Stoned or Just Plain Stupid?

Reacting to the choices of Sperling and Daley, this comment is one of the all-time greatest here at Balloon Juice:

For 2011, I have resolved to believe my lying eyes. It makes trying to figure out the Obama presidency so much easier. Then there is that saying about first impressions: again when it comes to Obama’s picks go with the first impression.

These two picks tell me that if Obama loses in 2012, he has set himself up nicely to waltz right over to a Wall Street job when his gig in the West Wing is up.

Because a former Senator and President probably didn’t have enough of a resume to get in with Wall Street. But now that he has picked Daley and Sperling, he’s a fucking lock. Not to mention the well known transition from President to stock broker that everyone in politics covets.

This is why hippies are occasionally punched on some blogs. Because it is so easy. And you deserve it.

128 replies
  1. 1
    MoonBatista says:

    Too easy. And yet, they often wonder why.

  2. 2
    de stijl says:

    Obama does have exceptional Excel skills.

    Not great with Access, but not too shabby.

  3. 3
    burnspbesq says:

    Obama to Goldman? Naah.

    He’ll be President Gillibrand’s first Supreme Court nomination.

  4. 4
    General Stuck says:

    Primo prog nut pick in yer own back yard. You can find variations of this genius on any number of liberal blogs these days. It is golden that anyone would think that a former editor of the Harvard Law Review that used that pinnacle to go into community organizing and dodge rats and roaches for his trouble, would be primarily interested in working on Wall Street. Not to mention the Senator to Presnit route. But there you have it folks. Just good libs with legitimate complaints.

  5. 5
    de stijl says:

    @burnspbesq:

    Why would President Gillibrand shit all her over base like that. I was promised ponies, dammit! All you “pragmatic” Gillbots can kiss my Progressive ass!

  6. 6
    bobbyk says:

    Yeah, I like the writing on this blog and I know you don’t give a fuck if I ever read it again-but you know what-go fuck yourself. I’ve been voting democratic all my life-I’ve never voted for a republican-ever. And I need to read this constant bull shit about how “hippies”(I guess I must be one you know since I’ve been voting for these dems all my life) are assholes for bitching about the very real policy failings of this administration? I’ve given well over $1000 to various different dems over the past 6 years but no more-fuck them. I will however open the check book for those dems that demonstrate real liberal values. Obama ain’t gettin any of it.

    I’m wondering when Obama signs the legislation to set up the destruction of SS, if you’ll find the gumption to criticize that move?

  7. 7
    agrippa says:

    Not all liberals are above average

  8. 8
    Chris Wolf says:

    Amazing.
    Like Mr. Obama has to worry about how he is going to provide for his family after he leaves office.

  9. 9
    Dee Loralei says:

    Whatever happened to the 2010 comment of the year? Wasn’t that supposed to be a new year thing after 2008 or 2009? The “I can see the moon from my house, so I should be an astronaut?” ( My badly remembered paraphrase.)

  10. 10
    John Cole says:

    @bobbyk: Lighten up, Francis.

    If you can’t see the in-your-face humor of that comment, you need to spend less time commenting on blogs and more time unwedging the stick up your ass.

  11. 11
    Left Coast Tom says:

    This is why hippies are occasionally punched on some blogs. Because it is so easy. And you deserve it.

    You forgot “and they’re not actually hippies”. Let’s not give in to attempts to redefine reality, even those professed to come from the left.

  12. 12
    Redshirt says:

    I’m an old school Maine Republican Hippie – I punch myself often.

  13. 13
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @bobbyk:

    I’ve been voting democratic all my life-I’ve never voted for a republican-ever.

    You know what? That is true of me as well, yet I can see just how out of touch with reality the comment Cole posted is. He wasn’t attacking someone for criticizing Obama; he was attacking someone for mindlessly criticizing Obama. That kind of crap is no different that the Islamo-Kenyan crap coming from the right.

    If you have criticisms, good. You have every right to have them. You have every right to express them, but, my god, if they are as mindless as the one quoted above, you should be prepared to have people criticize your cognitive capacity.

  14. 14
    Anya says:

    This is why hippies are occasionally punched on some blogs. Because it is so easy. And you deserve it.

    John, I know real hippies, my parents are hippies. Firebaggers, are no hippies.

  15. 15
    mk3872 says:

    I’m pretty sure that comment was snark

  16. 16
    burnspbesq says:

    @de stijl:

    You win the weekend. Well done.

  17. 17
    Bob Loblaw says:

    Oh, he’ll work in the financial sector post-Presidency, it just won’t be for an existing firm. Or on Wall Street. That would be retarded.

    On the other hand, the Obama Global Foundation will be headquartered in Chicago, and it will have an endowment of over a billion dollars within the first five years. And then he and Clinton will pettily snipe at each other in the press for the next two decades over who the more successful humanitarian really is, mostly Clinton’s doing to make up for his lesser presidency. Then Clinton will die, and Obama will probably go win a second Nobel peace prize for whatever, and he might even earn that one so that would be fun.

    I don’t know what this Pat guy is smoking…

  18. 18
    ronin122 says:

    That’s definitely a doozy of a moron’s thought there. I’d pick at it, but you did the job just fine.

  19. 19
    LosGatosCA says:

    It’s just plain funny. Everyone knows Obama has already been ______listed by Wall Street.

    It’ part of the reversal of the reverse discrimination thingee.

  20. 20
    phantomist says:

    Harold Ford is not laughing.

  21. 21
    Michael says:

    I’ve given well over $1000 to various different dems over the past 6 years

    Whooptie fucking shit. Nickels and dimes…

  22. 22
    Alex S. says:

    Stoned or Just Plain Stupid?

    Obviously stoned, as a hippie. The weed factor is getting underestimated on the internet in general.

  23. 23
    de stijl says:

    @burnspbesq:

    Everyone knows that Gillibrand will choose Greenwald for the SCOTUS. VP Grayson is also totally on board with that choice.

  24. 24
    WarMunchkin says:

    semi O/T – Why would anyone ever want to work for Wall Street?

  25. 25
    RareSanity says:

    @bobbyk:

    I’ve given well over $1000 to various different dems over the past 6 years but no more-fuck them.

    That’ll show ’em!

    (whispers to self)
    “Lord, grant me the serenity…”

  26. 26
    Jeffro says:

    Didn’t Hillary’s financial disclosures (back in the 2008 primaries) show that Bill had cleared $100M in 5-6 years or so, just from speaking fees and what not?

    (Not to mention having Bush Sr.’s ear/company/[rolodex] on a monthly basis)

    I can just see Obama now, cold-calling 50-somethings about their retirement plans, or lack thereof…

  27. 27
    General Stuck says:

    I adore grand gestures in politics. It is an art form, especially the sweeping exits. Been known to try my hand at that a time or two. I’d give bobbyk an 7.5 for style, but he needs to work on the dismount some.

  28. 28
    moe99 says:

    Look I remember being stoned back in the dark ages about 40 years ago when I was a college student. When I was stoned, I just didn’t care. Wish I wasn’t so damn law abiding these days. It would be nice to nod off in THC haze again. But then I’d be setting a bad example for the children!!

  29. 29
    RareSanity says:

    @WarMunchkin:

    Why would anyone ever want to work for Wall Street?

    I’m gonna take a wild guess and say…piles of cash.

    That, and if you are surrounded by douchebags, you can convince yourself that you’re normal, and not one yourself.

  30. 30
    Gwangung says:

    John, I know real hippies, my parents are hippies. Firebaggers, are no hippies.

    there were fools and morons in every group.

    Back in my day, though, they made an effort to learn from the past.

    Sigh.

  31. 31
    de stijl says:

    @moe99:

    I can just see Obama now, cold-calling 50-somethings about their retirement plans, or lack thereof…

    These are the new leads. These are the Glengarry leads. And to you they’re gold, and you don’t get them. Why? Because to give them to you would be throwing them away. They’re for closers.

  32. 32
    Gus says:

    Ah, the time honored practice of nut picking. No better way to make your point.

  33. 33
    Hal says:

    Meh. Sperling just doesn’t strike me as all that horrible. Look, if the name of Obama’s chief Econ adviser isn’t Doctor Paul Krugman, then some people will always be pissed.

  34. 34
    The Dangerman says:

    I’m guessing that Obama “retires” to a position where he can watch his daughters progress to becoming fine Doctors or Lawyers (given their genes, I want futures on their, um, futures). When it’s empty nest time, it’s back to Academia for him.

  35. 35
    ruemara says:

    I said my bit about the Daley pick in the open thread and I don’t care for the firebagger punchieness.but, that comment should be snark. if it isn’t, sweet crispy critter jebus on a hickory smoked cross, that’s a dumb comment.

  36. 36
    Dr. Squid says:

    @bobbyk: Great, more rank-pulling for Greatest Democrat Evah designation.

  37. 37
    John W. says:

    @Bob Loblaw:

    No way Bill’s heart holds out that long. Although given the Cheney precedent, who knows. Maybe Futurama is more right than we could ever know.

    Anyways, on topic, the likelihood of ever getting a POTUS appealing to the base in the first term is just highly unlikely (wants to ensure re-election, and that needs the middle). And getting a Congress in the second term the same side as the POTUS is unlikely (people tire of that party).

    So basically, get ready for a lifetime of failed expectations, and I’m just talking about basic structural issues, not the general moral turpitude of politicians.

  38. 38
    Ruckus says:

    @John Cole:
    I see that you get tired of the circle jerks as well.
    more time unwedging the stick up your ass
    Nicely turned phrase.

  39. 39
    Parallel 5ths (Jewish Steel) says:

    This is why hippies are occasionally punched on some blogs. Because it is so easy. And you deserve it.

    If only there were some succinct way of conveying that I am, in fact, laughing out loud.

    Oh well, I am.

  40. 40
    Redshirt says:

    Seriously: Obama is a Great Man, and he’ll be doing awesome things after he’s President. Black Jimmy Carter and all.

  41. 41
    Left Coast Tom says:

    @Hal:

    Sperling just doesn’t strike me as all that horrible.

    Truthfully, I’d rather Obama take economic adivce from economists rather than attorneys, and I’d rather he restrict his choice of economic advisors to those who foresaw the housing bubble before it crashed, not those who negotiated for repeal of Glass-Stegall, on the grounds that all others have failed to produce “reproducible results”, and therefore can’t claim to be part of any “science”, regardless of how “dismal” it should be.

    Damnit, if “economists” claim to have a “science”, let them be accountable for the reproducibility (or desirability) of their “results”.

  42. 42
    WarMunchkin says:

    @RareSanity: I guess that’s my problem. For some strange reason, we’ve decided that inventing ways to poof money out of thin air through loopholes and high frequency trading software adds more in goods and services to the economy than industrial entrepreneurship.

    I went to a top business school for a year before I transferred out because it was the only college I got in. The Goldman Sachs culture there was pervasive – people view joining that company as if it were a great act of public service, call people who used to work there “alumni” and talk about corporate social responsibility – while on the other hand they are wrecking the economy in ways they don’t or can’t imagine.

    To me the saddest thing is that people with high IQs or good resumes are attracted to Wall Street in such overwhelming numbers. It’s tempting to just think that people will be assholes if given the choice, but I don’t know what to do to move the “talent” elsewhere.

  43. 43
    DougJarvus Green-Ellis says:

    @ruemara:

    I don’t think it’s snark, it doesn’t have that sound to it.

  44. 44
    AAA Bonds says:

    Great straw man, dude, aces.

  45. 45
    AAA Bonds says:

    @General Stuck:

    I adore grand gestures in politics. It is an art form, especially the sweeping exits. Been known to try my hand at that a time or two. I’d give bobbyk an 7.5 for style, but he needs to work on the dismount some.

    I hope you meant this to be as funny as it reads.

  46. 46
    Davis X. Machina says:

    The missing detail, the one that gives the full-throated version of this narrative I found in Steve Benen’s comments its charm, is the necessity of being a one-termer and of tanking the 2012 election, because by the end of a second term, at least one of the girls will be in college, and hey, you know, tuition bills… and by then the payoffs from the health insurance companies will all be too late.

    Because little things like, oh, one’s place in history, weighed in the balance with filling out the old FAFSA….

  47. 47
    Restrung says:

    Daphne: I can’t take all this fighting!
    Jay: Yo, you guys need to turn those frowns upside down. And I got just the thing for that.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6cPSKLRR2A

  48. 48
    freelancer says:

    @Gus:

    Speaking of “dur” comments, it’s not nutpicking, when you’re looking at your own blog. That you run. And write for. And participate in.

  49. 49
    Mark S. says:

    @de stijl:

    That’s why Obama’s gotta win re-election. Coffee’s for two-termers.

  50. 50
    Bob Loblaw says:

    @AAA Bonds:

    That’s not a straw man. Some fool did actually write that.

    It is, however, ad hominem.

  51. 51
    de stijl says:

    @WarMunchkin:

    semi O/T – Why would anyone ever want to work for Wall Street?

    Here’s my semi-snarky, semi-real response: When they watched American Psycho for the first time they got boners. A lot of shame, but they also liked it at the same time.

  52. 52
    General Stuck says:

    @freelancer:

    it’s not nutpicking, when you’re looking at your own blog

    After thinking about it some, I think you are right in both a technical sense and one of internet traditions.

  53. 53
    RareSanity says:

    @WarMunchkin:

    I went to a top business school for a year before I transferred out because it was the only college I got in. The Goldman Sachs culture there was pervasive – people view joining that company as if it were a great act of public service, call people who used to work there “alumni” and talk about corporate social responsibility – while on the other hand they are wrecking the economy in ways they don’t or can’t imagine.

    You’re preaching to the choir. I’m an engineer, which means that I can actually make stuff, and I get shat upon by people like that daily.

    Who knows, maybe in our lifetime, the worm will turn. Not bloody likely, but there’s always dreamin’, I’m a rock star in my dreams.

  54. 54
    Dave says:

    Haha, whatever, the White House is a branch of Chase bank.

  55. 55
    de stijl says:

    @Mark S.:

    I thought second term was a set of steak knives.

  56. 56
    JWL says:

    Cole calculates in numbers: republicans plus pussycat democrats= fuck you I’m right.

    Lest anyone forget: Eight years ago, he cheered on the Big Lie war.

    But, hey, it’s his blog. If you don’t like it, go out and create one of your own.

  57. 57
    hhex65 says:

    The problem is: every time I go to punch a conservative a hippie jumps in the way.

    Choreography is the problem, in other words.

  58. 58
    Anya says:

    I am more upset/disappointed about President Obama granting an interview to Bill O’Reilly. I think it’s a waist of time. It’s not like he’ll change the minds of the angry old geezers who watch O’Reilly.

  59. 59
    SFAW says:

    Stoned or Just Plain Stupid?

    Maybe I missed the explanation but: are they mutually exclusive?

  60. 60
    kdaug says:

    @Bob Loblaw: Yeah, that’s more along the lines of my thinking.

  61. 61
    the farmer says:

    @John Cole: Because a former Senator and President probably didn’t have enough of a resume to get in with Wall Street.

    And there is, also too, this:

    Business International Corporation

    In the late summer of 1983, future United States President Barack Obama interviewed for a job at Business International Corporation. He worked there for “little more than year.”[3] As a research associate in its financial services division, he edited Financing Foreign Operations, a global reference service, and wrote for Business International Money Report, a weekly financial newsletter.[4] His responsibilities included “interviewing business experts, researching trends in foreign exchange, following market developments. . . . He wrote about currency swaps and leverage leases. . . . Obama also helped write financial reports on Mexico and Brazil.[5]

    [—]

    BI eventually became the premier information source on global business with research, advisory functions, conferences and government roundtables in addition to its publications. It was headquartered in New York City, with major offices in Geneva, London, Vienna, Hong Kong and Tokyo, and a network of correspondents across the globe.

    In his book The Strawberry Statement, former student protester James Kunen reports a description of Business International by an unnamed Students for a Democratic Society conference attendee in 1968. The attendee, referred to by Kunen as ‘the kid’, claimed the company offered to finance SDS demonstrations in Chicago. Business International is described as ‘the left wing of the ruling class’ and as desiring a Gene McCarthy presidency.[1]

    Brogue shoe hippies.

    *

  62. 62
    the farmer says:

    Edit @#60: That last paragraph (In his book … a Gene McCarthy presidency.) should have been in blockquotes too.

    *

  63. 63
    freelancer says:

    @General Stuck:

    I think you are right in both a technical sense and one of internet traditions.

    Funny, I wasn’t aware of that at all.

  64. 64
    de stijl says:

    @the farmer:

    Brogue shoe hippies.

    Imagine a brogue Birkenstock stomping on a human face – forever.

  65. 65
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @freelancer: I, of course, was.

  66. 66
    Citizen Alan says:

    Speaking as someone whose made a lot of harsh comments about Obama in the last year or so, whoever posted that was an abject moron. Whatever one’s feelings about Daley and Sperling, the idea that he picked them because he wanted to get a job on Wall Street post-presidency is just … stupid.

    Whatever he achieves in his time in office, Barack Obama will never want for money again. Reagan, Bush I, and Clinton all proved that an ex-presidency can become richer than Croesus by giving thirty minute speeches, and Obama’s post-presidential memoirs will be an international best-seller.

  67. 67
    J. Michael Neal says:

    @WarMunchkin:

    Why would anyone ever want to work for Wall Street?

    My experience is that most people are motivated by exactly what RareSanity mention: big piles of cash. I was just about the only person in the room doing it because I’d fallen in love with it. I took a two semester sequence on the math of options and derivatives, and I was fascinated by it. I liked playing with the equations. So I took a job that was offered making markets in options.

    It turned out that I also loved trading. It was a continuously interesting set of puzzles. It also comes with the benefit of knowing when you win or lose. It has the thrill of high stakes gambling. And it was interesting.

    Since I was one of the few there that did it because I loved it, of course I was the one that it drove crazy, literally. Did I create any social value at that job? Probably not. I agree that we need to change things so that there is a lot less money in finance.

    But, man, I loved that job.

  68. 68
    Uloborus says:

    @AAA Bonds:
    Not only is that comment a quote – and thus not a straw man by definition – it’s not exactly unique. I’ve seen a number of other claims that this selection somehow means Obama sucks up to business, which this is obviously only a variation on.

    I’ll do you the courtesy of assuming that you made the accusation because YOU wouldn’t make such a stupid argument. But it’s not a straw man. It’s an actual sarcastic jab at real arguments being made by paranoid conspiracy theorist morons. Nobody said you were one of them.

  69. 69
    WarMunchkin says:

    @RareSanity: I became a physicist myself. I’m not really sure how to move the bar other than to aggressively change the educational climate in which the country/world operates.

    @de stijl: The thing is, sociopathy isn’t so obvious. Their recruiting practices heavily emphasize the idea of using finance for social engineering or reform or solving climate change or things like that, in addition to a layer of the Enron hypermasculinized parts. These guys believe they’re doing God’s work, and many of the elite people in government and policy know them and all agree they’re good people. The issue is how to break the monopoly of talent because in a sane world, we wouldn’t even be discussing the prospect of a political figure going to Wall Street because he or she had the resume for it.

  70. 70
    kdaug says:

    @WarMunchkin:

    Their recruiting practices heavily emphasize the idea of using finance for social engineering or reform or solving climate change or things like that

    None of which make anything. I get what you’re saying, but which is more effective in “solving”” climate change – playing with derivatives, or designing a better wind turbine? Which is better for the third world – dealing CDOs, or developing new drugs?

    Methinks the packaging is a means of rationalizing what is, at root, greed.

  71. 71
    Mike in NC says:

    I’ve been voting democratic all my life-I’ve never voted for a republican-ever.

    I confess to voting against an incredibly corrupt Democrat congressman from Rhode Island when I lived there about 20 years ago. Forget the name, but anyway, the Republican was a lawyer, a Naval Academy graduate, and a GOPer. Normally that would be for me three strikes against him, but voters wanted to give him a chance. Fucker served one term — due to corruption charges!

  72. 72
    WarMunchkin says:

    @kdaug: I think I was agreeing with you.

  73. 73
    eemom says:

    doggone it. *I* was the one who FIRST recognized, and pointed out, that the stupidity of that comment was exceptional and far exceeded the mundane stupidity of the ordinary blog comment.

    But does a girl ever get a h/t around here?? NO.

  74. 74
    RareSanity says:

    @WarMunchkin:

    What’s funny is how Wall Street types always pull the, “We efficiently allocate capital” line.

    They rival doctors for inflated, God complex.

  75. 75
    General Stuck says:

    @eemom:

    Well, Cole did recognize your nomination for it being stupid in the original thread. i will give you a h/t though, fwiw. Which is not much on the open blog market.

  76. 76
    kdaug says:

    @WarMunchkin: You were, and I didn’t mean to imply otherwise.

    And I’ve no idea how to redirect the sociopaths, but it seems that there are a good portion of the “talented&gifted”(tm) to whom the argument could be made as I presented it – fucking make something.

  77. 77
    kdaug says:

    @RareSanity:

    “We efficiently allocate capital”

    “…and as proof, look at the size of my bonus this year”.

  78. 78
    Parallel 5ths (Jewish Steel) says:

    @eemom:

    Agreed. I see this post as essentially yours. I say John mails it to you and you can hang it behind your desk.

  79. 79
    eemom says:

    @Parallel 5ths (Jewish Steel):

    sure, go ahead and snark. Other visionaries before me have been mocked.

  80. 80
    JGabriel says:

    kdaug:

    Which is better for the third world – dealing CDOs, or developing new drugs?

    Right now, I suspect neither. From what I understand, it looks like cheaply producing and distributing existing medications for common third world diseases would be better than either of those options.

    .

  81. 81
    Parallel 5ths (Jewish Steel) says:

    @eemom:

    I’m more snarking the medium here. I really do think the h/t goes to you.

  82. 82
    dogwood says:

    The Sperling/Daley outrage is just more “sound and fury” from those with no political sense. First of all, Sperling is definitely an improvement over Summers. And since when did a Chief of Staff appointment become the catalyst for outrage? While I’m sure we’re headed for 2 years of whining that Obama isn’t passing a new stimulus, or an aggressive energy bill, the fact is no significant legislation is going to get passed in the next two years. The Republicans are playing a dangerous game right now. They need to figure out how to tank the economy further in order to beat Obama without leaving a mess that they won’t be able to clean up. That isn’t going to be easy. Obama’s political goal is to live to fight another day. Like it or not, Wall Street is sitting on a lot of money right now, and if bringing Daley into the WH has any effect on loosening up that cash that’s ok with me. Banks and big corporations don’t just have money to lend and invest right now, they’ve got money to buy the next election thanks to Citizen United. The White House is going to have to make the case that the tea party isn’t a good investment. Or maybe the tea party congress will make the case for him. I wish this weren’t the case, but alas, I’m a realist.

  83. 83
    the farmer says:

    #70 @kdaug: None of which make anything. I get what you’re saying, but which is more effective in “solving”” climate change – playing with derivatives, or designing a better wind turbine?

    Probably (in a manner of speaking) a little of both. Since designing better wind turbines or building wind farms means knowing how to raise a lot of financing for such projects. Just ask former investment banker Jerome a Paris (DKos link):

    Another reason for my silence has been that I’ve been inordinately (and thankfully) busy at work. As you may remember, I created my own company earlier this year, after 15 years in the banking world, to help developers find money to build their renewable energy projects, in particular in the offshore wind sector where I’ve been involved in the past 5 years.

    Well, I’m pleased to announce that the first transaction to happen with my new company’s help was signed last week last week.

    […]

    This may sound like advertising (and of course it is), but it also means that the next deals will be that much easier, and the industry will be able to go ahead with its plans to do industrial-scale wind farms (ie $2 billion, 500MW power plants) in the knowledge that it is going to be increasingly easy to find financing at decent conditions for the necessary investments.

    *

  84. 84
    Little Boots says:

    farmer, that all sounds awesome. Now as RuPaul says, Don’t fuck it up.

  85. 85
    the farmer says:

    #83 above – edit: Again, everything following “Jerome a Paris (DKos link):” should have been in blockquotes. sigh.

    *

  86. 86
    Little Boots says:

    In other words we both fucked it up.

  87. 87
    amk says:

    These nutjobs were never hippies. They are the racist bigots of blogging world hiding behind ‘progressive’ skirts. They never had Obama’s back and never will. I love it the Prez doesn’t give a nickel’s worth of attention to these nutsos.

    And yes, he and his family will do great post-presidency much to the chagrin of these racist MF’ers from the so called left.

  88. 88
    mak says:

    Damn, a little exasperated off-hand snark gives birth to an entire thread of hippie punching? Somebody needs a nap.

  89. 89
    the farmer says:

    #86 Little Boots

    Well I sure did. For some reason i fucked up the blockquote tags. And i can’t find a preview or an edit button anywhere anymore so…

    In any case, the wind farm financing project belongs to Jerome a Paris (see link above).

    *

  90. 90
    Little Boots says:

    Actually, napless, somewhat cranky John is sort of amusing. And it really was a delightfully mockable comment.

  91. 91
    Andy K says:

    @JWL:

    Lest anyone forget: Eight years ago, he cheered on the Big Lie war.

    Well how could we, since someone brings it up every two or three days.

    Funny thing about people with brains: Sometimes they change. Hell, I’ll bet you’re capable of it, too. I expect that even you might grant Cole a pardon for the crimes of his misguided youth…when President Kucinich is inaugurated.

  92. 92
    Uncle Clarence Thomas says:

    .
    .
    @John Cole:
    Your comment makes a lot of sense when you consider that there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that Wall Street has captured the government of the United States, or put key personnel in positions of influence, and is regularly stymied by President Obama and his Administration’s fierce financial regulation.
    .
    .

  93. 93
    NobodySpecial says:

    See, I don’t mind this, because that comment is worthy of mocking. But I’d like some equal time.

    They are the racist bigots of blogging world hiding behind ‘progressive’ skirts.

    Yes, because every single person who doesn’t like the choice of Bill Daley for whatever reason is really a Klanner in tie-dye.
    EVERY. SINGLE. ONE.

    See, the dumb works both ways.

  94. 94
    lol says:

    Lest anyone forget, four years ago, firebaggers were cheering on a Senator who, in fact, co-sponsored the resolution to invade Iraq.

    I’m not sure if this pre-dates or post-dates John’s Come-To-Obama moment, but it’s certainly amusing that as he was getting more liberal, the Professional Left was sucking John Edwards’ cock like no tomorrow.

  95. 95
    NobodySpecial says:

    @lol: I know it’s hard to remember back then, but he WAS one of the first Dems to publicly go back on his Iraq vote…and if we can forgive Cole two votes, we can forgive Edwards one.

    Also, he had that whole ‘Two Americas’ speech going, which was very exciting, as you get a lot of Dem-leaning voters who still believe at heart that both the Dems and the Reps are products of corporate capture. So it’s no surprise that New Deal type liberals would like that.

  96. 96
    Pat says:

    I think thou does protest too much! After all I’m only one opinion. However, I will continue to read your blog, and believe my lying eyes.

  97. 97
    Just Some Fuckhead says:

    Really, an anonymous commenter named Pat who know one even fucking knows is your rationale for ensuring there is always an internecine war on the left? You are one stupid motherfucker, John. I mean that. You are a fucking clown.

  98. 98
    Draylon Hogg says:

    I just read Matt Taibbi’s new un and as well as the stuff about letting the sunshine in and the dawning of the age of Aquarius there was quite a bit about Obama’s Administration being well, you know, just as much of a bunch of corporate whores as the last lot.

    Plus, Barack will have been to that smoke filled room that Bill Hicks talked about and seen the film of Kennedy from the grassy knoll.

    “Any questions Mister President?”

    “Just what my agenda is”

  99. 99
    Odie Hugh Manatee says:

    @amk:

    I’m a real pot smoking, hair to the waist (for over 40 years now!) hippy and while I have my disagreements with Obama I am no firebagging fuckwit. I support the president and plan on voting for him in 2012.

    These fuckers are grasping at anything to bitch, moan and groan about Obama. Nothing is too small or inconsequential to these asshats, they exist to bitch and whine because that’s all they know how to do.

  100. 100
    amk says:

    @NobodySpecial: No. Not every one. Only fuckwits like you & pat who bitch & moan about friggin’ hippie punching whenever Obama sneezes.

  101. 101
    Draylon Hogg says:

    @99

    What are you on about?

    There’s that much to grab on to with Obama that you’d need a fucking HIAB.

  102. 102
    Odie Hugh Manatee says:

    @Draylon Hogg:

    No, YOU need it, I’m doing just fine here. :)

  103. 103
    Draylon Hogg says:

    @Odin

    I’m British mate I’ve got enough on dealing with Call-Me-Dave and the Tories desire to drag us back into an age of Victorian charity and his ridiculous Big Society idea which essentially boils down to Mickey-Rooneyism; let’s put the library on in the backyard.

    Seriously though, read Taibbi if you haven’t already, the stuff about what the Obama Administration has done is interesting and flies in the face of all his campaign promises.

  104. 104
    John Cole says:

    @Just Some Fuckhead: JSF- Three Months ago: ‘What happened to this website? It used to be snarky and funny with people making fun of people saying stupid things’

    JSF- tonight, after 8 bourbons- “YOU SINGLEHANDEDLY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR INTERNECINE WARFARE BECAUSE YOU MADE FUN OF SOMETHING STUPID SOMEONE SAID.”

  105. 105
    TR says:

    Yes, Obama is doing this so he can score a job on Wall Street.

    Oh, hippies. You’re so sweetly naive.

  106. 106
    General Stuck says:

    @John Cole:

    Now you leave fuckhead alone. He went for the brass ring in an epic powerplay to unseat Kain as BJ ombudsman and arbiter of proper discourse and snarkery – because he’s been here, like forever and a day with seniority and all that kind of important shit.

  107. 107
    snarkypsice says:

    @Citizen Alan:

    Not to mention that he’s already rich from the first two books.

  108. 108
    Cat Lady says:

    @mak:

    a little exasperated off-hand snark

    Assumes facts not in evidence.

  109. 109
    Draylon Hogg says:

    Whatever Obama’s good intentions he’s just another lawyer in a grey suit elected to make sure a bunch of corporations don’t pay too much tax. Never has the illusion of choice been so illusory.

  110. 110
    Ash Can says:

    @Draylon Hogg: Feeling left out, are we? Want our own FP post, do we?

  111. 111
    AxelFoley says:

    @bobbyk:

    Yeah, I like the writing on this blog and I know you don’t give a fuck if I ever read it again-but you know what-go fuck yourself. I’ve been voting democratic all my life-I’ve never voted for a republican-ever. And I need to read this constant bull shit about how “hippies”(I guess I must be one you know since I’ve been voting for these dems all my life) are assholes for bitching about the very real policy failings of this administration? I’ve given well over $1000 to various different dems over the past 6 years but no more-fuck them. I will however open the check book for those dems that demonstrate real liberal values. Obama ain’t gettin any of it.
    I’m wondering when Obama signs the legislation to set up the destruction of SS, if you’ll find the gumption to criticize that move?

    U mad?

  112. 112
    burnspbesq says:

    @kdaug:

    ” I get what you’re saying, but which is more effective in “solving”” climate change – playing with derivatives, or designing a better wind turbine?”

    False dichotomy. Once you have your better wind turbine designed, you are going to need large piles of money to get into production, hire a sales force, etc. The same firms that play with derivatives are your link to that money.

  113. 113
    Whispers says:

    Tony Blair took a job working for JP Morgan.

    Who’s the idiot here?

  114. 114
    AxelFoley says:

    @lol:

    I’m not sure if this pre-dates or post-dates John’s Come-To-Obama moment, but it’s certainly amusing that as he was getting more liberal, the Professional Left was sucking John Edwards’ cock like no tomorrow.

    So Rielle liked to share with others?

  115. 115
    Admiral_Komack says:

    @John Cole:

    What the hell.
    Let him keep poking himself.

  116. 116
    Admiral_Komack says:

    @AxelFoley:

    Somebody hurt his widdle feelings.

  117. 117
    AAA Bonds says:

    @Bob Loblaw:

    Purposely attacking a poor defender of a position – in this case, the position that the Daley appointment reflects a problem with Wall Street and the White House – and treating the defender as representative is also a straw man argument. You don’t have to build your own straw man to attack one.

  118. 118
    AAA Bonds says:

    @Uloborus:

    See above. You don’t have to manufacture a quote to attack a straw man.

    I don’t really think that responders here are ignorant of logical argument; I think it’s just hard to defend Cole when he’s like “Look at this one guy make ludicrous claims that don’t reflect any of the substantial criticisms that have been offered! This is why the people who criticize the White House get attacked, and that’s okay!”

  119. 119
    Chris G says:

    @Whispers: JP Morgan.

  120. 120
    Gus says:

    @freelancer: Really? Perhaps I’m not aware of all internet traditions, but wtf difference does it make where the nut is picked? Is there a definition you can point to that will clarify your assertion?

  121. 121
    MikeMc says:

    I don’t understand the disappointment with Daley. When Obama’s term began they knew they would be attempting to pass some big things legislatively, so they wanted a COS with expertise in that area. That’s why Rahm was hired. In the latter half of the first term the White House is gearing for the re-election campaign and doing more things through the executive branch. With the loss of the house – I doubt they’ll be spending a great deal of time working with congress, so they wanted a COS with strong management skills. Someone to streamline and strengthen the inner-workings of the White House. Daley seems like a sensible choice.

    When did the COS become such a flash point for controversy? I don’t remember conservatives up-in-arms over Bush’s choice of Andy Card. I haven’t the slightest idea of what Andy Card did before he was selected, but I doubt Bush chose him because he thought he could help him with a gig after it was over. Shit, I can’t remember who it was before Card! This is simply something for progressives to be pissed about during a time when there isn’t anything better to be pissed about. Their entire schtick is based on perpetual outrage.

  122. 122

    @de stijl:

    Enough! Stop it! Just. Stop.

    …. that’s like teasing a hungry pet with a big bowlful of yummy goodies….completely unfair….

  123. 123
    Mike Kay (Chief of Staff) says:

    @eemom:

    But does a girl ever get a h/t around here?? NO.

    Hey, baby, I’ll give ya a hat tip… come here, you vixen!

  124. 124
    Mike Kay (Chief of Staff) says:

    Rahm was right: the hippies are retarded.

  125. 125
    Mike Kay (Chief of Staff) says:

    @AAA Bonds:

    This is why the people who criticize the White House get attacked, and that’s okay

    talk ’bout straw man arguments. dude look in the mirror.

    Cole never said, “people who criticize the WH”, no he said “hippies”. They’re not the same people.

    First of all, “hippies” is a self description derived from “punching hippies”.

    KThug criticizes the WH all the time, but I don’t know of anyone who considers him a hippie, even though he looks like on.

    Rachel Maddow criticizes the WH all the time, and I don’t know of anyone who has called her a hippie.

    Olbermann is a lunatic, who once said Hillary wanted to assassinate Obama, but even he’s not called a hippie.

    No, hippies are the wackos who say obama is gonna slash social security during the state of the union address. Hippies are the ones who wanted to “kill the bill”. Hippies are the ones who want to primary the only socialist in congress for voting for HCR. Hippies are the ones who primaried Nancy Smash in 2008. Hippies are the ones who say repealing DADT was, quote, “a crumb”, “small potatoes”, and “a bone”. Hippies are the ones who want to blacklist anyone who ever worked for a bank or in the financial industry. Hippies are the ones who want to run Alan Grayson, a guy who lost by 22 points to the teabaggers, for President. Hippies are the ones who say Elena Kagen is unqualified for the bench because she has never been a judge (see, the hippies, for all the books, have never heard of Earl Warren). And it goes on, and on, and on.

  126. 126
    Mike Kay (Chief of Staff) says:

    @AAA Bonds:

    This is why the people who criticize the White House get attacked, and that’s okay

    talk ’bout straw man arguments. dude look in the mirror.

    Cole never said, “people who criticize the WH”, no he said “hippies”. They’re not the same people.

    First of all, “hippies” is a whinny self description derived from “he’s punching hippies!”.

    KThug criticizes the WH all the time, but I don’t know of anyone who considers him a hippie, even though he looks like one.

    Rachel Maddow criticizes the WH all the time, and I don’t know of anyone who has called her a hippie.

    Olbermann is a lunatic, who once said Hillary wanted to assassinate Obama, but even he’s not called a hippie.

    No, hippies are the wackos who say obama is gonna slash social security during the state of the union address. Hippies are the ones who wanted to “kill the bill”. Hippies are the ones who want to primary the only socialhist in congress for voting for HCR. Hippies are the ones who primaried Nancy Smash in 2008 with cindy sheehan. Hippies are the ones who say repealing DADT was, quote, “a crumb”, “small potatoes”, and “a bone”. Hippies are the ones who want to blacklist anyone who ever worked for a bank or in the financial industry. Hippies are the ones who want to run Alan Grayson, a guy who lost by 22 points to the teabaggers, for President. Hippies are the ones who say Elena Kagen is unqualified for the bench because she has never been a judge (see, the hippies, for all the books, have never heard of Earl Warren). And it goes on, and on, and on.

  127. 127
    delosgatos says:

    @LosGatosCA:

    Hey, I haz a Forbes Mill too!

  128. 128
    Gus says:

    @Mike Kay (Chief of Staff): Perhaps your rather lengthy and very specific definition should be appended every time a hippie is punched. ‘Cause otherwise the term is pretty broad and ill-defined.

Comments are closed.