different because shut up that’s why!

  138. 138
    Corner Stone says:

    @JAHILL10: And I pay my bets. I donated $100 to IRC for a bet with You Don’t Say over Tebow and the NFL draft. So if there’s something more to this than just trash talk let me know.

  139. 139
    jinxtigr says:

    You cannot fight major structural economic problems with boycotts.

    Major structural problems are fought with government action, and/or with 11-dimensional chess against weak points.

    For instance, there’ve been times where McDonald’s pressured its suppliers to do things- for instance, improving treatment of poultry, says google, or McDonald’s refusing to buy genetically engineered potatoes- and this is because McDonald’s is vulnerable to pressure on the subject of being evil and vile. The same type of public pressure wouldn’t work on Halliburton.

    The talk about lack of shame being an ‘exploit’ in politics is just as relevant here. You want to find the corporations that are capable of feeling shame or fear, and exploit that to get them to apply pressure in turn. It gets pretty complicated.

  140. 140

    @Corner Stone: Not a party arbriter and just asked a simple question why the neverending and largely fact free Obama hatefail. And if you have made straight up praise for anything Obama has done, then I must have missed it. So give us one, a single link to back up your claim of sometimes supporting this president.

    And as for the 2000 date for getting involved in politics, that is relative to becoming a pol junkie, as I am now. I did pay attention to what was happening, and even then knew more than you do now, so that line is bunk.

    I supported a different D candidate in a D primary race 2 YEARS AGO, and haven’t mentioned HRC in any way as President, or a better President, or a better choice, or a better decision maker or executive or anything. At all.

    And my mentioning HC is only in your case of trying to make sense of the scorched earth commenting on Obama, that began in the primary, peaked on the day Obama officially became the nominee, and continued throughout the campaign to the present. I guess i will have to dredge up those old threads again, if you insist on rewriting this history.

    And I don’t believe you hosted a single house party for Obama, except in your nightmares. Does not wash CS.

    And as for your butthurt over Cole once being a republican and voting for Bush. Why on earth do you stay at this blog if that is your viewpoint? I am just trying to make some sense of the odd duck corner stone.

  141. 141
    Corner Stone says:

    @General Stuck: You’re just a sad little pathetic chump.
    Keep bringing up a D primary candidate from 2 years ago who is now the SecState, keep dredging up posts from 2 years ago during the primaries, keep calling people PUMA and Firebagger, etc.
    It’s got nothing to do with where this country is now, but you just keep fighting the good war of the last election!
    You can do it boy! You can make a difference!

  142. 142
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @General Stuck: @Corner Stone:
    Jeez, just get a room already.

  143. 143

    @Omnes Omnibus: LOL, I tried, but cornerstone wants me to respect him in the morning and that is a bwidge too far.

  144. 144

    @Corner Stone: Task Farce Ranger, Texass Division. REALITY is his codename, butthurt is his flame.

    edit – and we await the evidence of Mr. Reality supporting Obama even once.

  145. 145
    ruemara says:

    OK, Stuck, & Stone. As loathe as I am to get between two men in a pissing contest, do you really have to take this into ‘bot vs ‘bagger territory?

    Stone, you say that Obama needs to push back. Ok, he has, how often do you hear about it? I got http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-.....strickland and http://www.dailykos.com/story/.....8Photos%29

    that’s just for starters and HT to the inimitable and underappreciated blackwaterdog, who pulls together so much stuff that goes unreported. Did you want a Pres’dent Mountain Dew moment, compleat with pimp outfit and machine gun? Hell, I’d pay to see that, because I know 1/3 of Democrats and 98% of the Republicans would wet themselves, some would be oddly turned on. Ain’t gonna happen. You want another smackdown on cameras, like the meeting with Republicans where he demonstrated that their arrogance and belief of their own propaganda was a fatal flaw? Too late, Republicans do learn. They get optics. They can be outrageous, with no consequences.

    Stuck, Stone and others in this thread have a great point. We need better spokesmen, we need an active, engaged left of center bunch pushing back. I am tired of mealy mouthed, namby pamby, unprepared, Democratic party members showing up looking like fools next to a smooth, slick, talking point endowed, Republican reptile. I apologize to reptiles, some of you are nice. I see this way too often, from local Dems to Fuck the Press. Articles go unchallenged, news broadcasters parrot talking points, no one ever contacts the producer; at least, not from the left. Right wingers, they are on it. Vitriol, flames coming from their heads, not a clue or a fact in sight, but they are there. You want to see DFHs show up and have an opinion? Be almost to the left. Do something mildly pro-business or not quite as eco-friendly. Propose cutting down 2 rotting trees in a business district, while spending money to buy & preserve farmland. You will see tons of people showing up for those trees, only a few to support land preservation. Meetings on taxation, employee cuts? It’s less than a 10th. If it’s really that important, where are they? I’m not saying the media is completely blameless, but where are all those informed people who want “leadership on democratic issues”? Sometimes, you have to provide it for yourself.

    It can’t just be “Obama must push back”, it has to be “WE must push back”. It can’t be just up to 1 guy or even a handful of guys to talk some sense back into the nation. And it can’t just be that very left and sorta left are busy sniping at each other. Your opponents will destroy you and yours. It’s that simple. Co-operate with each other with the understanding that you have way too much common ground or submit to the teatardian overlords that will be wrecking what’s left of America, to the glory of the Koch bros.

    Ok, thank you for letting me rant, sorry to interrupt your pissing.

  146. 146

    @ruemara:

    Ok, thank you for letting me rant, sorry to interrupt your pissing.

    Oh, I just like pulling his chain now and again for old times sake and to focus his mind, such as it is.

  147. 147
    CF Oxtrot says:

    I love people jumping in to attack pancake for pancake’s pointing out the incredible hypocrisy and elitism of liberals and progressives, who love a good bossy millionaire or billionaire as long as he plays on their team.

    George Soros profits off the misery of others. The fact that he funds Donkey projects and candidates doesn’t absolve him of this heinous greed he works every living moment of his life. But to a pwoggie or lib-wool, Soros is 100% cool because he plays for The Donkle.

    What an incredible irony showing why America is so screwed up… it’s all about the partisanship, not about levelling playing fields, equalizing opportunities, or preventing inhumane financial practices.

    Secretly, every liberal and progressive I know just wants to be part of the Club. In this, “Club” means well-educated, rich, politically correct, with a nice house and a swanky new SUV, “crossover vehicle”, or Euro sports sedan. And a kid or two in a high-dollar Montessori schooling system. And an Airedale dog named Jimmy Carter.

  148. 148
    SciVo says:

    @CF Oxtrot: Your slip is showing. “Secretly” means that it’s really just you being self-credulous of your imagination.

    Also, too: Bossy? 100% cool? No one talks about Soros but conservatives.

  149. 149
    Corner Stone says:

    @SciVo:

    Also, too: Bossy? 100% cool?

    Bossy…hmmm…Bossy

Comments are closed.