More Fallout From Anonymous

More fallout from the Anonymous hacking of the shitshow fail parade that is HB Gary:

ThinkProgress has learned that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the big business trade association representing ExxonMobil, AIG, and other major international corporations, is working with set of “private security” companies and lobbying firms to undermine their political opponents, including ThinkProgress, with a surreptitious sabotage campaign.

According to e-mails obtained by ThinkProgress, the Chamber hired the lobbying firm Hunton and Williams to spearhead this effort. Hunton And Williams’ attorney Richard Wyatt, who once represented Food Lion in its infamous lawsuit against ABC News, was hired by the Chamber in October of last year. To assist the Chamber, Wyatt and his associates, John Woods and Bob Quackenboss, hired a set of private security firms — HB Gary Federal, Palantir, and Berico Technologies (collectively called Team Themis) — to develop tactics for damaging progressive groups and labor unions, in particular ThinkProgress, the labor coalition called Change to Win, the SEIU, US Chamber Watch, and StopTheChamber.com.

According to one document prepared by Team Themis, the campaign included an entrapment project. The proposal called for first creating a “false document, perhaps highlighting periodical financial information,” to give to a progressive group opposing the Chamber, and then to subsequently expose the document as a fake to undermine the credibility of the Chamber’s opponents. In addition, the group proposed creating a “fake insider persona” to “generate communications” with Change to Win. View a screenshot below:

The security firms hoped to obtain $200,000 for initial background research, then charge up to $2 million for a larger disinformation campaign against progressives.

One thing that even the dim bulbs in the media should understand by now is that there is in fact a class war going on, and it is the rich and powerful who are waging it. Anyone who does anything that empowers the little people or that threatens the wealth and power of the plutocracy must be destroyed. There is a reason for these clowns going after Think Progress and unions, just like there is a reason they are targeting wikileaks and Glenn Greenwald, Planned Parenthood, and Acorn. To a lesser extent the fail parade that was the Daily Caller expose on Journolist was more of the same.

You have to understand the mindset- they are playing for keeps. The vast majority of the wealth isn’t enough. They want it all. Anything that gets in their way must be destroyed. They don’t care if they poison every stream or crack the foundation to your house or if your daughter dies getting a back alley abortion or if every one in your mining town has an inoperable tumor. They just don’t give a shit.

And they are well financed, have a strong infrastructure, a sympathetic media, and entire organizations dedicated to running cover for them. They’ve even created their own mythical ideology in which they are superhero Galtian overlords, and this lets a few rubes who babble ignorantly about the free market get to feel like they are playing along, when they are really just being played. It’s these guys versus all of us, yet half the people being rogered (Republicans and glibertarians and hell, half the Democrats) have been convinced the other side is a bigger threat to their well being than the people with all the power, money, and resources. Hell, even in this post I can guarantee that at least five shitheads will come in and tell me they don’t like Glenn Greenwald because he uses too many words or that Jane Hamsher is shrill or because neither of them fellate Obama to satisfaction. Talk about not fucking getting it.

I don’t even know why we bother to hold elections any more, to be honest, the game is so rigged. We’re a banana republic, and it is just a matter of time before we descend into necklacing and other tribal bullshit.

369 replies
  1. 1
    Quaker in a Basement says:

    One thing that even the dim bulbs in the media should understand by now is that there is in fact a class war going on,

    Oh, they understand allright. It’s just that the media big shots are on the other side.

  2. 2
    Elvis Elvisberg says:

    What was the ratfuck theory behind the Dan Rather documents? Surely someone here knows a good place where it’s all spun out.

  3. 3
    Alex S. says:

    Cudlips, all of them.

  4. 4
    joeyess says:

    I don’t even know why we bother to hold elections any more, to be honest, the game is so rigged. We’re a banana republic, and it is just a matter of time before we descend into necklacing and other tribal bullshit.

    Sad but true.

  5. 5
    Ash Can says:

    before we descend into necklacing

    We’ve been there, done that, and called it lynching.

  6. 6
    joeyess says:

    @Quaker in a Basement:

    Oh, they understand allright. It’s just that the media big shots are on the other side.

    Just ask Mrs. Greenspan.

  7. 7
    danimal says:

    I agree with your post and I believe that concentration of wealth is the biggest problem in American society.

    I also believe that GG uses too many words and I can hardly read FDL. So, does that make me a shithead?

  8. 8
    dollared says:

    JC, don’t ever lose this theme and this tone. The theme is exactly correct and the tone is completely appropriate. Tens of millions of Americans are painfully, permanently poorer, and millions of Iraqis, Central Americans, Afghanis, etc. are dead because these people lie, cheat and steal.

    They should be in prison and instead they are rich and honored. It is fucking wrong, and anything we can do to make their chosen path more difficult is a service to humanity.

  9. 9
    joeyess says:

    @Elvis Elvisberg: to discredit the true charges that GWB was AWOL during his TANG hitch by discrediting Dan Rather. Ergo, if Rather was discredited, so was the true story.

  10. 10
    Amanda in the South Bay says:

    Hey, I pass by Palantir everyday in Palo Alto.

    Motherfuckers.

  11. 11
    pragmatism says:

    can we sell chicle instead of making necklaces? my paws ain’t so nimble.

  12. 12
    cathyx says:

    @danimal: You’re number 1.

  13. 13
    Redshirt says:

    Amen. To the fences! We’re going to need to act, eventually.

  14. 14
    General Stuck says:

    Fabulous post senor Cole

    The kind of point by point analysis of the wingnut way that brought me here to BJ in the first place

  15. 15
    Svensker says:

    Who the hell are these “Team Themis” guys? Are any of our media overlords doing any interesting stories on them? (What happened to Seymour Hersh, BTW?)

    I thought I was cynical. Apparently not cynical enough. This stuff is just gobsmacking.

  16. 16
    Jack Bauer says:

    This. Exactly this. Excellent post.

    They’ve had 30 years of it, and it looks like they’re going to get another 30. And only when the working and middle classes have been fully squeezed dry will anything happen. Huxley’s dystopia is coming into existence, with precious few even noticing.

    Is American Idol on tonight?

  17. 17
    El Cid says:

    __

    And they are well financed, have a strong infrastructure, a sympathetic media, and entire organizations dedicated to running cover for them. They’ve even created their own mythical ideology in which they are superhero Galtian overlords, and this lets a few rubes who babble ignorantly about the free market get to feel like they are playing along, when they are really just being played.
    __
    It’s these guys versus all of us, yet half the people being rogered (Republicans and glibertarians and hell, half the Democrats) have been convinced the other side is a bigger threat to their well being than the people with all the power, money, and resources.

    Welcome to the renewal of the glory days from the 1880s through the 1920s.

    Horatio Alger versus Big Labor thugs, Carnegie generosity versus those thieving Italians and Irish, elegant Biltmore retreats versus those teeming masses dirtying up our cities, Palmer Raids heroes versus irresponsible types using their free speech too much like saying soldiers shouldn’t fight in WW1.

    We’re not entirely back to 1897 yet, but we’re working on it. With a generous sprinkling of the honest values our people learn via a life based on sharecropping and learning to get around on mud roads.

  18. 18
    Arrik says:

    Wow John, that was a righteous rant! More please.

  19. 19
    cathyx says:

    Let’s see how the Egypt uprising works out. Then we can talk about one for us. I don’t want to throw my shoes though. I need arch supports.

  20. 20

    Hell, even in this post I can guarantee that at least five shitheads will come in and tell me they don’t like Glenn Greenwald because he uses too many words or that Jane Hamsher is shrill or because neither of them fellate Obama to satisfaction.

    Dude, what the fuck are you talking about? Glenn Greenwald, the guy who defended the Citizens United ruling, is supposed to have something to do with this?

    This was a good post up until the word “resources,” and then you just sort of started spewing irrelevant babble.

  21. 21
    RSR says:

    Part of this outcome, I think, is based on the stigmatizing of government action to the point where people are in denial. Only ‘those people’ get government services.

    The result, as noted by David Sirota, is that “a majority of those who have received federally subsidized student loans, 44 percent of Social Security beneficiaries and 40 percent of G.I. bill recipients say they have not used a government social program.”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....21414.html

    ahh, I’m not even really sure where I’m going with this, but the die is cast, at least for a generation or two.

  22. 22
    Sockpuppet says:

    So you’re having a bit of a day then, aren’t you Cole?

    I also like how these security firms are naming themselves from Tolkien. Do they compete for contracts against Alderaan Technologies?

  23. 23
    cathyx says:

    @joe from Lowell: You’re number 2.

  24. 24
    BombIranForChrist says:

    I am going to say something hackneyed at this point, but stay with me, because there’s a point.

    I will very, very likely vote for Obama in ’12, but his 2008 election and his subsequent failure to follow through on promises — particularly in re: the kid gloves treatment of banks and civil rights issues — has completely killed my faith that change can occur from elected officials. The biggest symbol of this is the fact that not a single banker is in jail for fraud right now.

    But I haven’t lost faith in change, and I am finding myself turning my faith more and more to things like Wikileaks and their ilk, even though a lot of their actions seem or are illegal.

    Because at the end of the day, many corporations are either blatantly committing criminal acts or they are paying off congress people to legitimize the criminal acts, and nothing in the status quo is going to change that. If Obama couldn’t pull it off with a stacked Congress, no one can.

    Something needs to shake up the status quo. In America’s history, and in other people’s Now, the status quo was shaken by violence. I’m not down with that. I am a DFH, after all. But information violence, to coin a stupid phrase, I am totally down with. Forced Transparency may not change anything, but I bet it will.

    So I am eating up news like this. Hackers and electronic criminals fill me with hope, not politicians, and that, my friends, is the state of America today. When you’re rooting for people to commit felonies in order to right the ship of state, the ship of state is in a state of fucked.

  25. 25
    elmo says:

    MOAR RANTZ PLZ kthxbai.

  26. 26
    DougJ® says:

    I don’t even know why we bother to hold elections any more, to be honest, the game is so rigged. We’re a banana republic, and it is just a matter of time before we descend into necklacing and other tribal bullshit.

    You may call it “bullshit” but it would create jobs.

  27. 27
    Poopyman says:

    What paranoid claptrap! Everyone knows(TM) that such a thing can’t happen here! This is the USA, where at least ah know ahm free.

  28. 28

    @cathyx:

    You’re number 2.

    I haven’t the vaguest idea what this is supposed to mean. Knowing you, it’s probably a poop reference.

    Please don’t interpret this as a request to explain. Really. I’ll be fine.

  29. 29
    General Stuck says:

    @joe from Lowell:

    I should have read the entire post, which was great up that little blurp. WTF does GG writing too many words have to do with anything, let alone wingnuts and glibertarians, that I thought the dude was one. scratches head

  30. 30
    eastriver says:

    Someone said recently that the worst thing about Reagan is that he convinced a majority of the country that rich people aren’t the enemy. Poor people are. How fucking evil and brilliant is that? Fuck. The mind reels.

  31. 31
    dr. bloor says:

    One thing that even the dim bulbs in the media should understand by now is that there is in fact a class war going on, and it is the rich and powerful who are waging it.

    Not coincidentally, the same rich and powerful folks that are signing the dim bulbs’ paychecks.

  32. 32
    fucen tarmal says:

    one way to look at it mr. john cole, and because ronny reagan gave you a chubby back in the day, i suppose its understandable.

    i would suggest, however,that the game has always been rigged, more so, or less so,from one generation of wealth, to the next. doesn’t matter, because in the end, it is what it is and it do what it do….and rigging the game is part and parcel to even allowing the game to be played.

    the positive way of looking at it, is that this generation, has no way of controlling the tempo. it doesn’t mean they will lose, ultimately, but when they fail to keep a man like john cole interested, they have lost something.

    the reality is, they can still rig it, but not without making it obvious to anyone paying attention. that is different than the past. perhaps more insulting, but it could be a step in galvanizing the masses, that looked at anyone who used to say the game was rigged as a whiny loser.

  33. 33
    Sockpuppet says:

    @joe from Lowell:

    Glenn Greenwald, the guy who defended the Citizens United ruling, is supposed to have something to do with this?

    Yes, Greenwald is all about the propagation of corporate power and influence. Exactly. Couldn’t be any of that civil liberties absolutism idea (misguided it may be).

    The point, it has failed to be gotten. Because the ‘G word’ was invoked. Instant thread death, every time.

    Also, we’re not a Banana Republic. Continue with the outrage.

  34. 34
    JGabriel says:

    John Cole @ Top:

    We’re a banana republic, and it is just a matter of time before we descend into necklacing and other tribal bullshit.

    Honestly, I think the fashion for tattoos that accelerated in the past two decades is the US version of necklacing/tribal bullshit. I wonder how long before Palin is sporting a teabag-draped handgun tattooed on her ankle?

    Edited To Add: Oops, I thought necklacing was referring to those Indonesia (?) tribes that stack necklaces on their necks, not the execution method. My mistake.

    .

  35. 35

    @General Stuck: The closest I can come to understanding what happened to this promising post is that John got worked up and clicked into the “Smite mine enemies!” mode he was so good at when he was a wingnut.

    Really, that last part reads like nothing so much as an old warblogger post, with three paragraphs making some point about Iraq, followed by a few lines of purple prose about those damn Dhmmi-crats! Just because.

  36. 36
    freelancer says:

    And they are well financed, have a strong infrastructure, a sympathetic media, and entire organizations dedicated to running cover for them. They’ve even created their own mythical ideology in which they are superhero Galtian overlords, and this lets a few rubes who babble ignorantly about the free market get to feel like they are playing along, when they are really just being played. It’s these guys versus all of us, yet half the people being rogered (Republicans and glibertarians and hell, half the Democrats) have been convinced the other side is a bigger threat to their well being than the people with all the power, money, and resources.

    This is why, above most other things, I cannot stand the culture war, but I actually kind of admire the saavy of those who engineered that kind of political re-alignment. Being from the Midwest, I loathe people that turn out to be single-issue voters because of abortion. You try to explain the moneyed infrastructure in language they are comfortable with and the conversation ends up going something like this:

    “Listen, so what happens is, when these companies aren’t shoving millions into elections, they are undermining any sort of progress that American citizens might be making for themselves. They go to NFL games in skybox seats, tearing up at the displays of hyper-patriotism, but then that night, they are shipping more jobs overseas, playing casino games with commodities like oil prices and corn (which totally screws anyone who drives or owns a farm), lobbying congress to push for looser regulations on oil companies so they can use toxic hydralic techniques to force natural gas out of the ground and it results in a ruined environment, unfarmable land, flammable drinking water. These are evil people, they are theives, marauders, and barbarian hordes, and they do it all by proxy of a Blackberry.”
    “Oh, that’s disturbing.”
    “Yes, it very much is.”
    “But…”
    “Where do they stand on Abortion?”
    O4FUX’sAKE FACEPALM.

  37. 37
    benintn says:

    The dim bulbs in the media are all sponsored by, bought, and paid for by the corporations who are doing the disinformation campaigns. Jeremiah Wright seems all the more prescient whenever this kind of stuff comes to light.

  38. 38
    cathyx says:

    @General Stuck: number 3.

  39. 39
    eemom says:

    WHY ISN’T ANYBODY TALKING ABOUT EGYPT??

    Justaskinzall.

  40. 40

    @Sockpuppet:

    Yes, Greenwald is all about the propagation of corporate power and influence. Exactly. Couldn’t be any of that civil liberties absolutism idea (misguided it may be).

    So, therefore, the people who denounce him have something to do with the subject this post started off being about?

    Are you trying to make the case that there’s actually some reasonable connection between the topic of this post and the weird rant at the end? Or did you just reflexively defend Greenwald, because you misunderstood my comment as an attack on him and that’s just what you do?

  41. 41
    General Stuck says:

    @Sockpuppet:

    Because the ‘G word’ was invoked.

    I don’t think it “invoked” so much as used as a blunt instrument to club real or imagined enemies of feedom, or somesuch.

  42. 42
    cathyx says:

    @joe from Lowell: You’re already number 2, let others have a chance.

  43. 43
    horse dave says:

    Great post,

    I’ve got nothing to add, just want my name attached to this when the “security” firms target BJ.

  44. 44
    BGinCHI says:

    Jake Gittes: Why are you doing it? How much better can you eat? What could you buy that you can’t already afford?

    Noah Cross: The future, Mr. Gittes! The future.

  45. 45
    Dr.BDH says:

    I take back every bad thing I ever said or thought about Mr. John Cole. Mr. Cole, you finally get it. It’s quite a trip from Reaganland to reality, isn’t it? Npow, don’t let up, apply your breakthrough to the present Administration, the last and present Congress, and the coming 2012 elections. I think you’re on the verge of offering your readers some real insights. Maybe not General Stuck but probably most of the rest.

  46. 46
    Amanda in the South Bay says:

    @horse dave:

    Though at this rate, your grandmother on dial-up with AIM may be able to outsmart them.

  47. 47
    freelancer says:

    @freelancer:

    Unmod me please, I have important things to say on this nonconsequential blog, dammit!

  48. 48

    @General Stuck:

    @General Stuck: number 3.

    How high do you think she can go?

    Eleventy?

  49. 49
    Justin says:

    What I don’t understand is why the poor is this country continue to support the supposed right of the wealthy to be uber-wealthy.

    Though, I do think that is changing to an extent. You can see it at the state level, where states are beginning to increase taxes on the super rich and corporations. This is nice.

  50. 50
    BGinCHI says:

    @El Cid: Where are the Polish/Italian anarchists??!!

  51. 51
    General Stuck says:

    @cathyx:

    number 3.

    Is this some kind of numbering system for the coming balloon juice gulag for Obots? You all are getting a tad creepy, you know that don’t you?

  52. 52
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    @joe from Lowell:

    It may be angry and over-the-top, but I see no reason to believe that it’s not a fairly accurate assessment of our politics and media.

  53. 53
    13th Generation says:

    Hell, even in this post I can guarantee that at least five shitheads will come in and tell me they don’t like Glenn Greenwald because he uses too many words or that Jane Hamsher is shrill or because neither of them fellate Obama to satisfaction. Talk about not fucking getting it.

    This.

  54. 54
    Gilgamesh says:

    To clarify, because there seems to be some confusion: necklacing has nothing to do with jewlery, it’s when you hang a gasoline drenched tire around someone’s neck and set it on fire. FWIW.

  55. 55

    @cathyx: Dimwit, I haven’t attacked Greenwald.

    You’re like one of those people who sits in bars, hoping to hear someone around you say something that would give the opportunity to start a fight, and imagining something because you want it so bad.

    Except you’re too much of a sissy to actually do that, so you act out online.

  56. 56
    martha says:

    I’m one of those shitheads, thank you very much. And proud of it.

  57. 57
    Continental Op says:

    [P]roposal called for first creating a “false document, perhaps highlighting periodical financial information,” to give to a progressive group opposing the Chamber, and then to subsequently expose the document as a fake to undermine the credibility of the Chamber’s opponents.

    Dan Rather.

  58. 58
    Jim, Once says:

    @dollared: I wish I could have said this. And for that matter, what John said. Your best, truest post ever, John (even though it brought tears). Tears on top of what I’m listening to and watching on Al Jazzeera.

  59. 59
    General Stuck says:

    @eemom:

    I think Cole has a flaming case of the ass that needs tending to. Don’t say anything bad about the you know who’s, or you are with the forces of evil.

  60. 60
    Sockpuppet says:

    @joe from Lowell:

    Are you trying to make the case that there’s actually some reasonable connection between the topic of this post and the weird rant at the end?

    Um, yeah. Cole seems to rather explicitly declared Greenwald his ally on the side of great justice against corporate and oligarchic manipulation in the public sphere. And that he doesn’t want to see his ally take any more shots when the real enemies (as Cole perceives them to be) are out there unmolested. He’s asking you to be more judicious with your target seeking. I would assume he’d give Glenn the same advice regarding some of his domestic criticism of the Obama administration.

    The fact that any of you lamebrains would fail to understand that immediately makes it pretty clear who the “reflexive” ones really are. Like I said, the ‘G word’ has been invoked. It can’t be uninvoked.

  61. 61

    @Spaghetti Lee: No, I like the part about our politics and media.

    I just can’t figure out what “But people dare to not like Glenn Greenwald!” is supposed to have to do with anything.

    It’s not even like John picked two labor activists who were being unfairly condemned. That would have made sense.

  62. 62
    Midnight Marauder says:

    @joe from Lowell:

    How high do you think she can go?
    __
    Eleventy?

    Probably just to five since, you know, the entire thing relates back to a specific number Cole used in his original post.

    For fuck’s sake, let’s all just agree–THIS ONE TIME–to overlook and ignore the section of Cole’s righteous rant that involved Hamsher and Greenwald.

  63. 63
    COB says:

    Righteous Words, JC.

  64. 64
    MBunge says:

    “Hell, even in this post I can guarantee that at least five shitheads will come in and tell me they don’t like Glenn Greenwald because he uses too many words or that Jane Hamsher is shrill or because neither of them fellate Obama to satisfaction.”

    I’m not sure if we’ve hit the five shithead quota yet but…WTF Cole? If genuflecting before The Last Honest Man and the FDL lady is going to be a mandatory requirement before you’re allowed to march in the armies of the left, it’s gonna get awful lonely on the battlefield.

    Mike

  65. 65
    Doug Woodard says:

    Money runs the country now, not elections, not people, not politicians even. Just money. Check out this guy for the full bloody truth. http://www.truthdig.com/chris_hedges

  66. 66
    General Stuck says:

    @martha:

    When i told my momma I wanted to grow to be a shithead, she just patted my rumpus and said be the best shithead can be son. She must be smiling with pride from this thread, up there, somewhere.

  67. 67
    The Sheriff's A Ni- says:

    Hell, even in this post I can guarantee that at least five shitheads will come in and tell me they don’t like Glenn Greenwald because he uses too many words or that Jane Hamsher is shrill or because neither of them fellate Obama to satisfaction. Talk about not fucking getting it.

    ’cause you know the comments would’ve been all about them had you, y’know, not namedropped them to troll your own post. But hey, the blog hits don’t generate themselves, right?

  68. 68
    eemom says:

    this may be a good time for me to note that John is planting a big wet kissie on Jane’s ass again.

    And you too, Glennzie. SMOOOOCH.

    I don’t know what other explanation there can be for that completely gratuitous bit of snidery…..other than that he’s some kind of blogger equivalent of a pyromaniac who just can’t resist igniting flame wars.

  69. 69
    Napoleon says:

    Great post

  70. 70
    martha says:

    @General Stuck: some days, it’s not such a bad thing to aspire to, I tell ya :)

  71. 71
    Jim, Once says:

    @BombIranForChrist: A.Fucking.Men. To every word.

  72. 72
    dms says:

    because neither of them fellate Obama to satisfaction

    Classic coming from you Cole. You just can’t give it up. In an otherwise totally unrelated post, you just can’t help ragging on those not as “mature” as you.

  73. 73

    @Midnight Marauder:

    Probably just to five since, you know, the entire thing relates back to a specific number Cole used in his original post.

    You’re probably right about five being the upper limit, but probably not for that reason.

    I think the problem here is that this

    I can guarantee that at least five shitheads will come in and tell me they don’t like Glenn Greenwald because he uses too many words or that Jane Hamsher is shrill or because neither of them fellate Obama to satisfaction.

    nonsense has such a hold on certain weaker minds that they’re now hallucinating it. I literally had no idea that there was supposed to be a connection between what I wrote and John’s prediction.

  74. 74
    cathyx says:

    65 comments and we hit 5. Now lets discuss the topic at hand.

    Does anyone disagree with the premise that there is a class war going on?

  75. 75
    cathyx says:

    65 comments and we hit 5. Now lets discuss the topic at hand.

    Does anyone disagree with the premise that there is a class war going on?

  76. 76
    Cat Lady says:

    Another righteous rant Cole. If we’re not at a tipping point yet, I can see it from here. The information barbarians are at the gate, and between Al-jazeera’s Egypt coverage and Wikileaks, the traditional media gatekeepers are just beginning to get a glimmer of the new world order of open source information. They’re being made irrelevant at an alarming rate (to them), and that’s ultimately good for us and good for the country. There are way more of us than them, ultimately, even though their minions have Medicaid scooters, so there’s that.

  77. 77
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    @joe from Lowell:

    I try not to get involved in the great Cole-Hamsher-Greenwald hate triangle, for my health. But I think the general idea is that you shouldn’t spend time attacking people who are basically on your side when there are such venal assholes out there on the other side. I think part of the reason the right has been so dominant is unity, and I wish the left had a little more ability to work together. I don’t think that’s such a crazy thing to say.

  78. 78
    danimal says:

    @MBunge: That was kind of my point. I agree with Cole completely in his analysis, I just don’t see WTF that has to do with GG and JH.

    OTOH, I’m rarely #1 in anything, so I’m feeling kind of proud. Thanks cathyx!

  79. 79

    @The Sheriff’s A Ni-:

    But hey, the blog hits don’t generate themselves, right?

    You know, I hope that’s not it.

    I hope he just lost his head and starting smiting his “enemies,” like in the old days.

  80. 80
    eemom says:

    @General Stuck:

    you are with the forces of evil.

    oh heck, Cole knowed that already.

    And here I am flying off the handle when he hasn’t even MENTIONED Israel.

  81. 81
    13th Generation says:

    So nice to see all of the haters out in force tonight.

    BTW, it’s not necessarily trolling just because someone doesn’t hold the same undying love for Obama that you do.

  82. 82
    The Sheriff's A Ni- says:

    because neither of them fellate Obama to satisfaction

    Oh, I also should note that if you’re going into a class war, its all well and good to be suspicious of the establishment. Its also well and good to be suspicious of admitted libertarians and those who proudly associated with Grover Fucking Norquist on HCR.

  83. 83
    Jeffro says:

    @Justin: what states and what additional taxes on the wealthy (other than Illinois)?

  84. 84
    Waldo says:

    Gentleman, let’s be reasonable. In the interest of the greater good, can we please not tempt the wrath of our corporate masters until my car loan is approved?

  85. 85

    @Spaghetti Lee:

    But I think the general idea is that you shouldn’t spend time attacking people who are basically on your side when there are such venal assholes out there on the other side.

    And, what, that little rant where Cole attacked all kind of people who are on his side, out of nowhere, with no relevance whatsoever to the topic, was supposed to be a demonstration?

  86. 86
    Sockpuppet says:

    @cathyx:

    Does anyone disagree with the premise that there is a class war is going on?

    Well, considering that there hasn’t been a moment yet in the history of the United States (nay, the history of civilization) that hasn’t been fought upon the battefield of the haves and the have-nots, I would doubt it.

    Why exactly this is a current issue during the most socially liberal Presidency ever, especially given the very real revolution against the very real Banana Republic upon the Nile as we speak, I really can’t say. Everybody has a breaking point, I guess.

  87. 87
    General Stuck says:

    Does anyone disagree with the premise that there is a class war going on?

    Yes, most certainly, class war, and why we need more words, a lot more words from you know who.

    I’m sorry, this is serious business, but my funnybone won’t leave me alone. I will try to be a little more mature though.

  88. 88
    Jim, Once says:

    @General Stuck: So maybe you should do what so many are here : change your name. To Shithead. In honor of Mama and all.

  89. 89
    The Sheriff's A Ni- says:

    @Sockpuppet:

    Why exactly this is a current issue during the most socially liberal Presidency ever, especially given the very real revolution against the very real Banana Republic upon the Nile as we speak, I really can’t say.

    American entitlement, basically. I was browsing FARK earlier and it surprised me how many minds were blown at how small the average Egyptian income was. We sit here and moan about how horrible it all is, but its not. It really can get a lot fucking worse.

  90. 90
    MBunge says:

    @cathyx: 65 comments and we hit 5. Now lets discuss the topic at hand.

    By all means. So, do you think Glenn Greenwald’s constant demonization of Obama helps or hinders efforts to advance a progressive counterattack against our Galtian overlords? I mean, I’m confident that doing everything you can to sour liberals on the most liberal President in several decades will have nothing but positive effects, but I could be wrong.

    Mike

  91. 91
    Belafon (formerly anonevent) says:

    John made a good point: We’ve got a class war going on where not only are the rich winning, but they’ve convinced a large portion of the poor to fight on their side. In the 1860’s this was called the Civil War; now it’s the Reagan Revolution. But most of the people even on our side spend time complaining about each other. This is why we are losing.

  92. 92

    @cathyx:

    65 comments and we hit 5.

    Uh, no, you’re just making things up, because you can’t get out of bed in the morning without believing yourself to be persecuted.

    Now lets discuss the topic at hand.

    Here’s a thought: if you don’t like the threads to get sidetracked, why don’t you tell it to Cole?

    There would have been zero (0) off-topic comments, except that Kaptain Kranky decided he needed to go all Hulk Smash on anyone who doesn’t worship at the Temple of the Glenn…but you don’t have any problem with that.

    Does anyone disagree with the premise that there is a class war going on?

    Nope.

  93. 93
    BGinCHI says:

    @The Sheriff’s A Ni-: See Louis CK: “White People Problems”

  94. 94
    General Stuck says:

    @Jim, Once:

    Momma would never forgive changing General Stuck, the one she gave me. Shithead is a vocation, not a person.

  95. 95
    JWL says:

    Wow, Cole. Times indeed are [a’] changing when you grant “the lesser of two evils” don’t always encompass the politically pragmatic. The arc of the moral universe apparently isn’t as long as you once believed, nor time an ally of a best intentioned-based democratic party.

  96. 96
    13th Generation says:

    @joe from Lowell:

    Yeah, but you don’t seem to miss an opportunity to let us know what you think of GG, on-topic or not.

  97. 97
    blahblahblah says:

    @El Cid:

    […]Palmer Raids heroes versus irresponsible types using their free speech too much like saying soldiers shouldn’t fight in WW1.

    Go back further. The combined Patriot Act, Warrantless Eavesdropping, and indefinite detention is more like the Seditious Libel act of 1798. It was brought to law by Federalists for the sole partisan purpose of promoting the Federalist Party under John Adams. Jefferson had the law immediately revoked upon gaining office. That law was a big reason why the Federalists lost the next election. It was so bad, congress even paid back the fines imposed on those who had been convicted of Seditious Libel.

    How many think these laws today will be used for anything other than the same partisan political purposes used then?

  98. 98
    nestor says:

    Here’s Sockpuppet doing what he does best.

  99. 99
    Dave says:

    kill kill kill kill kill kill

  100. 100
    Jim, Once says:

    Why exactly this is a current issue during the most socially liberal Presidency ever?

    Really? Do you really think this? Gawd. That makes me so sad.

  101. 101

    @13th Generation: Umwut?

    I’ve never posted a single comment about Greenwald except on threads about Greenwald.

    And I leave most of those alone.

    And I’m not even actually a Greenwald-hater, the way some people around here are, just not much of a fan.

    In other words, you completely made that up. You’ve decided, for reasons that might be worth thinking over, that I’m “that sort of people,” that you’re against.

    Just so you know, as someone who finds himself more or less in the middle on these Greenwald-Manning-Assaunge questions, I only get this sort of “with us or with the terrorists” responsefrom one side.

  102. 102
    Kathryn says:

    @MBunge:

    do you think Glenn Greenwald’s constant demonization of “righteous anger at” Obama helps or hinders efforts to advance a progressive counterattack against our Galtian overlords?

    Helps. Fixed.

  103. 103
    shithead #1, formerly danimal says:

    I think that the class warfare has been happening for the past 30 years, and it looks like liberals are finally organizing to fight back effectively. Obama, for all his failings, is framing the fight in a way that can be won. But, what do I know, I’m just a shithead.

    Update: cathyx can count to 5.

    Update 2: my updates are pointless little blogspats that take a long time to read and are centered on my self-righteousness, but if you don’t care for my style, you must be a corporatist.

  104. 104
    dollared says:

    @BombIranForChrist: I agree, I just don’t think it will work.

    But having 80% voter turnout, that actually would make us into a rational country again. That’s what Obama knows, but he’s been executing poorly.

  105. 105
    The Sheriff's A Ni- says:

    @Jim, Once:

    Really? Do you really think this? Gawd. That makes me so sad.

    Which Presidents were more socially liberal?

  106. 106
    Mark S. says:

    The fact that they’re going after small fry like Think Progress and Greenwald (seriously, how many regular readers do these sites have, 10-20,000 or so?) says to me that they know they have the mainstream media in their back pocket. It’s a little scary when you think about it.

  107. 107
    frankdawg says:

    But they have already won and a handful of people in the blogosphere are not going to undo them. Once they have destroyed the unions and thinkprogress they will move down the ladder to the next rung and destroy them also. BJ may not be on their list yet but that time will come unless they can control access to the internet, which will probably happen first.

    And who will stop them? Certainly not the Corporatist Republican party and their President, Obama. They will join with The Blew Dogs and The right-wing Batshit Insane Party (who will complain they are commies & not moving fast enough).

  108. 108
    13th Generation says:

    @joe from Lowell:

    Man, you sure showed me.

    However, I think your comments, in this thread alone would lead one to a different conclusion. Sorry if I’m wrong about that. But I don’t think I am.

  109. 109
    General Stuck says:

    @Jim, Once:

    Really? Do you really think this? Gawd. That makes me so sad.

    How many liberal presidents repealed DADT and stated DOMA needs repealing as well? hint, it wasn’t Bill Clinton.

    Ask any wingnut who is the most liberal president ever.

    The left blogs are such Wonderlands.

  110. 110
    MBunge says:

    @Kathryn: Helps.

    How? Seriously, I’m not just being a dick. If you’re a regular reader of GG or Atrios, you probably think that Obama is History’s Greatest Monster and can’t wait to vote against him in 2012. That does what now in the battle against our Galtian overlords?

    Mike

  111. 111
    dollared says:

    It is really weird to have people dislike Glenn Greenwald for being angry because the law is not being enforced.

    Can someone explain this to me? Don’t give me style complaints – substance, please.

  112. 112

    @Mark S.:

    The fact that they’re going after small fry like Think Progress and Greenwald (seriously, how many regular readers do these sites have, 10-20,000 or so?) says to me that they know they have the mainstream media in their back pocket.

    The mainstream media is a forum for their class war, not a participant in that war. ThinkProgress is an actual opponent in the fight.

    Which is pretty funny, when you think about all of the grief TP, and TPers like Matthew Yglesias, always catch for allegedly being on the side of the elites.

  113. 113
    Cathie from Canada says:

    What struck me about this was the utter amateurism of it — where is Donald Segretti when the Republicans need someone who really knows how to rat-f*ck someone?
    If this is the best they’ve got — fake financial documents? fake personas to argue with people on blogs? — then actually we’ve got nothing to worry about.
    Its the manufactured or inflated “scandals” that actually bring organizations and Democrats down, like Elliot Spitzer and Acorn and Don Siegelman.

  114. 114
    dollared says:

    @General Stuck: You really think gay civil rights policy is what defines a liberal?

    You really have crossed the “even the liberal Andrew Sullivan” line.

  115. 115

    @13th Generation: Well, just so you know, not only do I not go off on Glenn Greenwald for no reason, but I actually went off on another commenter – “stuckinred” – a few days ago specifically because he went off on an irrelevant tear about Greenwald.

    But I find your reasoning here illustrative and interesting:

    However, I think your comments, in this thread alone would lead one to a different conclusion.

    In a thread which discusses Glenn Greenwald in the body of the post, I took exception to that attack on people who don’t like Greenwald – but never, you have utterly failed to notice – actually attacked Greenwald.

    And from those comments, you’ve deduced that I’m like to attack Greenwald, off-topic in threads that have nothing to do with him.

    strokes chin:

    fascinating.

  116. 116
    dollared says:

    @joe from Lowell: But Yglesias is on the side of the elites. Open immigration and free trade are clear positions in favor of impoverishing working Americans.

  117. 117
    BGinCHI says:

    @joe from Lowell:

    The mainstream media is a forum for their class war, not a participant in that war.

    Sorry, but that’s a naive reading. What the msm does, without doubt, is protect the status quo. Whether they think they do or not, whether it’s intentional, the msm in this country shows no inclination to speak truth to power, to jeopardize their positions, and so on.

    Or to put it simply: the class that most of the media inhabit (upper middle to wealthy) does not know much at all about how the rest of society lives or thinks. And its assumption that “we’re all in the same boat” keeps them from rocking it.

  118. 118
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    Great job, Cole. You ensured that this thread would be about nothing but Greenwald, Hamsher, and why it is good/bad to be fans of/not fans of either and/or both of them. I bet that is what you were aiming for when you started writing. I don’t particularly care for either one, but I do recognize that they are basically on my side of the fence. Do I get to be a shithead too?

  119. 119

    @dollared: Since the only people I’ve ever seen dislike Greenwald “for being angry the law isn’t being enforced” are on right-wing blogs, so you might want to ask there.

  120. 120
    gwangung says:

    It is really weird to have people dislike Glenn Greenwald for being angry because the law is not being enforced.
    __
    Can someone explain this to me? Don’t give me style complaints – substance, please.

    Disliking his style is not the same as disliking what he fights for.

    Open immigration and free trade are clear positions in favor of impoverishing working Americans.

    Immigration? Hm. Talk to Hispanic and Asian Americans about that.

  121. 121
    nestor says:

    @dollared:

    To be honest, the inner workings of Glenn Greenwald have always been somewhat of a mystery to me.

    I should probably start following his twitter tweets.

  122. 122
    General Stuck says:

    @joe from Lowell:

    strokes chin:
    fascinating.

    It truly is, you can’t even make light hearted jokes/snark about the guy or it’s hate. What a political force this would be if channeled into actually supporting a dem president where support actually matters for getting things done, that most here want done.

    such irony is the stuff of blogs

  123. 123

    @dollared:

    But Yglesias is on the side of the elites. Open immigration and free trade are clear positions in favor of impoverishing working Americans.

    Just so you know, Yglesias’ position on immigration is indistinguishable from that of the AFL-CIO, the SEIU, and just about every other national union.

    Please, spend a moment considering what you just did: you just asserted that the American labor movement, by virtue of not wanting the government to push around immigrants, is in favor of impoverishing working Americans.

    I’m not asking you to reconsider your position on immigration; I’m asking you to reconsider your understanding of why people disagree with you.

  124. 124
    NobodySpecial says:

    @General Stuck: When those were not passed prior, you blamed Congress, so Congress should get the credit for it. Obama is equal to Clinton in this regard, not superior.

  125. 125

    @dollared:

    You really think gay civil rights policy is what defines a liberal?

    Just a reminder, the characterization you’re debating is:

    the most socially liberal Presidency ever

    So, yeah, gay civil rights is a pretty big part of the picture.

  126. 126
    General Stuck says:

    @dollared:

    It most certainly is at the presidential level. Not at the Sullivan level, which should be obvious. And we were talking about SOCIAlly liberal. read back the links.

  127. 127
    Odie Hugh Manatee says:

    One thing that even the dim bulbs in the media should understand by now is that there is in fact a class war going on, and it is the rich and powerful who are waging it.

    Many of them already know it and have for a long time now. They work for the upper class, they depend on them for their employment and pay. They are bought and paid for shameless shills and political propagandists for the rich but you’ll never get them to admit it.

    Never.

  128. 128
    Jennyjinx says:

    So, what you’re saying is that there are ratfuckers trying to hurt the credibility of websites? I’d like to act surprised and outraged, but this is not something that just started. Sow dissension among the peons? Pfft. Nothing new there either.

    To hurt the credibility of the CoC, though, this information has to get off the web and into the news that “average” folk take seriously– such as their nightly news or local newspaper. Progressive/liberal blogs interlinking each other (which is funny in itself) is good for getting us the news, but we’ve already known this. The only thing this document does for us is confirm our suspicions. This has the potential to change the minds of the average person if this information can get to them. And Rachel and/or John aren’t going to get that particular job done.

    Another issue that this brings up, is: Can we really trust those who are supposed to speak for us to actually look out for our best interests? If money changes everything and the other side has all the money, who are they paying on our side to sow even more dissension? That’s a valid question (but one I can’t answer because, ahem, I still haven’t got my Soros check yet). And, no, this isn’t a dig at Cole.

    Personally, I don’t trust those who threaten to out people on our side (or investigate them) because those people had an opposing viewpoint. I don’t trust those on our side who try to invalidate opinions of smaller voices by screaming “Shill!” at them. I don’t trust those on our side who would rather have power/money than to hold strong to their declared ideology. I think it’s possible to become respected/influential/a regular on the tee vee without engaging in the same practices that define the GOP/Tea Party. I think, while we’re worried about what the CoC (and other groups) are doing, we should be concerned about what our own leaders are doing, too.

  129. 129
    MattR says:

    @joe from Lowell:

    I took exception to that attack on people who don’t like Greenwald – but never, you have utterly failed to notice – actually attacked Greenwald.

    In what world is this true? Are you actually trying to argue that commenters on balloon juice don’t like Greenwald but never attack him?

  130. 130
    bemused says:

    I was just thinking about Egypt, other Middle Eastern countries, Latin American countries moving toward becoming democracies and here in the US, we are being bulldozed and conned into giving our democracy up. The ultimate irony. I wonder what it will be like living in one of the largest banana republics in the world. What a comedown.

  131. 131
    General Stuck says:

    @NobodySpecial:

    Obama is equal to Clinton in this regard, not superior.

    You say such dumb things on this blog, but this comment is in the top tier of that class. Clinton helped pass the goddamn law and SIGNED IT INTO LAW. Obama pushed for repeal, and smartly going the route of getting the top mil brass on board, that won the day in the end. AND SIGNED THAT REPEAL

  132. 132

    @BGinCHI:

    Sorry, but that’s a naive reading.

    Is there anything less convincing than the internet guy tut-tutting about how “naive” it is to hold a different opinion?

    What the msm does, without doubt, is protect the status quo. Whether they think they do or not, whether it’s intentional, the msm in this country shows no inclination to speak truth to power, to jeopardize their positions, and so on.

    That’s quite a different matter than being an active participant on one of the sides. Think about it – you, yourself, trying to define what the corporate media does that makes it part of the class war, came up with “inactivity.”

    Well, the people actually waging the class war don’t just fail to speak truth to power, or fail to jeopardize their positions. They actively take affirmative steps to impose a right-wing political agenda.

    There’s a difference. What’s naive – perhaps simplistic would be a better adjective – is to think that everyone outside of your team is working together.

  133. 133
    dollared says:

    @joe from Lowell: Link, please, for AFL-CIO favoring unlimited immigration. Not immigration reform. Yglesias is far more open than just reform.

    Link, please, for AFL-CIO advocating free trade agreements.

  134. 134
    Fuzz says:

    I always think of the people in Argentina, when their economy collapsed in the late 90s/early 00s, and how the bankers and the financial power brokers became the most hated people in the entire country, to the point that they needed bodyguards. Here, after our financial collapse, after these assholes basically either stole or just fucked up and lost an incredible 40% of the wealth in THE ENTIRE WORLD, we have radio hosts riling the citizenry into some kind of rage when the government tries to raise taxes, slightly, on the very same assholes who just ruined everyone’s lives. It’s almost like we, as a country, are too stupid, or maybe too scared, to see that the whole system is built on this myth that what’s good for them is good for you, and (even more outlandish) that if you work hard enough, you can become one of them. Until we stop believing that utter bullshit, it will always be the same.

  135. 135
    Suck It Up! says:

    “Hell, even in this post I can guarantee that at least five shitheads will come in and tell me they don’t like Glenn Greenwald because he uses too many words or that Jane Hamsher is shrill or because neither of them fellate Obama to satisfaction.”

    I don’t even understand how you jumped from the beginning of your post to THIS. Those two didn’t even come to mind as I was reading and it looks like no one else was thinking of them either. weird. really.

  136. 136
    Splitting Image says:

    @13th Generation:

    Sorry if I’m wrong about that. But I don’t think I am.

    Not surprised, to be honest.

    Your kind never does.

  137. 137

    @NobodySpecial:

    When those were not passed prior, you blamed Congress, so Congress should get the credit for it.

    1. Does not follow. If the President tries to pass a bill and is blocked by Congress, it is to Congress’s shame that they blocked it, not the President’s. If the President succeeds in passing a bill, it is to his credit, as well as theirs.

    The President doesn’t get credit for passing his agenda because he had to have Congress aboard? That makes no sense.

    2. Clinton didn’t just fail to repeal DOMA while calling for its repeal; he signed the bill. That’s a huge, meaningful difference.

  138. 138
    Jennyjinx says:

    P.S.

    Just because John laid the Greenwald/Hamster/Obama is God/the devil debate trap doesn’t mean you have to fall into it. Commenters here are generally a lot smarter than that. Please fight the urge.

  139. 139
    dollared says:

    @gwangung: Hispanic and Asian Americans? Already here. Not the issue, but I appreciate your racial wedge approach.

  140. 140
    Hob says:

    @joe from Lowell: “Out of nowhere, with no relevance whatsoever to the topic”?? Did you read the article Cole linked to? Greenwald is named specifically as one of the targets HB Gary Federal was hired to “sabotage or discredit.”

  141. 141
    Just Some Fuckhead says:

    Great post John. It appears, however, you lowballed the shithead number. Haha.

  142. 142
    You Don't Say says:

    @BGinCHI: My favorite quote from a quote-heavy great movie!

  143. 143
    dollared says:

    @Suck It Up!: I don’t know about Jane, but the linked article specifically refers to the project including a dirty tricks attack on GG. That’s why it’s in there.

  144. 144
    MBunge says:

    Has Glenn Greenwald ever written a cross word about Bill Clinton? A lot of the stuff he roasts Obama for has a lineage that goes back to The Big Dog and it’s not like Billie’s refrained from the spotlight since he left office, yet I’m not sure I’ve ever read or even heard about The Last Honest Man reading out the riot act when it comes to Clinton.

    Mike

  145. 145
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Jennyjinx: I have come to realize that this is the shiny object that must be pursued at all costs. I will also plead guilty to have chased it myself on occasion.

  146. 146
    Tsulagi says:

    @Sockpuppet:

    The fact that any of you lamebrains would fail to understand that immediately makes it pretty clear who the “reflexive” ones really are.

    Yeah, you could almost hear a whooshing sound as it went over their heads, or through as the case may be. Funny.

    Particularly liked cathyx numbered shithead#3. First comment is “fabulous post,” dude. Then later after he actually reads the entire post it’s more like “Umm, not sure but I think you may have called me a shithead so I take back the fabulous.” Classic. Guess Cole was using too many words too. For some.

  147. 147
    Felanius Kootea (formerly Salt and freshly ground black people) says:

    And the sad part is when the disinformation campaign grows, no one will have learned anything. There will be more ACORNs, Planned Parenthood and other targets falling because of fake documents, entrapment plots and heavily edited video with no one fighting back in an organized manner.

  148. 148

    @MattR: Whoops! I am undone by my punctuation!

    I took exception to that attack on people who don’t like Greenwald – but never, you have utterly failed to notice – actually attacked Greenwald.

    Change that to:

    I took exception to that attack on people who don’t like Greenwald – but never, you have utterly failed to notice actually attacked Greenwald.

    Meaning, I never actually attacked Greenwald on this thread. I took exception to the attack on Greenwald haters, but I didn’t attack him. That’s what I meant to say.

  149. 149
    David Fud says:

    @BombIranForChrist: Couldn’t agree more. Transparency until if m-f-ing hurts. Give me more Anonymous, please.

  150. 150
    numbskull says:

    @General Stuck:

    You all are getting a tad creepy

    Well, glad that you’re worried, but who is “you all” and why would you view any others here as being in a group with cathyx?

  151. 151
    Just Some Fuckhead says:

    @Tsulagi: I lol’ed. Poor Stuck always gets caught between his love for Obama and his reflexive toadyism to the front pagers.

  152. 152

    @dollared:

    @joe from Lowell: Link, please, for AFL-CIO favoring unlimited immigration. Not immigration reform. Yglesias is far more open than just reform.

    You’re back-pedaling, and you should. Yglesias supports the same immigration reform as the AFL-CIO. He does not support “unlimited immigration,” but, like the AFL-CIO, he frequently has his views misrepresented that way.

    Since you are already apparently familiar with the AFL-CIO’s position on immigration reform, I won’t bother linking to it.

    And since I never wrote a single word about the AFL-CIO supporting free trade agreements, you’ll forgive me for not finding you links for a position I’ve neither taken nor believe.

  153. 153
    Suck It Up! says:

    This is why we can’t have productive discussions.

  154. 154
    NobodySpecial says:

    @General Stuck: Clinton originally wanted full equality for gays in the military, same as Obama. The difference is that Congress would not move for Clinton, and instead we got DADT, which was only signed by Clinton because he believed that at least that way, gays would be able to serve. In other words, that pragmatism you flagellate the left over whenever you troll.

    Clinton wanted gays to be able to serve openly.
    Obama wanted gays to be able to serve openly.

    One is not different from the other.

  155. 155
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Suck It Up!: … or nice things.

  156. 156
    dollared says:

    @General Stuck: No. You are buying the entire culture war framing.

    10% unemployment and 20% U6 is a SOCIAL issue. 37% of all American children spending at least one year of childhood in poverty is a social issue. And while Obama says he cares, he does nothing – nothing – about it.

    For my money, that vulgar redneck war criminal Lyndon Johnson was much more socially liberal. Because he really did things for poor people.

  157. 157
    General Stuck says:

    @Tsulagi:

    No you dishonest hack. I didn’t take back the “fabulous” post, but wondered wtf the ending had to do with anything.

    @Just Some Fuckhead:

    Go to hell you piece of shit

  158. 158

    @Hob: The question of people’s opinion about Greenwald and Hamsher (where was she mentioned, pray tell?) is what is irrelevant to the thread. The Greenwald Wars, where people actually do complain about him, that John dragged into his post, are irrelevant.

  159. 159
    gwangung says:

    @dollared: Then you don’t know jack. Ignorable ignorant twit.

  160. 160
    Caz says:

    “You have to understand the mindset- they are playing for keeps. The vast majority of the wealth isn’t enough. They want it all. Anything that gets in their way must be destroyed. They don’t care if they poison every stream or crack the foundation to your house or if your daughter dies getting a back alley abortion or if every one in your mining town has an inoperable tumor. They just don’t give a shit.”

    It doesn’t even make any sense. The rich and the corporations want poor people and the middle class to suffer and die? What the hell would be the benefit from that to anyone?

    They’re playing for keeps! They just don’t give a shit! LOL. I can’t decide if this is pathetic or hilarious. Maybe a little of both. Boy, you people are really a bunch of morons.

    I don’t even know what else to say. There’s no way to actually respond to this in any logical manner, so I guess I’ll just stop. The rich are evil; down with the rich. LOL. Get a grip, people.

  161. 161
    MattR says:

    @joe from Lowell: Ah. That makes a ton more sense.

    @Caz: The rich are not evil because they are rich. The rich are evil for the actions they take to obtain a larger portion of the pie. I think most liberals would be quite happy if things went back to the wealth distribution we had in 1975 (as a quickly grabbed example), despite the presence of plenty of rich people at that time.

  162. 162

    Teh Left…drool, slobber. The left is considerably more fractious than the Democratic Pary, so no, Jane doesn’t represent The Left – just her part of it. One of the most basic opinions/policies of the left is that there is a class war and that the side with money is winning and that the only counter to that is government. Sure, GLBT issues feature there, more so and more dramatic than other places but economics affect us all. The legal treatment and attitudes toward the GLBT are shameful, but we’re getting our asses kicked badly on a much bigger issue and the President and Congress are hardly innocent in that.

    DADT and ACA may be pretty big deals, but quite flatly the T-Rex in the room is ignored. The collapse of ’08 meant what to the ’10 elections? Once the frame got pushed so damn far right, the “middle” way espoused by so many results in being quite right – not progressive or liberal and sure the hell not left. You all feel free to call Obama progressive or liberal if it pleases you, the results are nothing of the sort. As for your Civil Liberties … oh the hell with that.

  163. 163
    dollared says:

    @joe from Lowell: Agreed on FTAs. But read Yglesias. He is in favor of expanding immigration.http://yglesias.thinkprogress......insurance/

  164. 164
    JC says:

    Of course Cole, you realize, you are only saying what High Prophet Carlin said, many years ago.

    however, it’s good to point out that these guys DO engage in ‘war by other means’, when the details come out on the destructive plans.

    The question, as always, is what can be done? Exposing this crap, we rely on the natural revulsion of these type of things, to penetrate the consciousness of the typical American.

    But the typical American gets their information from the ‘owners’, the Chamber of Commerce types. (Which is how idiots like the current Republican crowd, got elected, and how the Rethugs can – EVER – be taken seriously when talking deficit reduction. They can’t, of course. But somehow they get to pretend.)

    So what’s to be done, with the game so rigged?

  165. 165
    Svensker says:

    @Spaghetti Lee:

    Hey! Stop making sense! Right this instant!

  166. 166
    General Stuck says:

    @NobodySpecial:

    You idiot. What did DADT offer that didn’t already exist. I served in the military before DADT, with gays and they kept it to themselves, and I didn’t ask and they didn’t tell.

    Without that odious piece of shit law, things would have went on just the they had been when I was in. But having it codified, opened the door for homophobes to use it as a weapon to harass and trap suspected gays, providing a legal framework to practice bigotry. Clinton didn’t have to sign that bill. He did because he wanted the military to like and accept him, being a former draft dodger of sorts.

  167. 167
    Palantir info says:

    If you’re going to go after these guys, start with Palantir. Their software is top notch, the people who work there are extremely bright, and….they’re pretty much all liberals on the worker bee level. Headquartered in Palo Alto, they’re a stone’s throw from Stanford.

    Seriously – wanna raise awareness? Begin with demonstrations in front of their headquarters, which are at the nexus of the Caltrain station and University avenue.

  168. 168
    dollared says:

    @Chuck Butcher: This. You would have to be born in 2001 to think Obama is liberal. He is somewhere between Richard Nixon and Bob Dole.

    Sudden, weird thought: Wouldn’t we have been better off with two terms of Nixon and no Reagan, and two terms of Dole and no Bush? Hun

  169. 169
    dollared says:

    @Chuck Butcher: This. You would have to be born in 2001 to think Obama is liberal. He is somewhere between Richard Nixon and Bob Dole.

    Sudden, weird thought: Wouldn’t we have been better off with two terms of Nixon and no Reagan, and two terms of Dole and no Bush? Hun

  170. 170
    Rihilism says:

    It is unfortunate that these corporate “hit-jobs” “issues” have centered around “not-easily considered” persons such GG, Assaunge, etc. Perhaps if the target of these “legal” corporate actions was someone/thing less “controversial” it wouldn’t be as difficult for some to “fucking getting it” to borrow from JC.

    Well, how about Think Progress? They are also being targeted. Are they sufficiently “without sin” to qualify for a more concerned response regarding the increasingly authoritarian corporate oligarchy? Or have they hurt someone’s feefees to the extent that we should simply ignore the strategy of divide/discredit/demolish being employed by our corporate overlords?

    John may have stepped in it when he mentioned certain peoples’ likely response to his post. Without knowing, I assume it was preemptive and perhaps a bit out of frustration with those who would rather focus on the “who” rather than the “what” and “why”.

    As to whether JC was attacking his allies, I’d suggest that people avoid relying on a blog such as John’s for your daily affirmation. There are other web locations where you are less likely to get your panties in a bunch (my apologies to women for the rather sexist nature of that last comment). John pisses you off today? Well, these things happen. But it certainly not necessary for you to comment every single frickin’ time your honor has been deflowered and besmirched, is it? If it is, then perhaps your personal outrage meter needs to be moved down from eleven.

    John is a human being after all (again, I’m assuming), and he may occasionally “lash out” in frustration at those he believes would rather focus on the side issues rather than the main event. It would be a human response though not necessarily well measured. Perhaps a more mature and ultimately more constructive response to his post would be to ignore it and focus on the issues at hand rather fingering your gauntlet….

  171. 171
    An Onymous says:

    I’m an engineer, interviewed at Palantir and did not get an offer.

    Glad now.

  172. 172

    @NobodySpecial: That’s good enough for DADT – I do think Clinton is unfairly maligned as having supported it, when actually his proposal was blocked – but what about DOMA? There’s no way Barack Obama would sign that.

  173. 173
    An Onymous says:

    I’m an engineer, interviewed at Palantir and did not get an offer.

    Glad now.

  174. 174
    Suck It Up! says:

    @dollared:

    ok, but it was still uncalled for.

  175. 175
    Svensker says:

    @nestor:

    Are you one of Glenn’s old trolls? Is this the Wayback Machine?

  176. 176

    @dollared: The terms “socially liberal” and “economically liberal” exist, and are distinguished from each other, for a reason.

    You can’t just go back and redefine words like that.

  177. 177

    @Caz:

    It doesn’t even make any sense. The rich and the corporations want poor people and the middle class to suffer and die? What the hell would be the benefit from that to anyone?

    Read the quote you pasted a little closer this time.

    They don’t care if they poison every stream or…

    They don’t care. They aren’t actively working to harm the middle class and poor – the damage they do is a just a side effect that they won’t life a finger or deny themselves a dollar to avoid.

  178. 178
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @joe from Lowell: Dude, everything is, like, interrelated. And stuff.

  179. 179
    Maude says:

    @General Stuck:
    GG is in Brazil isn’t he? Are we all Brazilian now?
    I haven’t forgiven the Leni Riefenstahl remark. Could take some time.

  180. 180
    shithead #1, formerly danimal says:

    I’ve long suspected that liberal blog comments really are infiltrated by conservative dirty tricksters. No matter what side you’re on in the Great JC/GG/JH debate, can we all agree that Think Progress has done a trememdous service by exposing what many of us have suspected to be true for years.

    I believe that Real Journalism is just about the best method of counter-attacking the Borg in our ongoing American class war. It’s a shame the MSM isn’t up to the job. Thank goodness for Think Progress.

  181. 181
    dollared says:

    @joe from Lowell: What? You think that there’s some dictionary definition that makes poverty not a social issue? You need to spend some time being poor.

  182. 182
    Tsulagi says:

    @General Stuck:

    but wondered wtf the ending had to do with anything.

    The whooshing continues. Carry on, General.

  183. 183
    General Stuck says:

    @Maude:

    I haven’t forgiven the Leni Riefenstahl remark.

    A long time, maybe a century or two.

  184. 184
    The Other Chuck says:

    @freelancer:

    My response has always been “Why don’t you stand for a world where less people want to abort their kids?”

  185. 185

    @General Stuck:

    Clinton didn’t have to sign that bill. He did because he wanted the military to like and accept him, being a former draft dodger of sorts.

    That’s not fair. Clinton signed the bill because he thought he had a deal to protect gay people who kept their orientation on the D.L. to avoid being snooped on and persecuted. Then, afterwards, the military went back on their end of the deal.

    You, personally, might not have asked, but there was a lot of asking and and lot of snooping before DADT.

  186. 186
    El Tiburon says:

    @joe from Lowell:
    Like he said, you just don’t get it.

  187. 187
    MBunge says:

    @Rihilism: “But it certainly not necessary for you to comment every single frickin’ time”

    The lack of self-awareness! It burns!

    Mike

  188. 188
    bystander says:

    As Paul Rosenberg wrote at the now defunct Open Left:

    And they’re coming after everything we’ve got left to live on, much less to fight them with. [7/16/2010]

    Great post, Cole.

  189. 189
    numbskull says:

    @General Stuck:

    Go to hell you piece of shit

    Well, as long as it’s a compelling argument…

  190. 190
    General Stuck says:

    @joe from Lowell:

    That’s not fair. Clinton signed the bill because he thought he had a deal to protect gay people who kept their orientation on the D.L. to avoid being snooped on and persecuted.

    If that is what he thought, then he was clueless about the military, or he did it for the reasons I stated. I choose the latter to believe, but only Clinton knows for sure.

  191. 191
    Morbo says:

    Hell, even in this post I can guarantee that at least five shitheads will come in and tell me they don’t like Glenn Greenwald because he uses too many words or that Jane Hamsher is shrill or because neither of them fellate Obama to satisfaction.

    Without that sentence I would have put the number at zero, but it is nonetheless excellent commenter trolling.

  192. 192

    I have to wonder how many tools know what the word co-opt refers to in politics. It really is quite nasty in its final implications. You hand out a goddam fig leaf to paper over the real differences. You could, for instance, offer up a socially “liberal” policy while behaving in a plutocratic manner and get away with it because people think they got something important while the foot remains on their neck.

  193. 193
    MBunge says:

    @joe from Lowell: “Clinton signed the bill because he thought he had a deal to protect gay people who kept their orientation on the D.L. to avoid being snooped on and persecuted. Then, afterwards, the military went back on their end of the deal.”

    DADT went into effect in 1993. Clinton had another 7 years in office after that. He did what about DADT during that time?

    Mike

  194. 194
    MattR says:

    @General Stuck:

    If that is what he thought, then he was clueless about the military, or he did it for the reasons I stated.

    OTOH, if Clinton thought the miltary would like him becasue he signed DADT then he was clueless about the military.

    (Edited because I misread your comment initially)

  195. 195
    General Stuck says:

    @MattR:

    LOL. good point.

  196. 196
    Suck It Up! says:

    There is a class war and I would take Team Obama any day over the “heroes” of the politically inept and sanctimonious left.

  197. 197

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    Dude, everything is, like, interrelated. And stuff.</blockquote

    Walter Sobchak: Those rich fucks! This whole fucking thing… I did not watch my buddies die face down in the muck so that this fucking strumpet…
    The Dude: I don’t see any connection to Vietnam, Walter.
    Walter Sobchak: Well, there isn’t a literal connection, Dude.
    The Dude: Walter, face it, there isn’t any connection

  198. 198
    numbskull says:

    @Caz:

    They’re playing for keeps! They just don’t give a shit! LOL. I can’t decide if this is pathetic or hilarious. Maybe a little of both. Boy, you people are really a bunch of morons.

    Don’t know many rich people, do ya binky? I work with ’em all the time. A LOT of them are as described here.

    But look, what do you think the Wikileaks docs demonstrate? What do you think is going on here? If you feel that JC’s comments are too far over the edge, then please, give us your take on the import of the subject of the leaked docs.

    Or do you want to just to pretend that it’s not happening?

  199. 199
    Rihilism says:

    @MBunge: “The lack of self-awareness! It burns!”

    I’m sorry, MBunge, was that directed at me, or John, or both of us or those to which John was referring?

  200. 200
    Shithead #3 - formerly Gen Stuck says:

    shithead #1, formerly danimal

    I like it.

  201. 201

    @MattR:

    See how co-opting works? Cole posts one thing and you wind up arguing about Clinton and DADT and meanwhile continue getting fucked without lube.

  202. 202

    @dollared:

    What? You think that there’s some dictionary definition that makes poverty not a social issue?

    I think words have meanings, and you don’t get to make up new ones when things are going badly in an argument.

    Social issues. Economic issues. This is not that hard.

    You need to spend some time being poor.

    Been there. Done that. Ate popcorn because it wasn’t pay day yet.

    So spare me the sanctimony, and come up with a classier way to deal with the fact that you skipped over the word “socially” in the phrase “most socially liberal president.”

  203. 203
    Hob says:

    @joe from Lowell: It’s really not that complicated.

    There’s a long history here of discussions about [crappy political development X that Glenn Greenwald commented on] devolving into an argument about whether or not Greenwald is not a worthy defender of our side on X.

    Cole now points to a story that should be of general concern, which also happens to involve GG. Cole then briefly mentions that he expects some people will derail the discussion by arguing about Greenwald again, and that if they do that, they’ll be missing the more important story.

    And he was sort of right, except what you’re doing is even more pointless than what he expected. You’re derailing the discussion by arguing about Cole’s prediction that someone would derail the discussion. You found a whole new way to miss the point.

  204. 204

    @General Stuck: Is “Bill Clinton was clueless about the military in 1993” really an implausible belief?

    He had no experience with it, he’d never held federal office before, and he took on the issue as one of the very first things he did upon coming into office, when his White House was constantly screwing up.

  205. 205
    El Tiburon says:

    @Spaghetti Lee:
    Ding ding ding we have a winner.

    Joe from Lowell, eemom, et al would rather jerk off to Glenn& Hamsher hate-porn (citizens united? Really? Idiot) rather than acknowledge their invaluable fight for the cause.

    Cole puts out the red meat and the Pavlov dogs come running frothing at the mouth.

  206. 206
    MBunge says:

    @Rihilism: It’s to the suggestion that it’s Greenwald critics who need to refrain from commenting every frickin’ time The Last Honest Man is mentioned, as though GG-lovers weren’t just as OCD about rebuting every perceived slight to his sainted honor.

    Mike

  207. 207

    @MBunge:

    DADT went into effect in 1993. Clinton had another 7 years in office after that. He did what about DADT during that time?

    The Republicans held Congress for 6 of those 7 years, and it wasn’t clear that the military was stabbing him in the back until a couple years after the bill passed.

  208. 208
    Emma says:

    I would like to call for a damn moratorium on Greenwald. Please. He’s not a saint and he’s not a devil, and if his manner rubs some of us off, that’s par for the course in human interaction.There are so many more interesting things to fight about!

  209. 209

    @Shithead #3 – formerly Gen Stuck: Oh, yeah?

    I’m NUMBER TWO!

    I think I’ll just go with “#2head.”

  210. 210
    Shithead #3 - formerly Gen Stuck says:

    @joe from Lowell:

    Maybe. But presidents are still responsible for signing laws into law. He gets some mitigation possibly, from being new on the job. But not a pardon.

  211. 211
    kentropic says:

    Echoes of the Pennsylvania domestic spying incident that cost the PA security chief his job last year: http://www.pennlive.com/midsta.....ity_1.html.

    These folks will never stop – they’ll just go deeper undercover. “The grabbing hands / grab all they can / all for themselves / after all:” Depeche Mode nailed it, years ago.

  212. 212
    MD Rackham says:

    @Morbo: That’s only because the shitheads–as has been demonstrated repeatedly here–comment before they’ve read the post or followed any links.

    I think John was being pre-emptive, but failed to realize just how clueless at least some of the shitheads are.

    Whoosh indeed.

  213. 213
    MBunge says:

    @Hob: “Cole then briefly mentions that he expects some people will derail the discussion by arguing about Greenwald again”

    Uh…

    I can guarantee that at least five shitheads will come in and tell me they don’t like Glenn Greenwald because he uses too many words or that Jane Hamsher is shrill or because neither of them fellate Obama to satisfaction.

    When you deliberately provoke a reaction, you can’t then claim that reaction proves something.

    Mike

  214. 214

    @Hob:

    Cole now points to a story that should be of general concern, which also happens to involve GG.

    And you’re fine with that.

    You’re so terribly upset at the concept of people generally on the left engaging in infighting and missing the point that you…defend John for attacking people on the left, irrelevantly, and starting up a fight, while attacking those of us who objected to what he did.

    Brilliant!

    Oh, and btw, striking the little “This isn’t that complicated” pose to pretend that someone who thinks your argument is idiotic, and has taken it apart already, just doesn’t understand, reeks of desperation.

    It’s like leading off with “LOL!” It’s something you do to try to appear to be superior, when you don’t think your argument is going to get it done on its own.

  215. 215
    MBunge says:

    @joe from Lowell: What? You mean we’re actually allowed to understand why a President may do something we don’t like and even make excuses for him doing it? When the fuck did that become the rule?

    Mike

  216. 216
    dollared says:

    @joe from Lowell: not so good at that complexity thing, are you? You think social issues are completely separate from social issues? Is racism a social issue or an economic issue?

  217. 217
    Shithead #3 - formerly Gen Stuck says:

    @MD Rackham:

    Sound likes a chicken/egg conundrum. I personally think it’s a riot, the good kind of riot, with a target rich environ for snarkery. It has turned a bit serious though, which is too bad.

  218. 218
    Stillwater says:

    @Hob: You found a whole new way to miss the point.

    Joe is very creative, revolutionary almost, in the ways he can miss the point. Give him some credit for that.

  219. 219
    MBunge says:

    @MD Rackham:“That’s only because the shitheads—as has been demonstrated repeatedly here—comment before they’ve read the post or followed any links.”

    If that’s true, then Greenwald’s name would have never come up if Cole hadn’t mentioned it, right?

    Mike

  220. 220
    300baud says:

    Bravo, John.

    As an entrepreneur who has a deep appreciation for the power of a free market, it makes me crazy that the Galtian assholes and their legions of fluffers are making me say, “Boy, that Marx guy had some good points about class.”

  221. 221

    @Shithead #3 – formerly Gen Stuck: Let’s keep in mind, if followed strictly, the bill he signed and the regs his Pentagon wrote would have actually made things better for gay troops.

  222. 222
    Caz says:

    At numbskull:

    First of all, I don’t see how Wikileaks has anything to do with evil corporations or the wealthy. Most the post is incoherent rich-bashing, which is the fashionable progressive thing to do these days.

    Secondly, people who leak confidential government information ought to be punished. Those who publish what the leakers give them, not so much. I thought this has been clear for years – ever since the Watergate lawsuits.

    But again, I don’t see how this has anything to do with rich people, and I don’t see how rich people wanting more money is evil. Don’t we all want more money? Just because some are more successful than others doesn’t make them evil. As for corporations abusing the environment, this is a problem that has no malice attached to it. Corporations simply do what is best for their bottom line. Laws needs to strictly enforced, which they are not – and it’s mainly due to the incompetence of government.

  223. 223
    matoko_chan says:

    nice. very nice.
    i have underappreciated you as well, John Cole.
    you just might make a decent quellist.
    ;)

  224. 224

    @dollared:

    not so good at that complexity thing, are you?

    Actually, I’m so adept at complexity that I can immediately recognize when someone is working to make something simple seem complex in order to obscure a point.

    Some social issues have economic effects. Some economic issues have social effects. Some issues are fundamentally both social and economic.

    And absolutely none of that makes “He didn’t do enough about poverty” a relevant statement about someone’s social liberalism.

  225. 225
    moe99 says:

    I wonder if Obama is rethinking his attempt to make nice with the Chamber this Tuesday?

    http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsme....._commerce/

  226. 226
    Ralf says:

    So, John, you got us to ActBlue pretty effectively. How about for one thing, we Juicers give a bag full of cash to Think Progress. And one or two other appropriate non-profits that are movingn our viewpoint against these hyper-privileged, power-crazed nihilists.

  227. 227

    How to pretend you aren’t losing an argument:

    1. When you can’t rebut, say “You just don’t understand the point.”

    2. If someone else agrees, just keep nodding at each other.

  228. 228
    Just Some Fuckhead says:

    3. Write this.

  229. 229

    @Caz:

    Don’t we all want more money?

    Good job there, I’d certainly like more money, but there are a whole lot of lengthes I’d not go to. A GOPer POV, money = good, you just jealous…

    Are you deliberately stupid or was this just an accident?

  230. 230
    lol says:

    @MBunge:

    One curious phenomenon of late with the Professional Left has been the lionization of Clinton as this Great Liberal President, largely based on remarks he’s made *hafter* he left office even as they simultaneously lambast Obama for not repealing his actual policies quickly enough.

    It’s part of their “optics > results” mentality. Obsessed with framing the perfect policy, disdainful of actually implementing it.

  231. 231
    Allan says:

    @Suck It Up!: Yep. This. As Al Giordano has said, repeatedly, about He and She Who Must Not Be Named, they are not on my side and I don’t want them in my foxhole.

  232. 232
    Stillwater says:

    Damn dudes, this Cathyx has crazy-beautiful powerz!

  233. 233
    Shithead #3 - formerly Gen Stuck says:

    @Stillwater:

    She is dumb as a fencepost, just like you.

  234. 234
    eemom says:

    “That’s only because the shitheads—as has been demonstrated repeatedly here—comment before they’ve read the post or followed any links.”

    Any links?

    The general formula of a John Cole post is link + quote + off the cuff rant, occasionally topped off with a swipe at his regular readers, as here.

    There is never any actual research into the subject of the quoted link, and rarely any independent thought.

  235. 235
    Rihilism says:

    @MBunge: I was neither referring to the GG supporters nor the detractors (I am neither, by the way, though I think that aggressive critiques of those in power is healthy as long as the critique is honest).

    I was referring to a more meta discussion of those who get upset because JC has apparently upset them with his blog post and thus feel the need to focus on their “upsetness” rather than the actual issues he discussed. This seems to be especially true whenever the dreaded GG gambit is played. My suggestion in my comment above (however obtuse) is to simply let it go, take the high road, etc.

    As to self-awareness. Is anyone really self-aware?

  236. 236
    eemom says:

    @Allan:

    don’t forget “pond scum”!

  237. 237
    PS says:

    I liked the original rant, and I think it’s important. Scrolled through the comments and got very disappointed. What a lot of half-bright, over-self-confident people yelling apparently in order to hear their own voices. And the truly sad thing is that I strongly suspect that most of us mostly agree with each other. It’s real People’s Front of Judea stuff.

  238. 238
    Stillwater says:

    @Shithead #3 – formerly Gen Stuck: You seemed to agree with her, eh Shithead?

  239. 239
    Chris says:

    It amazes me how even “smart” people get caught up in believing this teabagger galtian crap. I have a client who’s biz has gone to hell since late 08. He designed small bank branches in a very red southern state. He has taken it on the chin and hasnt done very well since it all went to hell. Who does he blame? You know who he blames. Does he blame the greedy damn bankers who TOLD HIM they stopped building branches because the finreg legislation stopped them from charging ungodly fees for stupid shit? No he doesnt. He told me today that Obama raised my taxes. I told him no he didnt. Then he backed up and said well…he changed shit and is making the cities and states raise taxes. You never win with these damn people. Next he is ranting about overpaid municipal employees. Fuck man I get it that you are hurting and you want to blame somebody..but look around. Cant you see who is to blame here?

  240. 240
    Shithead #3 - formerly Gen Stuck says:

    @Stillwater:

    You are right. caithx should get a Nobel for numbering shitheads. My bad.

  241. 241
    WyldPirate says:

    @eemom:

    Any links?

    The general formula of a John Cole post is link + quote + off the cuff rant, occasionally topped off with a swipe at his regular readers, as here.

    There is never any actual research into the subject of the quoted link, and rarely any independent thought.

    Well, hell eemom. WTF do you hang out here for then?

  242. 242
    4jkb4ia says:

    This whole campaign is full of real cynicism about how the internet works. Yves Smith probably would be able to tell real from fake documents because she can tell which sources to trust.

    Yves came to the understanding that the rich were waging class war without really having a predefined political set of views. OTOH part of being a liberal is understanding that the system is rigged in part and trying to push back against it.

    I think the shitheads part was boilerplate after John has seen too many of these threads go to hell.

  243. 243
    geg6 says:

    Late to the thread, which seems to have degenerated into crazyland, I just wanna say…

    Right on, Cole. Best rant in ages and totes on point. Bravo.

  244. 244
    nestor says:

    @Svensker:

    Of course not. I was clearly referencing the other sockpuppet.

  245. 245
    4jkb4ia says:

    @eemom:

    Balloon.Juice.Means.Hot.Air. That has not been a secret for years.

  246. 246
    John Cole says:

    @Morbo:

    Without that sentence I would have put the number at zero, but it is nonetheless excellent commenter trolling.

    I wasn’t trolling. I mentioned Glenn in the first paragraph as one of the people being targeted along with ACORN and Planned Parenthood. That alone, the mere mention of his name, is enough to send the usual suspects into bouts of idiocy.

  247. 247
    Shithead #3 - formerly Gen Stuck says:

    @John Cole:

    Since there is zero chance of Jane or GG fellating Obama in the slightest way, and never has been, the idiocy is all on you dude. You once supported getting and keeping dems in office, those two want Obama gone, and any other dem that doesn’t measure up to purity standards. you want to swap out going from one type of wingnut to another, fine, some of us were neither, and never will be.

  248. 248
    newhavenguy says:

    “Banana Republic” is no longer a polemic epithet. And no, I don’t mean Obama, and I don’t mean ZOMG BROWN PEOPLE IN MAH MER’KA! either.

    We’re bigger and have a far more capable military, but our society has been trending towards Mexico or Brazil for decades now. A society in which a few, very few in fact, live a gilded life of heavily armed luxury, with 80% struggling at best, and another 5-10% who hate the poor like poison because they aren’t in THE elite set. Read a few New York Ragazine articles about how >$1M income families “don’t feel as rich as they used to” and tell me I’m wrong.

  249. 249
    Stillwater says:

    @Shithead #3 – formerly Gen Stuck: With a well reasoned attack like that, proving Cole’s point, I bump you up to Shithead #2. You’re on your way to the top, Stuck!

  250. 250
    nestor says:

    I don’t mean ZOMG BROWN PEOPLE IN MAH MER’KA! either

    Of course you don’t.

  251. 251
    Jennyjinx says:

    @Omnes Omnibus,

    You’re right, but I can still hope that someday the shiny object will dull and boring. Can’t I?

  252. 252
    Tim says:

    Joe From Lowell is pretty much definitely a BJ ratfucker.

    Stuck and Eemom are highly suspect.

    Now, have I already missed it, or has there been a thread about the likelihood that GG was deliberately given Dengue Fever by agents of the folks who really run this planet?

    I am completely serious. Anyone who pretends that such a likely possibility is beyond the pale of rational discourse, is DEFINITELY a rat fucker.

  253. 253
    Judas Escargot says:

    Doubt they named Team Themis after the Mars mapping project. So to wikipedia:

    Themis means “divine law” rather than human ordinance, literally “that which is put in place” […] To the ancient Greeks she was originally the organizer of the “communal affairs of humans, particularly assemblies”.

    …and…

    Themis is untranslatable. A gift of the gods and a mark of civilized existence, sometimes it means right custom, proper procedure, social order, and sometimes merely the will of the gods (as revealed by an omen, for example) with little of the idea of right.

    …and…

    “There was themis—custom, tradition, folk-ways, mores, whatever we may call it, the enormous power of ‘it is (or is not) done’. The world of Odysseus had a highly developed sense of what was fitting and proper.”

    Interesting choice of goddess.

  254. 254
    Just Some Fuckhead says:

    Tim, there are a lot of Tims here already. You should change yer handle to “Gay Tim” or “Boston Tim” or something.

  255. 255
    shithead #1, formerly danimal says:

    The irony is that the CofC is apparently willing to put $2million into an operation to muck up liberal blogs, while we’re more than willing to do the same for free.

    To be blunt, I was initially hoping to make a humorous point that liking GG/JH is unrelated to the whole thrust of the posting–that the VRWC actually exists. It wasn’t a terribly important point, and I’m sorry the thread degenerated. I don’t care for Greenwald or Hamsher much, but they’re usually on the right side of things. Different strokes for different folks and all.

    I hope everyone reads the links and pays attention to the real issues that were exposed.

  256. 256
    fasteddie9318 says:

    This has been an episode of “How to turn the relatively innocuous concept ‘Glenn Greenwald is generally one of the good guys but can be hard to read and sometimes goes after the wrong people in the quest for unrealistic purity’ into 250+ posts bitching about everybody’s hurt fee-fees,” with your host, John Cole.

  257. 257
    Nick says:

    @BombIranForChrist:

    has completely killed my faith that change can occur from elected officials.

    what the hell made you think it could?

  258. 258
    nestor says:

    @Tim:

    Interesting theory. Raise your hand and wait by the window.

  259. 259
    Nick says:

    @General Stuck:

    Clinton didn’t have to sign that bill. He did because he wanted the military to like and accept him, being a former draft dodger of sorts.

    He also did it so that LGBT soldiers can avoid being prosecuted and thrown in jail, as being gay in the military was illegal and everything.

    I think a lot of people forgot about that. The reason DADT needed to be repealed legislatively was because it was illegal to be gay in the military…it was literally a crime.

  260. 260
    Nick says:

    @NobodySpecial:

    Obama is equal to Clinton in this regard, not superior.

    Except Obama actually signed the law repealing it and sacrificed tax cuts for the rich to get it passed, and refused to sign an executive order temporarily suspending it, like you suggested he do, in order to push Congress to act, which it almost didn’t.

    But I know, Obama only gets credit when something fails.

  261. 261
    Commish says:

    Good post JC.

  262. 262
    Joel says:

    @Fuzz: The difference is, relatively speaking, the informed people in this country haven’t suffered very much.

  263. 263
    Nick says:

    @Justin:

    What I don’t understand is why the poor is this country continue to support the supposed right of the wealthy to be uber-wealthy.

    because Obama doesn’t use the bully pulpit…or something.

  264. 264
    eemom says:

    @WyldPirate:

    mostly because it has a great community of commenters. With some exceptions, e.g., you.

  265. 265
    Svensker says:

    @Rihilism:

    Yes. This.

    Jeez, folks. Pavlov’s dogs look like freethinkers compared to y’all. John doesn’t have to use bait anymore, he just waves a picture of the bait and everyone starts frothing.

  266. 266
    cleek says:

    One thing that even the dim bulbs in the media should understand by now is that there is in fact a class war going on, and it is the rich and powerful who are waging it.

    welcome to human history

  267. 267
    drew42 says:

    matter of time before we descend into necklacing and other tribal bullshit.

    I had to look up “necklacing” — thanks. Now I hate the whole world again.

  268. 268
    lol says:

    @Nick:

    So basically, what you’re saying is that while DADT was far from ideal, it actually got passed, was a significantly big step forward for gays serving in the military (even if the implementation was poor), redefined the terms of the debate from “can gays serve?” to “can gays serve openly?” and paved the way for future legislation to get us all the way across the finish line?

  269. 269

    […] Who Has The Gold… One thing that even the dim bulbs in the media should understand by now is that there is in fact a class war going on, and it is the […]

  270. 270
    Tim says:

    @Just Some Fuckhead:

    Tim, there are a lot of Tims here already. You should change yer handle to “Gay Tim” or “Boston Tim” or something.

    Thanks, Just Some RatFucker, but I’ll stick with just Tim. Or maybe I’ll go with JUST TIM.

    Or Fuck You Just Some Ratfucker has a nice ring also.

  271. 271
    Nick says:

    @lol:

    So basically, what you’re saying is that while DADT was far from ideal, it actually got passed, was a significantly big step forward for gays serving in the military (even if the implementation was poor), redefined the terms of the debate from “can gays serve?” to “can gays serve openly?” and paved the way for future legislation to get us all the way across the finish line?

    As ridiculous as it sounds…yes. It made the difference between being discharged, but only if YOU tell people, and being prosecuted and put in prison because higher ups sought out your sexual orientation even if you didn’t want them too

  272. 272
    Nick says:

    @drew42:

    I had to look up “necklacing”—thanks. Now I hate the whole world again.

    when I was in high school, still a naive young conservative, we divided the class among those who supported the death penalty and those who didn’t. I was one of only 4 on the pro side, while the rest of the 30 person class argued against. After class, a classmate came up to me and told me how in Haiti, where she was from, people did this and it mortified her.

  273. 273
    eemom says:

    @lol:

    you mean…..you mean…..surely you are not implying……that actual PROGRESS is……incremental?

    And that self-proclaimed “progressives” who throw toddleresque tantrums and hurl an entire presidency across the room like a discarded toy because it doesn’t wind up and march EXACTLY where they want it to NOW are……unworthy of adulation?

    Perish the thought.

  274. 274
    Stillwater says:

    @John Cole: repost this later. This is actually an important topic that needs some light and discussion. Just post it in a way that tricks the harpies into focusing on the topic at hand – that shouldn’t be hard to do.

  275. 275
    eemom says:

    tee hee. Fuckhead has been outfuckheaded.

  276. 276
    Odie Hugh Manatee says:

    @eemom: “There is never any actual research into the subject of the quoted link, and rarely any independent thought.”

    He gives his opinion and then the opinion-laden hemorrhoids (us) are let loose on it. I kinda thought that was what this place was all about…lol!

    I am enjoying the GG/JH catfight though it does distract from the issues this information brings up, things that go far beyond those two personalities. I guess that has to be expected when John tosses out delicious bait like he did here. Kudos sir, that’s some good shit!

    All John has to do is sit back and reel them in, one at a time. He’s only catching suckers but what the hey, it’s a good way to waste some time. ;)

  277. 277
    Tomjones says:

    WTF. If I want to read this kind of shit, I’ll go to daily kos. But, hey John, this is totally Rec list material. Congrats.

  278. 278
    Nick says:

    @eemom:

    you mean…..you mean…..surely you are not implying……that actual PROGRESS is……incremental?

    This is what I think is wrong with progressives…they don’t know how to be progressives.

    It’ll never be “perfect” or even “enough” because what makes a progressive a progressive is that PROGRESS is always happening. One we solve one problem, we work to solve it better, and better, and better still, for our entire lives.

    Progressives like Jane Hamsher see progress as not perfect, which is normal, and give up, become cynical and fight against whoever is trying to make progress. They think it’s weak to stand up and say “Well, ok, now lets make that better” they think it makes them “bots”

    Progressives, especially in the United States, suck at being a movement, they’re horrible at it, because they don’t even understand their political point of view.

  279. 279

    Jesus H. Christ, with liberals like this who the fuck needs conservatives? Seriously, you dumbfucks have completely lost the thread, we’ve got a bunch of fucking retards arguing about Bill Clinton and DADT. WTF? Anyone who thinks that the teabaggers have a monopoly on crazy and stupid in this country needs to look at this thread.

    We have a corrupt media in this country, they are utterly and completely corrupt. Conservatives like Andrew Breitbart and James O’Keefe are given free rein to smear anyone they like without ever being called on it. Most members of the media are nothing more than stenographers for the powerful. We have corporations and wealthy individuals who have driven this country into a ditch and who are pushing us towards a future that could best be described as “neo-feudalism” and which will look like something out of Mad Max conspiring to fuck over even more people and get even more money. We have evidence of a conspiracy aimed at liberals and liberal groups by a cabal of shady security firms and the wealthy and you stupid fucking bastards are arguing about Bill Clinton and DADT, a president who hasn’t been in office for 10 years and a law which he signed 17 years ago. I don’t know who said it, but the quote “The left is an alternate religion worshipping impotence” nailed it right on the head. You stupid fuckers will be arguing about this meaningless shit right up to the point where they march you into the fucking showers and dump in the Zyklon B.

  280. 280
    Phoenician in a time of Romans says:

    I am reading “For the Win”, entirely relevant to your post, and very entertaining besides (http://www.amazon.com/Win-Cory.....0765322161).

    I keep thinking “is this science fiction?”. Your post was inspired by a private transparency group, threatening to release secrets about a major bank, hiring a private security firm, launching an attack on the entire progressive eco-system, and now opposed by an anonymous distributed hacker collective. Jesus H Christ – reality is just as sf as the bloody novel!

  281. 281

    […] UPDATE: More Banana Republic shenanigans. […]

  282. 282
    Hob says:

    @joe from Lowell:

    You’re so terribly upset at the concept of people generally on the left engaging in infighting and missing the point that you… defend John for attacking people on the left, irrelevantly, and starting up a fight, while attacking those of us who objected to what he did.

    I’m not terribly upset, and I haven’t attacked you. I think what you’re doing is silly, that’s all. Cole can’t start a fight by himself – it takes two to tango.

    … striking the little “This isn’t that complicated” pose to pretend … reeks of desperation … something you do to try to appear to be superior …

    Actually, I just said “This isn’t that complicated” because I thought that was a true statement. But that sure is some grade-A telepathic assholism there. I wonder what I’m thinking now?

  283. 283
    elf says:

    Go ANON !!!!!

  284. 284
    Citizen Alan says:

    @joe from Lowell:

    Clinton didn’t just fail to repeal DOMA while calling for its repeal; he signed the bill. That’s a huge, meaningful difference.

    Not that I want to defend Bill Clinton or anything, but “the bill” in question was the 1994 Defense Reauthorization Act, which Clinton was not going to veto in an election year when he plainly did not have the backing of his party. And while DADT today seems odious in hindsight, at the time, it did improve the lot of gay servicemembers. It forbade superior officers and/or investigators from directly inquiring about sexual orientation (a lie about such a thing would itself be a violation of the oath of service), it (on paper at least) placed an affirmative duty on the military to show that the servicemember had made some affirmative statement revealing his or her orientation, and it subsequently instituted policies intended to ban the harassment of gay and suspected-gay personnel. Clinton himself always considered it a stop-gap measure and had planned on revisiting it later, but then he lost Congress in 1994 and spent the next 6 years fighting off impeachment.

    Incidentally, does anyone have figures on how many gays have been kicked out since DADT was repealed? Cause it’s been nearly two months, and while the law has been repealed, the actual policy is still in place until Obama and his Joint Chiefs issue the appropriate notices to Congress that allowing gays in won’t damage military readiness.

  285. 285
    Mark S. says:

    @Wile E. Quixote:

    Yeah, but one time Greenwald mischaracterized part of an email from some guy at Wired, so both sides are equally at fault, etc.

  286. 286
    Socratic_me says:

    I think my favorite part of this thread is where the same assholes who blew up this comment thread wander around all lost and sad and insist that John’s irritation came out of nowhere. For the love of all that is holy, people, it just cleared the front page! We remember the events of yesterday even if you want to pretend they never happened. I do enjoy the front pagers here, but christ almighty it quickly gets old arguing with the same 5 shitheads who are both 1)always wrong and 2)incredibly voluminous in their output.

  287. 287
    Odie Hugh Manatee says:

    @newhavenguy:

    When I was at the IRS site they had a little box that put up statistical facts they have accumulated. The one that caught my eye went something like this:

    ‘Did you know that 70% of American taxpayers earn $58,000 a year or less?’

    That is a sad statistic. Compare that to the ungodly piles of cash our corporate overlords haul in every year. It’s obscene and our government has been complicit in letting it happen. They are just as bought and paid for as the M$M are; the rich own them, their votes and their opinions, lock, stock and barrel. They sign, seal and deliver them with a kiss to their asses so they can collect their own form of bonus paychecks.

    As long as the M$M and our government profit from their work in furthering the interests of our ruling class, nothing will change. The only way I can see it happening is if there is a popular uprising like in Egypt. The rich have too strong a hold on our government and the media and they aren’t going to give it up without a fight.

    The rich are like drunk dumbshit kids behind the wheel of a high performance car; they have control of it now but eventually they will wrap it around a tree at 220 MPH or drive it off a cliff. It’s inevitable because all each one of them sees is what they don’t have and want to get. It’s a game of Monopoly and they want to win! What the 27% of taxpayers above the $58,000 or less earners don’t realize that the game is rigged and they are next on the shit list the top 3% have in hand. The lower class is about broke and the rich are hungry.

    A responsible government would have prevented this but our government is not run by responsible people. Politicians expect to be enriched by their time in D.C. Someone has to give them the money they crave and the damned voters don’t have the cash to feed their addiction. That’s why they distort, obfuscate and flat-out, boldface lie to us. They have the system down to an art, everyone plays their part in this intricate dance.

    Everyone. The rich wouldn’t have it any other way. They have worked hard and paid a lot of money into the system to let it happen.

    The rich kids want to turn this country into a third-world shithole for everyone but them to wallow in. They just want to keep farming it for whatever wealth they can extract from it but I think people will stand up and raise hell before that happens. Unfortunately, because of the ignorance and bigotry out there, I think any uprising will look a hell of a lot different than what is happening in Egypt.

    Probably more like a civil war.

    Many of the same people who bitch about low pay and the cost of things are the same people who support our corporate overlords and their ungodly pay out of pure ignorance and/or stubbornness. They willingly wave the foam index finger for the rich, thinking it’s for the good ol’ capitalistic nation we are. All the while giving the middle finger to those that they have been told are ‘the enemy’. They have taken the bait that the rich have been feeding them and are too busy fighting amongst themselves and against their perceived enemies to be much of a bother to their masters. At the same time they are at the ready as willing minions against the ‘others who seek to destroy them’ (aka anyone not like them).

    If shit happens I don’t think it’s going to be pretty.

    It’s pure and simple, clear as a bell to me, that it is class warfare and we are losing badly. As a party, the Democrats are probably not equipped to handle getting us out of this mess. Not with the incessant infighting and bickering, no way. Their party symbol ought to be the pushmi-pullyu. Nope, in the past it took both sides to keep this country somewhat on course and that ain’t happening now. One side has completely sold out and enough of the Dems have done so to weaken any chance of seeing major change come about.

    Enough rambling… Just had to vent a bit.

  288. 288
    Citizen Alan says:

    @joe from Lowell:

    Of course not, because it’s 2011 and not 1996. I really do think that people who blame Clinton over DADT and DOMA fail to appreciate just how far gay rights have come in the last 15 years. 1996 was a year before Ellen came out, two years before Will & Grace, and six years before Rosie O’Donnell came out. At the time, there was concern bordering on hysteria that Hawaii would legalize gay marriage and that the Full Faith & Credit Clause would instantly legalize it in all 50 states. Honestly, I always thought Clinton signed DOMA because he was genuinely afraid a Constitutional amendment would pass if he didn’t. Frankly, I think he was right.

  289. 289
    Nick says:

    @Odie Hugh Manatee:

    The only way I can see it happening is if there is a popular uprising like in Egypt.

    So why doesn’t this happen? Could it be that most Americans accept and like the way it is?

  290. 290
    4jkb4ia says:

    Did not want to write about “I am not sure why we bother to have elections anymore” because that clearly touched my personal sore spot. But this is being written in a situation where elections did have consequences. Whether anything was done in the last Congress to break the power of the rich/the bankers/the Chamber, the Republican leadership in the House has clearly signaled that they mean to undo anything that might annoy or inconvenience them. And it is being written in a situation where the election had consequences because the Democratic leadership/strategists threw up their hands and said, “We are bad at messaging. We have NO national narrative.” If that continues to happen, we shouldn’t bother to have elections and the more ruthless messagers will win. But that is not rigged, that’s failure. Now to see if I have to break out my eloquent defense of John.

  291. 291
    The Raven says:

    there is in fact a class war going on, and it is the rich and powerful who are waging it

    Well…if you have come to believe this, you might start taking a look at the history of socialism in the USA. You might start with Eugene V. Debs. There’s quite a bit of history there, and it wasn’t taught in my high school classes.

  292. 292
    numbskull says:

    @Caz: Wow, I see what you meant now when you complained about coming across a post that is so inane, so shallow, so missing-the-point, that it’s just hopeless to try to engage.

    Thanks for giving me that experience.

  293. 293
    lol says:

    Elizabeth Warren’s consumer financial protection bureau is basically immune from being defunded because it gets its money from the federal reserve, I believe.

    Once the agency becomes independent of dept of treasury, the repugs aren’t going to be able to do shit about her, going foward.

  294. 294
    Odie Hugh Manatee says:

    @Nick:

    Because Americans are too in to hating on each other to unite against the corporate overlords and their government lackeys.

    This is a feature, not a bug.

    ETA: That and too many Americans are too damned lazy to do it. I expect it to stay this way until it gets much worse than it is now.

    People are still too comfortable and have their distractions. Once those comforts are gone then they will have the time to go raise hell.

    When they do, I believe it won’t look anything like Egypt does now.

  295. 295
    Hob says:

    Trying to be on-topic:

    1. This sure is some sleazy depressing shit, but it’s also evidence that we’re not a banana republic, at least not yet. In a banana republic, the Company doesn’t spend $2 million on trying to undermine someone’s credibility; they spend $2000 on having someone beaten up, jailed, or shot. If credibility still matters at all, there’s some hope.

    2. Greenwald is relevant to this in a way that Cole didn’t articulate very well, but Joe sort of did in spite of himself when he brought up Citizens United.

    I personally think GG was dead wrong about that, although I think he was coming from a principled position badly applied, rather than a desire to increase corporate power (and if it was the latter, he’s pretty bad at it since he only commented after the case was over, did so in strongly anti-corporate terms, and doesn’t appear to have changed anyone’s mind at all).

    The thing is, the Chamber of Commerce doesn’t seem to give a shit that he supported the Citizens United ruling. He’s still on their enemies list. ThinkProgress seems to think that has to do with Wikileaks, but I think that’s an unnecessary stretch, since he’s very specifically attacked the CoC and its leaders in pieces like this and this. Whatever it is, they seem pretty sure that what he’s doing is bad for their interests.

    Still… if the CoC were really brilliant supervillains with a far-sighted plan for bringing back feudalism, there are plenty of other people they could go after. You can’t tell me Amy Goodman is less of a smart dedicated lefty investigative journalist than Greenwald. But they’ve fixated on him, just like some of us have fixated on him for reasons that don’t necessarily mean much in the long run.

    These corporate assholes aren’t brilliant or far-sighted; they’re flailing around trying to defend their position from whichever threat they’ve heard of most recently. Their side isn’t monolithic any more than we are– it’s made up of a bunch of subgroups of flailing assholes, just like our side. They’re more effective not because they’re smart and unified and have a master plan, but just because they have a ton of money.

  296. 296
    roshan says:

    GO FUCK YOURSELF, eemom, and DIAF.

  297. 297
    Nick says:

    @Odie Hugh Manatee:

    Once those comforts are gone then they will have the time to go raise hell.

    One thing, the rich will be sure those comforts are NEVER gone.

  298. 298
    Nonny says:

    @The Sheriff’s A Ni-:

    Eisenhauer, for one (look up some quotes). LBJ, for another.

    & the best of them all: FDR
    –whose well-constructed social nets Obama seems intent on ameliorating (‘decimating’ doesn’t near cover it)
    and if he can: totally getting rid of.

    Obama never met a corporation he couldn’t like. He appoints more lobbyists, banksters and Wall Streeters to aid & abet his covering in slobbering kisses every square inch of Corporate Rump.

  299. 299
    4jkb4ia says:

    This point about the CFPB funding is true, but both Bachus (chair of House Financial Services) and Neugebauer, who is chairing the subcommittee of same on oversight and investigations, would like to see that gone and CFPB put into the regular appropriations process.

  300. 300
    General Stuck says:

    @roshan:

    GO FUCK YOURSELF, eemom, and DIAF.

    Yea, right, it is Cole’s designated shitheads that are the problem with this thread and blog. I wonder if any of you geniuses noticed none of us shitheads actually attacked GG, or Jane or anyone else, until morons like you crawled out of the woodwork to attack us. Self contained poutrage. Pre attack in thread post, and on come the mouthbreathers to claim Obots are once again attacking the progressive royalty. You can’t make this shit up, or maybe you can. Simply awesome.

    The only thing missing is Anne Laurie parachuting in and telling me my loyalty to Obama is making me unreasonable, but she likes me but only cause of my dog.

  301. 301
    Nonny says:

    @PS:
    Splitter!

  302. 302
    General Stuck says:

    @Stillwater:

    Go to hell stillwater, and stop the goddamn blog stalking you creepy fuck.

  303. 303
    someone says:

    This is the most astute writing John Cole has produced. Congratulations, and welcome.

  304. 304
    ruemara says:

    @John Cole:

    You know, I don’t give a damn about Glenn Greenwald and I dislike Jane Hamsher as an attention grabbing bit of fluff. I also think the article shows something very serious about institutions attempting to completely stamp out dissent with underhanded, even illegal techniques. I also think you can gfy for calling me a shithead because I deign to not hold GG or JH as apostles to the side of the left. I respect each one for the good they do, Glenn perhaps more than Jane, but to derail the content of the article with this pre-emptive bullshit smackdown because you think the merest mention of GG as a target would cause his non-fans to ooze in and slander him, it’s pretty damn stupid. You had a real strong point, I don’t know what you’re thinking by kicking up this stupid pro GG/FDL-anti GG/FDL nonsense. Some of us who are perfectly strong liberals just don’t give a good damn about either of them. Period.

  305. 305
    Odie Hugh Manatee says:

    @Nick:

    Boy, you are an optimist, eh? :)

  306. 306
    The Ratfucker Assigned to Balloon Juice says:

    Look, you guys, this thread has obviously tended towards the asymptote on the axis of intramural infighting vs useful dialog. A lot of heated rhetoric as been bandied back and forth, and any number of hurtful accusations have been leveled.

    And it’s that last part I’d like to address: because, as much as I’m pleased to observe the rapid disintegration of the discussion to petty, repetitive, and oh so unproductive infighting– and really, it’s a wonder to behold!– my sense of professional pride compels me to point out that I, personally, had nothing to do with this particular cock-up, what-so-ever.

    I mean, sure, I’d like to take credit (if only for the paycheck) for the golden apples that have been lobbed about with such abandon by the likes of Stillwater, Stuck, Fuckhead, Tim, and Eemom– and let’s not leave out the contribution of the estimable Me. Cole himself!– but I simply can’t. Because the utter boorishness of the whole thing would be a stain on my resume. Really, it’s jr high stuff. None of my guys would be that obvious.

    To re-purpose a cliche: It’s not me, it’s you. Doing that thing you lefties have done oh-so-well for the last several decades.

    Just want to be clear on that.

  307. 307
    Ronc99 says:

    John,

    That is one of your BEST POSTS I have read in years from you.

    Thanks!!!

  308. 308
    The Ratfucker Assigned to Balloon Juice says:

    I loathe moderation. Both politically and blog-o-spherically. Just thought I’d mention that.

  309. 309
    giantslor says:

    I think we’re at the peak of a cycle. We’re in a new guilded age. This too shall pass — but only if we make it.

  310. 310
    Ayn Stein says:

    Wow, terrific post, Mr. Cole. As a true liberal, I make it a point to read Glenn, Jane, and you, each and every day. Glenn, to me, is David vs. Goliath–and Goliath is starting to fight dirty! Truthfully, I usually watch Jane’s TV appearances with the sound off, (the second or third time, anyway) because I really just wanna ball her! Duh, right? You just know that girl is muy orgasmic, as true left-wing chicks are! Conservative broads OTOH, are cold and soulless, inside and out. I’ve got an old C-SPAN tape of her debating Mona Charen, w/o sound, that is a striking example of this essential truth.
    Finally, Mr. Cole, you are today’s Everyman, sharing the awakening and discovery of your inner Homer Simpson meets Noam Chomsky leading to the inevitable Michael Douglas in Falling Down yet happier ending than that –journey. With Love, and Respect.

  311. 311
    Ayn Stein says:

    Wow, terrific post, Mr. Cole. As a true liberal, I make it a point to read Glenn, Jane, and you, each and every day. Glenn, to me, is David vs. Goliath–and Goliath is starting to fight dirty! Truthfully, I usually watch Jane’s TV appearances with the sound off, (the second or third time, anyway) because I really just wanna ball her! Duh, right? You just know that girl is muy orgasmic, as true left-wing chicks are! Conservative broads OTOH, are cold and soulless, inside and out. I’ve got an old C-SPAN tape of her debating Mona Charen, w/o sound, that is a striking example of this essential truth.
    Finally, Mr. Cole, you are today’s Everyman, sharing the awakening and discovery of your inner Homer Simpson to Noam Chomsky leading to the inevitable Michael Douglas in Falling Down yet happier ending than that –journey. With Love, and Respect.

  312. 312
  313. 313
    Merc says:

    The money doesn’t seem to be able to secure competent services as evidenced by their inability to keep their little dirty secrets from leaking out.

    Oh, and I like Greenwald and Hampsher.

  314. 314
    bob h says:

    and it is just a matter of time before we descend into necklacing and other tribal bullshit.

    I imagine that we will eventually have the equivalent of Tahir Square, with Republican goons riding elephants into us.

  315. 315

    […] followup from Juan Cole (via Reddit) to the ongoing leak of the corporate emails of HBGary, the security […]

  316. 316
    matoko_chan says:

    One thing that even the dim bulbs in the media should understand by now is that there is in fact a class war going on, and it is the rich and powerful who are waging it.

    Cole, Cole, Cole…..this is the Real Forever War, and its been going on in some form since Kylon and Pythagoras. You remembah Kylon of Croton dontcha? the pissed off oligarch that raised a mob of local Noble Yeoman Farmers to chop up the mathematikoi and aukosmatikoi at Pythagoras School for Leaders when he couldn’t get in?

  317. 317

    […] shitshow fail parade that is HB Gary More Fallout From Anonymous […]

  318. 318

    […] here: One thing that even the dim bulbs in the media should understand by now is that there is in fact a […]

  319. 319
    Agoraphobic Kleptomaniac says:

    One: this comment thread is more depressing than the original article. This is a fairly striking story, and the best most people can do is cry about cole mentioning GG at all (which I believe is what Cole was saying would happen).

    Two: It’s interesting how CoC and BoA is hiring these people to discredit Wikileaks and progressive groups because they might have damaging information about BoA or CoC. BoA apparently doesn’t fear any sort of legal reprocussions, only PR reprocussions.

  320. 320
    Paul in KY says:

    @danimal: Makes you half a shithead ;-)

  321. 321
    Paul in KY says:

    @General Stuck: Because generally Glenn is with us & against them. Wanking on his shortcomings is being ‘pennywise’ and ‘pound-foolish’.

    We need a strong Glenn to help us fight this right-wing monstrosity.

  322. 322
    Paul in KY says:

    @General Stuck: Well, bless your heart ;-)

  323. 323
    MBunge says:

    @Paul in KY: Because generally Glenn is with us & against them.

    Given the specific nature of Cole’s post, I would say that defending Greenwald is a bizarre thing to do, given that his position on Citizens United makes The Last Honest Man a useful idiot who is helping our Galtian overlords screw us all up the ass.

    If you want to write about civil liberties and hold Glenn up as a righteous warrior, that makes sense. Invoking him in a diatribe about class warfare is like mentioning Dick Cheney in a discussion of gun control.

    Mike

  324. 324
    Paul in KY says:

    @Cathie from Canada: Please don’t think that’s all they got.

  325. 325
    General Stuck says:

    @Paul in KY:

    Yes, it’s “pound foolish” to wank on GG shortcomings. And bashing the dem president in nearly every article, for everything from a to z is wisdom? and fighting the GOP monstrosity? Not in my world, that is not the netroots, admittedly. But carry on, taking it to the only real hope of changing anything right now.

    The righteous outrage will be sweeter with Romney or Gingrich or Palin in the WH>

  326. 326
    Paul in KY says:

    @Fuzz: There are more stupid people in America than in Argentina.

  327. 327
    Paul in KY says:

    @Caz: Glad you’re with the program. If you yourself are rich, please jump off a bridge ;-)

  328. 328
    Paul in KY says:

    @General Stuck: I tend to agree with your view here. I saw more people sent out of the military for ‘teh gay’ after DADT, than before.

  329. 329
    Marvin says:

    The Chamber of Commerce is an enemy of the people. No doubt about that. I wish there were some way to bring it down.

  330. 330
    slag says:

    @The Ratfucker Assigned to Balloon Juice:
    Haha!

    Also, I’m loving how the BoA v. Wikileaks v. Anonymous v. the “Institutional Left” is progressing. I can’t wait til we get to the point in it when someone finally has to ask: “Who the fuck are the Knudsens?”. If it weren’t so depressing, it’d be hilarious.

  331. 331
    Paul in KY says:

    @Wile E. Quixote: I like the cut of your jib.

  332. 332
    Paul in KY says:

    @MBunge: I think he was wrong about that. It is only a facet of Glenn’s positions. To me, he’s on our side the vast majority of the time.

  333. 333
    Paul in KY says:

    @General Stuck: He pounded on Dumbfuck McChimpy for his perceived civil liberties shortcomings. If he see’s the same things going on with Pres. Obama’s administration, I think he has to harp on that as well, or lose his credibility (IMO).

  334. 334
    lessthanjoey says:

    @joe from Lowell:

    Did you miss the part where HBGary and Palantir specifically proposed extorting Greenwald to get him to shut up?

  335. 335
    MBunge says:

    @Paul in KY: “If he see’s the same things going on with Pres. Obama’s administration, I think he has to harp on that as well, or lose his credibility”

    Here’s the thing. I don’t think too many people have a problem with Greenwald continuing to spotlight the abuse of civil liberties under the Obama administration. It seems to me the occasionally overheated reactions to GG stem from two things.

    1. His shitting over the entire Obama administration and everything they do because of their failures on civil liberties.

    2. His almost Hannity-like refusal to acknowledge there are reasons why the Adminstration does the things it does besides being evil bastards who hate freedom.

    Mike

  336. 336
    Nikolai says:

    AND there’s the difference between the USA and Egypt. In egypt they just wanted their dictator gone, and they knew who he was. In the USA, it’s not really the gov’t, it’s the people who control the gov’t, and they are very, very wealthy and in the shadows, so those who speak of revolution, we need root out the multitude of dictators. A good example would be the 300 souls who are at the core of the Federal Reserve, and no one knows who they are, not even the president. We have our work cut out for us.

  337. 337
    john says:

    Too bad you didn’t figure all this out before you lent your enthusiastic support to the invasion of Iraq.

  338. 338
    Paul in KY says:

    @MBunge: Good points. I think he feels like a jilted lover, vis a vis the Obama administration.

    I still support him & the work he does. I obviously differ from him on various points, but I think his heart is in the right place.

    I wish we had more Greenwalds on our side.

  339. 339
    Atlanta says:

    Go, John Cole! We love you. Take good care of yourself, eat lots of greenery, get lots of love, we need you around for a long, long time! Power to truth, and you, beautiful man.

  340. 340
    bernie says:

    What shitheads 1 thru 5 don’t seem to understand, and republicans DO, is that you don’t settle for ‘incremental’ progress. You PUSH your position, and you push it hard, because that’s the only way you get any forward momentum going at all against the other side’s pushback.

    GG criticizes Obama for some very legitimate reasons, mainly his ongoing support and implementation of the invasive security state apparatus instituted in large part by George Bush. Obama isn’t just showing a sufficient lack of resistance to this apparatus, he is ACTIVELY supporting, extending and enhancing it in many ways. He needs to know that his constituents aren’t ok with this. At all, even in small measure.

    Do you think it’s a coincidence that various nefarious conservative organizations think it’s imperative that they go after GG by any means necessary, even criminal means, but they totally leave you milquetoast incrementalists totally alone? It’s because they like you. They WANT you around. They know that they can smash you in the mouth, endure your weak kneed inconsequential blip of a response, then smash you in the mouth again. They can do what they want, because you and the methods you support, and the people in power who use these incrementalist methods, are too weak to provide any sort of meaningful reply.

    GG – aka ‘The Last Honest Man’ (I really like that!) – hits back and he hits hard. He calls a crime a crime, he details the crime and whodunnit, and he’s not afraid of what comes after. We need him, and a dozen more like him who are just as articulate and fearless. We don’t need you and your mewling about how he goes too far, names too many names, pisses off too many people or doesn’t kiss the correct asses. If you don’t like that fact that he points out when Obama is on the wrong side of the fence as actively and loudly as he does when Donald Rumsfeld is, then maybe your real complaint should be directed at Obama. Make him deliver on his promises, both spoken and unspoken.

  341. 341
    bernie says:

    And my last post would be a lot more eloquent if I could edit it lolz

  342. 342
    General Stuck says:

    @Paul in KY:

    He pounded on Dumbfuck McChimpy for his perceived civil liberties shortcomings. If he see’s the same things going on with Pres. Obama’s administration, I think he has to harp on that as well, or lose his credibility (IMO).

    Thank for distilling the problem into a paragraph. You see, the thing is, while there are shortcomings with Obama on civil liberties, folks like me see no rational equating to what Bush did. GG not only sees an equation, but actually contends that Obama is worse than Bush, and uses all sorts of polemic dumbfuckery to maintain this posture.

    This is fundamentally dishonest and harmful to fighting the monsters of the right, in a wholistic pol sense.

  343. 343
    Paul in KY says:

    @General Stuck: I think he thinks it is worse under Pres. Obama, because he considered/considers Pres. Obama to be ‘civilized’ (for lack of a better term).

    Under Bush/Cheney, you were probably surprised what they did was not worse (given the personalities involved).

    Much higher wishes for Pres. Obama & much more hurt feelings due to that (IMO).

    I know Glenn doesn’t think Pres. Obama the person is worse than McChimpy & Darth Cheney.

    I think if the Obama administration did catagorically undo at least one of the previous administration’s assaults on civil liberties, Glenn would probably turn to some other targets. This might be wishful thinking on my part.

  344. 344
    General Stuck says:

    @Paul in KY:

    I think if the Obama administration did catagorically undo at least one of the previous administration’s assaults on civil liberties, Glenn would probably turn to some other targets. This might be wishful thinking on my part.

    LOLwut? Stopped torturing people and dismantled or completed dismantling the evil state sanctioned torture infrastructure Bush/Cheney constructed. Reversing a number of equally evil EO’s from Bush justifying these things. Trying to close down Gitmo, stopped by bed wetting congress.

    No credible reports of renditioning captured prisoners for express purpose of torture in brutal countries.

    Actually following the Fisa law as it now exists, instead of completely ignoring it with warrantless wiretaps.

    The list goes on, and I agree that he should be doing more to improve the Patriot Act with more protections right now, and do not support his not trying to do that, and will as well when the Fisa comes up for renewal. But that is a far cry from the utter lawlessness of the Bush admin., that thumbed their noses at any and all laws they didn’t like, and did what they damn well pleased.

  345. 345
    General Stuck says:

    @General Stuck:

    Much higher wishes for Pres. Obama & much more hurt feelings due to that (IMO).
    I know Glenn doesn’t think Pres. Obama the person is worse than McChimpy & Darth Cheney.

    I think this is silly, and don’t think GG has hurt feelings nor that he really doesn’t think Obama is worse than Bush, for the simple reason he keeps repeating it again and again in so many words

  346. 346
    Paul in KY says:

    @General Stuck: The wiretapping & other stuff. Glenn probably feels some of the stuff you mentioned that the Obama administration now goes to court over should not be done period, through the legal niceties or not.

    I expected any Democratic president to stop the torturing, so that’s not a high hurdle to cross. I know I like the Obama administration more than Glenn likes it.

    You need to get over there & gig him about it. Just let me know what handle you’ll be using & have your shit wired down, cause he can be quite cutting at times.

    I’m leaving now for weekend. Hope you have a great one.

  347. 347
    Paul in KY says:

    @General Stuck: The Obama administration. Must seperate that from Obama the person.

    I think Glenn thought McChimpy was a small animal torturer when he was a kid. So do I.

  348. 348
    General Stuck says:

    @Paul in KY:

    I’m leaving now for weekend. Hope you have a great one.

    I see we are never going to agree on this, but thanks for not calling me an Obama Cultist, and have a safe fun weekend Paul. that lives in my native Bluegrass State :-)

  349. 349
    General Stuck says:

    @Paul in KY:

    The Obama administration. Must seperate that from Obama the person.

    Yup, he should, though I don’t see that it makes that much difference in the final analysis, since Obama is responsible for the Exec branch.

  350. 350
    General Stuck says:

    @bernie:

    Make him deliver on his promises, both spoken and unspoken.

    But how would we know they are promises if unspoken? You are such a deep thinker Bernie, no way I could match such depth.

    Maybe Glenn would run for president? I think that would all kinds of cool, don’t you?

  351. 351
    bernie says:

    The unspoken, not explicitly stated promises that he will represent progressive interests and values as POTUS. If Glenn ran for President he’d be shot before the primaries were over, and a lot of ‘liberals’ like yourself would shrug your shoulders because hey, what do you expect with a radical like that? Right?

  352. 352
    General Stuck says:

    @bernie:

    If Glenn ran for President he’d be shot before the primaries were over, and a lot of ‘liberals’ like yourself would shrug your shoulders because hey, what do you expect with a radical like that? Right?
    Reply

    This sir, is a sick comment. Have a nice weekend bernie.

  353. 353
    Dan L. says:

    Yes, it’s “pound foolish” to wank on GG shortcomings. And bashing the dem president in nearly every article, for everything from a to z is wisdom? and fighting the GOP monstrosity? Not in my world, that is not the netroots, admittedly. But carry on, taking it to the only real hope of changing anything right now.

    The righteous outrage will be sweeter with Romney or Gingrich or Palin in the WH

    Some of us have doubts about whether Dems really support progressive interests at all. Some of us wonder if maybe the dems aren’t actively undermining progressive interests.

    I think this is actually a pretty legitimate position. Dems do all the dirty things Repubs do politically, and there’s always a broad tranche of democrats whose policy views are indistinguishable from the GOP mainstream. The only real difference is where the funding comes from — unions never donate to the GOP, and corporations only donate to the dems if it looks like they’re most likely to win.

    Honestly, if you think the fight is still repubs vs. dems (if it ever was) I don’t know if you can do much more than kick up dirt. The concept that progressives must support the democrats against the slightly more odious republicans (“don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the slightly less bad”) is not by any means a new one. I doubt there’s anyone reading this who hasn’t encountered this idea and internalized it.

    There’s a lot of folks who vote Republican who really do believe in freedom and individual rights. Maybe you think they’re being fooled. But how are you so sure that you’re not?

  354. 354
    Uwaine says:

    For those who keep wondering about the GG item at the end – and I haven’t read the whole thread to see if someone else corrected – it’s there because Mr. Greenwald was identified directly in the e-mails as someone they wanted to discredit. I don’t think mr. cole was namedropping.

  355. 355
    Peter in Kobe says:

    @Doug Woodard:
    I second the motion. At the risk of being passe, I would recommend a look at M. Parenti as well. He has been saying something similar for 30 years. Just finished rereading Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath. Nothing has really changed.

  356. 356

    […] Greenwald knocks another one out of the park, but his quoting with approval the following by John Cole gave me pause: One thing that even the dim bulbs in the media should understand by now is that […]

  357. 357
    Peter in Kobe says:

    @bernie:

    If you don’t like that fact that he points out when Obama is on the wrong side of the fence as actively and loudly as he does when Donald Rumsfeld is, then maybe your real complaint should be directed at Obama. Make him deliver on his promises, both spoken and unspoken.

    Well said!

  358. 358
    fnorkmama says:

    @BombIranForChrist: Amen! If the pen is mightier than the sword, the internet is mightier than AK-47s or bombs. Conscious consumerism ~ in media & product ~ promoted in the disinfecting sunlight of The Commons is a way to skew with the power of the Corporacracy. When we expose Who They Are, when we Refuse to buy what they are Selling, we can assist along their collapse. And at the end of the day, it all comes down to Greed. Whatever we can do to promote Greed as an evil on the level of Slavery will be all for the Greater Good. Rock on.

  359. 359

    […] the Atlantic, Balloon Juice finds a pattern in American politics: there is in fact a class war going on, and it is the rich and powerful who […]

  360. 360
    Bosco says:

    My god, what a tedious bunch of infighters. I’m very interested in what people think of the issue Cole is discussing here. But instead a dozen assholes are sniping at each other from behind their monitors to the near exclusion of any useful dialogue. Get outside, people. Get some fresh air. Start meeting friends in person, conversing with strangers. You’re fouling your nest here.

  361. 361
    Mrs. Polly says:

    @bernie: I’m expecting that in a couple of hours, Mr. Cole might have rethought the coda to this post. It is possible for a blogger like GG to be a needed voice on the left, a fellow citizen in need of defense against a pernicious and deeply disturbing smear campaign, and something of a shithead himself, all at once(see “powerful blogger slaps Obot ant”).

    If Mr. Cole truly wants a discussion focussed on HB Gary and the covert, disturbing war against progressives that Anonymous has exposed, he could merely ask that people skip the usual GG & JH stuff and stay on topic. Instead, he has played the picador. What else are you going to get, John, but more of the same? As for Hamsher, it isn’t just her shrillness (see “JC, “misognyist” and “peevish non-sequitur”)but her lack of transparency about various questionable practices, including financial, that is so damaging to her,and our, cause.

    Those questions pale in comparison to the importance of the main subject of the post. But they aren’t invalid.

    Anonymous, btw, has done amazing work against Scientology: after the New Yorker article on Paul Haggis came out, I went on a research binge. The way that group has grown from plain barn-burning opposition to a rounded view of the poor souls caught up in that sinister cult, has only increased their accuracy and effectiveness. I admire them greatly.

  362. 362
    Mrs. Polly says:

    Whelp, I’ve sailed in on another dead thread like the schmuck I am.

    Now to put on hip-waders, plunge into a living thread, and see if anything, including time, has persuaded the proprietor that invoking the Names was perhaps unwise–

    Iä! Iä! Chthamsher fhtagn!

  363. 363
    Tom65 says:

    Can I be shithead #6? For fuck’s sake, you ruined a perfectly good rant by invoking Beetlejuice. And for what?

  364. 364

    […] goes on to quote blogger John Cole’s response to this mess […]

  365. 365
  366. 366
    DontTreadOnMe says:

    Wow, somebody who gets it. It’s kind of odd how this is playing out. About 30 years ago, when I was a highschool kid, I dreamed up an idea for a novel/movie called “The Corporation For Survival.” It was about a rogue corporation with a benign outer cover, but which secretly battled for democratic rights by fighting corporate power through covert actions. I foresaw in highschool what we’re living in now and it’s only going to get worse. We live in a nation with a government subverted to serve corporate interests and they don’t really care for us beyond our potential as low wage, low cost labor. As far as the corporations care, we should all just be useful, produce maximum benefit and then die. This does not apply to small corporations which are pretty much victims as well.

  367. 367

    […] Yet these firms had no compunction about proposing such measures to Bank of America and Hunton & Williams, and even writing them down.   What accounts for that brazen disregard of risk?  In this world, law does not exist as a constraint.  It’s impossible to imagine the DOJ ever, ever prosecuting a huge entity like Bank of America for doing something like waging war against WikiLeaks and its supporters.  These massive corporations and the firms that serve them have no fear of law or government because they control each.  That’s why they so freely plot to target those who oppose them in any way.  They not only have massive resources to devote to such attacks, but the ability to act without limits.  John Cole put it this way: […]

  368. 368

    […] there’s this Juan Cole quote.  It’s a generalization and therefore not useful as a statement of fact  but serves well to […]

  369. 369
    Sama says:

    Please do not think that voting is not important. It is your right and you should use this right. It is also true that rigging has become common. But please do not get discouraged.

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] there’s this Juan Cole quote.  It’s a generalization and therefore not useful as a statement of fact  but serves well to […]

  2. […] Yet these firms had no compunction about proposing such measures to Bank of America and Hunton & Williams, and even writing them down.   What accounts for that brazen disregard of risk?  In this world, law does not exist as a constraint.  It’s impossible to imagine the DOJ ever, ever prosecuting a huge entity like Bank of America for doing something like waging war against WikiLeaks and its supporters.  These massive corporations and the firms that serve them have no fear of law or government because they control each.  That’s why they so freely plot to target those who oppose them in any way.  They not only have massive resources to devote to such attacks, but the ability to act without limits.  John Cole put it this way: […]

  3. […] goes on to quote blogger John Cole’s response to this mess […]

  4. […] the Atlantic, Balloon Juice finds a pattern in American politics: there is in fact a class war going on, and it is the rich and powerful who […]

  5. […] Greenwald knocks another one out of the park, but his quoting with approval the following by John Cole gave me pause: One thing that even the dim bulbs in the media should understand by now is that […]

  6. […] here: One thing that even the dim bulbs in the media should understand by now is that there is in fact a […]

  7. […] shitshow fail parade that is HB Gary More Fallout From Anonymous […]

  8. […] followup from Juan Cole (via Reddit) to the ongoing leak of the corporate emails of HBGary, the security […]

  9. […] UPDATE: More Banana Republic shenanigans. […]

  10. […] Who Has The Gold… One thing that even the dim bulbs in the media should understand by now is that there is in fact a class war going on, and it is the […]

Comments are closed.