An Anti-War Candidate

I think mistermix makes some very good points regarding a Johnson administration and the inherent handicaps of politics over reality. My point here is simply that presidents do have a great deal more influence over foreign policy than over domestic policy. For instance, I think Obama has been a pretty extraordinary president on most domestic issues. His expansion of healthcare access is the most significant liberal achievement in decades, hands down.

Two points: 1) There is no way in hell Johnson gets the nomination. So maybe this is all just mental masturbation to begin with. But 2) I think it’s important for people who care about issues like the War on Drugs, or our interventionist foreign policy to somehow make those in power listen. I like Obama, as far as politicians go. I think he means well, which is more than I can say for most of his potential 2012 opponents. But I’m not happy with a third war and I’m not happy with the drone operations in Libya, Afghanistan and Pakistan. I think a lot of the bad powers that the Bush administration expanded, Obama has either expanded or at least continued. This is a problem for me.

Ditto for the drug wars.

But in many ways I think Johnson is a terrible choice for president in spite of his good policies on drugs and military intervention. I have never heard that he is a creationist and I think that’s little more than a rumor (if someone can link, then by all means…) but he’s downright radical on spending issues, on healthcare, and on a number of other issues I think are tremendously important as well that I disagree with Johnson on. The drug war and the Middle East wars are life and death issues, so they sit right at the top of my priority list – but so is healthcare, and I think people like Johnson or Paul Ryan have bad ideas for healthcare reform, ideas that could badly effect the welfare of millions of American citizens. I would prefer a liberal non-interventionist who would campaign on ending the drug war, expanding healthcare, and so forth.

So there’s no easy answers here. There’s no perfect candidates obviously, and even the ones we like for issues A and B may be horrible or just horribly disappointing on issues C and D. When it comes time to pull the lever, we make as honest a decision as we can – and often that means compromising our values in the least painful way possible. Such is politics.






122 replies
  1. 1
    E.D. Kain says:

    So right after I posted this something came up. Will check back in a bit for comments. My apologies.

  2. 2
    Odie Hugh Manatee says:

    “There’s no perfect candidates obviously…”

    and there never will be. Ever. Such is life.

    Nao get redy for matoko_blahblahblah to rant and rave about you…

    Good luck! :)

  3. 3
    Just Some Fuckhead says:

    You go do your thing. I got this.

  4. 4
    Yutsano says:

    @E.D. Kain: It’s called having a newborn ED. JSF will keep us in line until your return, which I hope is soon because you raise a few points that could lead to some interesting discussion. In the interim I’ll try to find some facts about his tenure as governor of New Mexico since that will be the best predictor of future behavior.

  5. 5

    Moar unicorn ponies for everybody!

  6. 6
    JPL says:

    McCain will be on Meet The Press and he will enlighten you on the Middle East.

  7. 7
    Bob says:

    E.D. impossible to argue with any of this. For every good point that could be mentioned about GJ many more negative one could be listed.

  8. 8
    E.D. Kain says:

    @Yutsano: thanks all. I shall return as soon as possible! Dig up facts and dirt and whatever. I’m sure there is plenty to not like.

  9. 9
    Bob says:

    @Odie Hugh Manatee: I have not seen her in a long time. Did John banish her?

  10. 10
    Odie Hugh Manatee says:

    @Bob:

    Yes he did but he let her back in and she returned as Hermione Granger-Weasley. Check out this thread from today if you want to see her in action once again.

    It’s a donnybrook of strange, her specialty. Her EDK obsession is over the top, as usual.

  11. 11
    Woodrow "asim" Jarvis Hill says:

    @Bob: She’s posting as Hermione (or whatever the hell that character from HARRY POTTER is) these days. Trust me, you’ll recognize her writing style when you see it.

    (After edit, I see Odie got the full name hook up!)

  12. 12
    Bob says:

    This is not about his term as govenor but some very odd positions on nullification and child labor laws. Two short clips from Think Progress.

    http://thinkprogress.org/2011/.....ild-labor/

  13. 13
    Amir_Khalid says:

    @Bob:

    She has been commenting as Hermione Granger-Weasley since returning from her last suspension.

  14. 14
    DFS says:

    I guess it’s sort of interesting as a mental exercise, at least, to wonder which sort of unelectable anti-war candidate would be the slightly less unelectable — a mostly-isolationist paleoconservative or a mostly-pacifist far-lefty. Probably the former, but to a degree that is far beyond academic.

  15. 15
    Bob says:

    @Odie Hugh Manatee: Thanks. I recognize the name, had no idea. Thanks.

  16. 16
    PurpleGirl says:

    When M_C posts as Hermione Granger-Weasley, her language skills seem to improve and she’s more coherent. However she still rants about EDK.

  17. 17
    MikeJ says:

    Sure he wants to put the elderly on ice floes, but hey, it’s always 4:20 somewhere man!

  18. 18
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    @EDK
    /points and laughs
    LIBERTARIAN!
    you naked….. and your junk is really, really small.
    ;)

  19. 19
    Zam says:

    What I don’t get is why it’s always “so and so should be President.” I always see third parties or “different” candidates going for the big office. You have to build up a base of voters before national change can happen so run for Senator or something first.

  20. 20
    Yutsano says:

    @Zam: Because that’s boring and doesn’t get people all excited in their nether regions. Plus it’s easier to fundraise and fleece the rubes get attention for your issues if you aim for the Big Chair. I’d have more respect for the Greens if they’d bother building up grass roots and local support in local elections, but it doesn’t seem to be happening.

    @Hermione Granger-Weasley: Apparently you learned nothing from your last little time out. And your obsession with ED’s naughty bits is approaching pathological. I expect more from someone who claims to be more intelligent than the rest of this blog. I see little demonstration of said intelligence. Shorter me: STOP. IT. NAOW.

  21. 21
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    @DFS:

    I guess it’s sort of interesting as a mental exercise, at least, to wonder which sort of unelectable anti-war candidate would be the slightly less unelectable

    no, its boorrrrrriiinnnngggg.

    And EDK is just link whoring anyways. Hes not gettin many hits at Forbes so he has to pimp his crap here, or have DougJ or mistermix do it.
    Or have Sully dooo eeet.

  22. 22
    TomG says:

    Zam, there are quite a few libertarians who are trying to press that argument. And honestly, it makes a lot of sense. Unfortunately, the LP and most of the other better known libertarian organizations tend to emphasize the run for the presidency.
    Personally, I’d be quite happy if Reason and the LP and whoever else is listened to these days took about…3 or 4 election cycles to JUST focus on state elections. But that means no national coverage, that means trying to whip 50 sets of cats into some semblance of coherence….
    Not. Gonna. Happen.

    Hell, look at New Hampshire. How many years ago did the porcupines/free staters vote to have all of us libertarians move en masse to NH. Has it made much difference? Has Reason done any sort of followup lately? I doubt it. (no, I didn’t bother to check).

  23. 23
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    @Yutsano: fuck off fanboi.
    It isnt personal, its not just EDK. I loathe ALL market-based libertarians with the fire of a thousand suns.

    Did you see what i did to Kuznicki?
    lawl.
    ;)

  24. 24
    The Snarxist Formerly Known As Kryptik says:

    Yeah, dude’s a tenther. That’s an immediate disqualification in my book.

  25. 25
    stuckinred says:

    Gee I wish I could stick around for this dopefest but I’m off to celebrate the life of Earl Murphy the 92 year old fiddler who died last month. Carry on.

  26. 26
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @stuckinred: Have fun.

  27. 27
    stuckinred says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: Thanks, the dude was a treasure and it’ll be a gathering of incredible pickers.

  28. 28
    Zam says:

    @TomG: Yea the national coverage thing is something I hear a lot of, but honestly I think a lot of the people who get behind these movements have a fundamental lack of understanding of how government works. To them it’s always if this straight shooter gets at the helm everything will change. Americans have a strange view of what the President actually does.

  29. 29
    Sharl says:

    This old SNL “What If” transcript might offer some inspiration and guidance in composing future posts like this.

  30. 30
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    @Yutsano:

    STOP. IT. NAOW.

    make me.
    you are just pissy cuz’ im fuckin wid asiangirlmans berth at the LoOG.
    ;)

  31. 31
    Martin says:

    @TomG: Well, President makes sense because the big guy swings the veto stick – and since Libertarianism is vastly more about ‘stop doing shit’ and ‘stop enforcing shit’, having executive power is all that they really need. Libertarians would have to go a long fucking way before they ever needed Congress to do anything other than passing budgets.

  32. 32
    rikyrah says:

    Johnson is a libertarian ‘ racism is over because we elected a Black President’.

    as a Black American, when this type of shyt comes out of someone’s mouth, it’s time for me to move on, and treat them like the irrelevant clown that they are.

    there are certain non-starters with me…and this is at the top of my list.

    add into it, his bit about NULLIFICATION, and you could see, from my Black perspective why Johnson is nothing more than an assclown.

  33. 33
  34. 34
    Yutsano says:

    @Hermione Granger-Weasley: I sometimes forget you’re still an immature child. Thank you for that reminder. I shall now address you with the proper condescension and pats on the head.

    @jeffreyw: My brother’s favorite! How big is that couch again? :)

  35. 35
    Zam says:

    @jeffreyw: I want those. NOW!

  36. 36
    TomG says:

    @Martin – so then, why not focus on governors?

    One of my favorite presidents is Grover Cleveland. He was a Democrat, and a governor of New York.

  37. 37
    Odie Hugh Manatee says:

    @Yutsano:
    “I sometimes forget you’re still an immature child suffering from Tourette’s Syndrome.”

    Fix’t.

  38. 38
    Yutsano says:

    @Odie Hugh Manatee: Adjustment noted and accepted. And my thanks for your detail to accuracy.

  39. 39
    Amir_Khalid says:

    @E.D. Kain:
    Your argument for this Johnson chap as candidate for President sounds like “Well, it’s 5:30 now, and the clock is stopped at 5:30, so I guess it’s right.” You say you liked when he said the US should get out of fighting a “war” on drugs and quit interfering in other countries. Yet you also say that his position on a lot of domestic issues, maybe most of them, is unsupportable. So according to you, he only makes sense on two issues out of many.

    For any national leader, even of the US, domestic issues take priority — after all, they will consume most of his attention while he’s in office. If he’s much the same as the Republican pack on that score, he’s no better as a candidate than anyone else from that party. Plus, he’s very much a fringe candidate at this point. If his heterodoxy on those two issues were gaining traction among other, more likely candidates, that might be worth talking about.

  40. 40
    tom p says:

    I’m off to celebrate the life of Earl Murphy the 92 year old fiddler

    stuckinred, I’m jealous. have fun.

  41. 41
    Parallel 5ths (Jewish Steel) says:

    @Yutsano: Your birthday present But now I don’t want to give it to you if it’s going to make the new blogpresident yell at you.

  42. 42
    PurpleGirl says:

    @stuckinred: That sounds really good. Have a good time.

  43. 43
    RinaX says:

    @Zam:

    Thank you. Then again, many “progressives” don’t want to put in this type of legwork either to get their dream candidates into Congress, etc., so…

  44. 44
    PurpleGirl says:

    @PurpleGirl: I take the comment back… she’s only marginally better this evening. It gets tiresome to read the constant rant.

  45. 45
    Zam says:

    @RinaX: Well we did at one point in history, but whats left of them have been assimilated into the democratic party and neutered.

  46. 46
    Tonal Crow says:

    Oh you’re trolly, baby it’s unholy.
    You’ve got those cudlips, it’s just moldy.
    Way down inside, honey you need it.
    I’m gonna give you some pie, I’m gonna give you some pie.
    Oohhhh, what a whole lotta pie.
    What a whole lotta pie.
    What a whole lotta pie.
    What a whole lotta pie.

  47. 47
    FormerNMResident says:

    As someone who lived in NM during the Johnson admin, you are right about his many many flaws and overall health would be bad for the country.

    On an unrelated note I think you underestimate the power of the permanent military establishment and how hard it is to buck. I have been disappointed with Obama here, but the I think I underestimated how hard it is to change that. Don’t have the link, but Jon Bernstein has a good post on this from a while back.

  48. 48
    Davis X. Machina says:

    The way you end the wars is by voting Republican.

    Because only people in the streets can end the wars, and the people won’t take to the streets unless there’s a Republican in the White House.

    The logic is impeccable.

  49. 49
    JasonF says:

    President Johnson (hypothetically speaking) would be about as successful at ending the war on drugs and disentagling us from the Middle East as President Obama was at closing Guantanamo Bay. Which is to say, the President is very powerful, but his power is not limitless, and he can’t unilaterally reverse policies supported by the overwhelming bulk of the establishment.

  50. 50
    lamh34 says:

    @rikyrah:

    Rikyrah, ICU girl and I agree…

  51. 51
    Svensker says:

    @Amir_Khalid:

    For any national leader, even of the US, domestic issues take priority — after all, they will consume most of his attention while he’s in office.

    Yeah, normally. But then we got Dubya, and look what happened. After that, it’s tempting to look for a true anti-war candidate. But trying to find someone electable who’s anti-war is probably impossible. So we gotta go for “not fucking insane” — which lets out pretty much every Repub. And some Dems.

  52. 52
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    @PurpleGirl: oh im done.
    I’ll just quote EDK’s libertarian hero naow.

    ThinkProgress spoke with Johnson at a stop in West Palm Beach, FL. During a question about the Fair Labor Standards Act, Johnson abruptly shifted gears and declared that because “we elected a black president,” this shows that “we are colorblind” and “we’re not a discriminate (sic) nation”:

    you can always go read EDK at the LoOG and Forbes.
    hes just here to link whore anyways, so im sure he’d love the hits.

    Should have taken DougJ’s advice, Kain.

    Comrade DougJ – April 23, 2011 | 9:14 am · Link
    __
    I think it’s a waste of time to get excited about GaJo and that ED shouldn’t waste his breath on it….however, I am sympathetic to Republicans like young Conor get excited about him.

    but….why isnt DougJ sympathetic to Libertarians like EDK that get excited about him?
    EDK and GaJo are both libertarians, right?

  53. 53
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    Why does Balloon Juice even link the LoOG?
    The loogies are just HotAir with college degrees.

  54. 54
    J. Michael Neal says:

    @Amir_Khalid: I disagree, and it’s because Johnson has no chance of winning the primary. Supporting him is a way of highlighting the ways in which he is different from the rest of the field. Bad as they are, Johnson’s domestic positions are hardly distinguishable from those of the field. Given that, a vote for him is, symbolically, a vote for those differences. If he had a chance to win, it would be different.

    That said, the only way I’m going to be able to hold my nose and vote in the Republican primary at all is if there aren’t any candidates in the Dem primaries that need my vote, *and* if Jon Huntsman is on the ballot. There’s a possibility that someone sane is actually running. He won’t win, either, and I still disagree with him about a bunch of stuff, but sane is a very valuable character trait in a President.

  55. 55
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    @J. Michael Neal: umm….Huntsman is a Mormon and a republican. If he runs for president that disqualifies him from sane.
    A mormon cannot be elected president in America, sry.

  56. 56
    Allan says:

    EDK, you have a future in punditry. You do an excellent job, as the MSNBC guest-chair fillers do, of moderating your tone and emphasis depending on which host you’re fluffing. You’d do this shtick for Rachel and Lawrence, then you’d get on with Dylan and Cenk and let your libertarian freak flag fly.

  57. 57
    Stillwater says:

    @Tonal Crow: Custard pie!

  58. 58
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    @Amir_Khalid: the only reason Kain supports GaJo is because he is the only nonbirther out there.

  59. 59
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    @Allan: its that swapping positions on a dime and endlessly concern trolling Obama too.
    EDK is just honing his fluffer skills here, because he doesn’t have any readership at Forbes.

  60. 60
    FlipYrWhig says:

    So maybe this is all just mental masturbation to begin with.

    This post, or libertarianism in general?

    I would prefer a liberal non-interventionist who would campaign on ending the drug war, expanding healthcare, and so forth.

    Yeah, and I would “prefer” a lot of things that I realized decades ago I wasn’t going to get.

  61. 61
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    @Stillwater:
    can she bake a cherry pie, stillie boi, stillie boi?
    can she bake a cherry pie, stupid stillie
    she can bake a cherry pie in the twinkling of an eye,
    she sees right through the glibertarian grifter

    Go comment with your homies at the LoOG, stillwater.

  62. 62
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    So maybe this is all just mental masturbation to begin with.

    This post, or libertarianism in general?

    Dude….ALL his posts are mental masturbation.
    I defy you to find one that isn’t.

  63. 63
    Nellcote says:

    Gary Johnson

    I don’t think the Ron Paulies will stand for this guy.

  64. 64
    Tonal Crow says:

    @Stillwater:

    @Tonal Crow: Custard pie!

    Not from me!

  65. 65
    Stillwater says:

    @Tonal Crow: Well, no. Of course not. Uhhh… I didn’t mean…

    Shit.

  66. 66
    Amir_Khalid says:

    @Svensker: George Walker Bush was kind of a special case — not much ever consumed his attention as president, did it?

    @J. Michael Neal:
    Gary Johnson’s position on those two issues might be worth supporting. The man himself, maybe not so much.

    As for his being a nonbirther, Hermione, I understand he’s not the only one among Republican presidential contenders. Huntsman, for one, is surely not a birther, and I believe Romney has also repudiated it.

    Michele Bachmann backed off under questioning while on the TV. Even the kooks know better than to hammer on this issue.

  67. 67
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    @Nellcote: lol the sunglasses over the bald spot crack me up.
    I think he has gotten a weave, lol.

    He signed into law a late-term abortion ban. He won’t affirm a belief in global warming, and says even if it is happening that the effects are exaggerated and too much money is being wasted on it. And he vetoed a bill that would have continued the collective bargaining rights of public employees.

    Oh, he is perfect for the LoOGies. Against SSM, global warming denialist, anti-union, wants to overturn Roe.
    Nice pick EDK.

  68. 68
    NobodySpecial says:

    Why does anyone bother engaging with the troll? I mean, she wasn’t anything to care about back when she was pimping herself as the ubermensch of the blogerati with her Scott Adams-y ‘certified genius’ crap. She may have dropped that temporarily, but she’s still the person who doesn’t get it no matter how much word salad she throws.

    Ignore her and she’ll be back to flinging feces until Cole bans her again, and this time gets smart and blocks her IP.

  69. 69
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    @Amir_Khalid: Romney is what you call a “Reform Birther”. He does believe Obama was born in the US, but he UNDERSTANDS people that don’t. Ditto Bachman.
    Have you seen where EDK is mainstreaming islamophobia at the LoOG?

  70. 70
    MazeDancer says:

    Despite this blog’s global popularity, it’s clear that doesn’t include many New Mexicans. People who had to suffer through his dim brained incompentency might reconsider over-looking Romney’s animal cruelty and repugnancy if forced to choose a former Gov candidate.

  71. 71
    J. Michael Neal says:

    @Hermione Granger-Weasley:

    Oh, he is perfect for the LoOGies.

    Wait, there’s a whole team of lefty one out guys?

  72. 72
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    @NobodySpecial: awww….you missed my epic takedown of that other libertarian fucktard Kuznicki.
    Here, you can read about it.

    hmm…if you read Nellcotes link, it would seem an anti-union AGW denialist that wants to overturn Roe and strike down child labor laws would be a strange choice for the front page of BJ.
    jus’ sayin’

  73. 73
    eemom says:

    maybe this is all just mental masturbation to begin with.

    maybe. But since you are kind of a political adolescent, that’s all the more reason for you to engage in it all the time.

    I’m with Superluminar, who I think it was that said earlier something to the effect of, even contemplating support for a candidate with an R after their name in this day and age is either fatuous naivete or pure evil.

    Fuck this shit.

  74. 74
    gn says:

    There’s an easy answer. Don’t flirt with hard right wing libertarian politicians for president in some gambit to get the most progressive president of this generation to “listen” to the shrieks of people who have the luxury of dismissing political realities. I guess that’s “hard” for the netroots but that just speaks to how out of touch these blogs are, how fantastical the media product merchandised here is.

  75. 75
    eemom says:

    So there’s no easy answers here. There’s no perfect candidates obviously, and even the ones we like for issues A and B may be horrible or just horribly disappointing on issues C and D. When it comes time to pull the lever, we make as honest a decision as we can – and often that means compromising our values in the least painful way possible. Such is politics.

    No. shit.

    Come to think of it, so irritating am I finding this pompous little Sullivan-wannabe ass, that I might just throw a few bucks into toko-loko’s stalker fund.

  76. 76
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    Ummm …….is there some reason for TWO FUCKING FRONT PAGE POSTS ABOUT THIS FUCKER?
    wallah, can’t mistermix and DougJ wet nurse EDK at Forbes or the LoOG for cripes sake?
    Didn’t EDK even read ANYTHING about this assclown before shooting his load?
    What a waste of spacetime.

  77. 77
    gn says:

    Loving the fact that a person who flirted with some right wing nutcase for POTUS is on the front page of a “progressive” blog talking ’bout POTUS “means well.” April 2011, America.

    Can’t make this stuff up.

  78. 78
    OzoneR says:

    I would prefer a liberal non-interventionist who would campaign on ending the drug war, expanding healthcare, and so forth.

    We had one, Dennis Kucinich, and another, Mike Gravel, they lost.

    What you want, or what I would want, and what America wants, or even what the Democratic and Republican (and third parties) want may be completely different things.

  79. 79
    eemom says:

    @Hermione Granger-Weasley:

    preach it, child.

  80. 80
    Amir_Khalid says:

    @Hermione Granger-Weasley:

    So a Reform Birther is a nonbirther, but from the subset that is not above pandering to actual birthers. Is that what you’re saying?

  81. 81
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    @Amir_Khalid: yup. its from this Ellis post smack talking that ratfucker Dave Weigel.
    Birther Issue Goes Mainstream.

  82. 82
    Fred says:

    Good to see you are coming out of the closet regarding the former Republican Gov. of New Mexico.

    NOTE: Anyone who supports him is NOT, NOT …..NOT progressive in any way shape or form. If you have progressive credentials of some sort like a pony tail or black rose above your nipple or something you must buck that off and head off to the nearest tattoo removal place immediately. Your credentials have been REVOKED!

    PS: If you seriously think a Republican candidate (don’t kid yourself, he is still VERY much a republican) like the former New Mexico Gov. is anti war you are dillusional. If he was elected (in some alternate universe, will never happen for real) he would cozy up to neocons so fast it would make your head spin.

  83. 83
    eemom says:

    @Fred:

    d-e-l-u-s-i-o-n-a-l

  84. 84
    Fred says:

    @Hermione Granger-Weasley: @Davis X. Machina:

    Oy Vey. Please at least add an “LOL” or (rolleyes) or something that tells me you are not serious.

  85. 85
    E.D. Kain says:

    @Allan: please explain what you mean. Use links.

  86. 86
    E.D. Kain says:

    @Fred: you did read where I said I’d prefer a liberal non-interventionist right? Or maybe not.

  87. 87
    Fred says:

    Saying you would prefer liberal over a Republitarian but even flirting with the idea of voting for such a person tells me all I need to know.

    One is sane, the other isn’t. You would consider both. So endeth the conversation.

  88. 88
    E.D. Kain says:

    @Fred: well that sounds like partisanship at its worst to me.

  89. 89
    gn says:

    @E.D. Kain: how could you. this will be erased in tomorrow’s snark, but how you could people seriously fucking try to replace President Obama for some loon who doesn’t even believe in social security. What is wrong with you guys, how could you do this, you’re so awful. Proud Obamabot. You’re all a bunch of assholes. I don’t think it’s snarky and clever to think of an elderly person going to the store, and thinking, petfood is 50 cents, tuna fish is a dollar so i’ll get that petfood because social security is gone under President Gary libertarian asshole. This is a joke to you POS. I hate the netroots so much, I wish I never had anything to do with it.

  90. 90
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @E.D. Kain:I don’t think that’s partisanship at its worst. I think it is a recognition that the Republican Party is so far out in the weeds that it is foolish to consider it. The best guy they have available seems pretty nuts. Until they decide to tamp down the crazy, I don’t see why anyone who is sensible should give them a moment’s consideration.

  91. 91
    Mandramas says:

    @E.D. Kain: Liberal non interventionist sounds like a contradictio in adjetio. In American political lingo, at least.

  92. 92
    eemom says:

    @gn:

    calm yourself. The netroots have a lot to answer for, but this particular abomination isn’t one of it.

    What we are experiencing here is simply the result of John Cole’s uniquely bizarre taste in front pagers, which ranges, inexplicably, from the rational adult to the college freshman who just scored an A in Political Science 101.

  93. 93
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @eemom: Who is the rational adult? Levenson?

  94. 94
    eemom says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    SP&T of course.

    And Kay. Also too.

  95. 95
    gn says:

    @eemom: thanks for the context and backstory. Appreciated.

  96. 96
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @eemom: Of course. How sexist of me. I apologize.

  97. 97
    E.D. Kain says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: You have a point. So then what should people who admire and like Obama do to register their discontent at his foreign policy?

    Frankly, I don’t want to see any Republicans in power. But I don’t want Democrats to govern like Republicans either.

  98. 98
    b-psycho says:

    As much bullshit right-wingers invoke nullification for, the concept has a point. Maybe if the Left moved towards deliberately ignoring unjust laws we’d get somewhere.

  99. 99
    Stillwater says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: OO, you need to impart to EDK the virtues of not getting out of the boat. Nothing good happens out there.

  100. 100
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @E.D. Kain: You, for one, have a platform from which to speak. Use it. Make the nature of your discontent clear, but make it known. Another suggestion would be to work to get a good Congress elected. Talking up and/or voting for someone on the right merely indicates to those in power that you prefer the arguments of the right. I am not sure that is what you want to do.

  101. 101
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Stillwater: It is where the mangoes are.

  102. 102
    Stillwater says:

    @E.D. Kain: well that sounds like partisanship at its worst to me.

    Only if you limit your view of things to the letter behind the name. If you look at constituencies, and policy initiatives, and policy enacted, and the realities of coalition building, and the current ideological nature of the GOP, then no, it’s not partisanship at its worst. It’s a considered judgment based on a broad range of factors.

  103. 103
    Stillwater says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: Damn straight!

  104. 104
    E.D. Kain says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: That’s all very true and well said. Thanks.

    @Stillwater: Well I was responding mainly to Fred saying that even considering at all a Republican means that I can’t be a true progressive – regardless of the reasons, caveats, etc. That seems like partisanship to me.

    But yeah, I get both your points. I really do. I’ll have more to say in a follow-up.

  105. 105
    Stillwater says:

    @E.D. Kain: But also, and think about this question seriously: are the two issues you name in your OP trumping issues? Are they more important than, eg., reducing the deficit (D), reigning in healthcare costs as a dual purpose objective (D), supporting labor in an anemic way but supporting it nonetheless (D), sustaining social programs (D), increasing taxes on the wealthy as an avenue to reducing the deficit (D), supporting civil liberties, gay rights, the right to choose (a sad for you) (D), actual functioning regulation of business practices (D), an end to rescission and the start of guarantee issue (D), and a whole host of others?

    Foreign wars are post-partisan: both sides do it, brother! And the war on drugs is a paradigmatic example of why democracy is the worst political system except for all the others.

  106. 106
    E.D. Kain says:

    @Stillwater: Yeah, like I said, these are all really important things, and supporting Johnson would mean not supporting many of them, at least when casting the vote. But at the same time, the post-partisan nature of foreign wars makes finding an anti-war president all that more important to me. Who will come down the pipeline for 2016 I wonder, on the left, and what lessons will they have drawn from the previous eight years?

    I will most likely vote for Obama, but I will certainly use whatever small pedestal I have to critique his foreign policy at the same time.

  107. 107
    Allan says:

    @E.D. Kain: Sure thing, ED.

    Your friend on Twitter:

    I supported Ron Paul and Obama, mostly for their anti-war policies. Obama may not be the best anti-war candidate in 2012.

    And you responded:

    having started another, I’d say he’s not much of an anti-war candidate at all, sadly.

    So I asked you what war Obama has started, and also why you (and by extension your friend) came to the conclusion that Obama was anti-war in the first place.

    This is why earlier today on another thread, I said of you that you were either ignorant of Obama’s actual positions regarding war, or were willfully misreprenting those positions in order to slam him.

    Got crickets in reply until just a half hour ago from you on Twitter, where you avoided answering my questions and said, in classic emoprog style:

    I’m not sure where this hostility toward me is coming from. Can I not be critical of Obama and the D’s at all?

  108. 108
    Stillwater says:

    @E.D. Kain: Well, fwiw, my own view the use of military force is that it’s probably the area the president has the least control over, except at the edges. The immensity of the institutional structures governing decision-making with regards to when and where military might will be exercised is prolly the single most inexorable force any Pres. has to overcome. ANd they simply can’t. Foreign policy is largely determined by forces outside of any single individuals control.

    Shorter: your ‘anti-war’ candidate would become the ‘reluctantly we must use military force’ Pres.

  109. 109
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    @Stillwater: jaysus, will you and omnes go wet nurse this libertarian assclown somewhere else?
    Its fucking gross.
    @E.D. Kain: Why are there two frontpage posts about a AGW denialist tenther creationist union bashing scumbag like GaJo? WTF? Who freaking cares about that pile of glibertarian assclownishness? He is unelectable and he shits all over everything liberals believe in. He voted for a late term anti-abortion bill. He helped strike down unions. He wants to repeal child labor laws. Who gives a fuck about his anti-war views?
    What Allan says is true…..you concern troll the shit out of Obama and piss on him when you think no one is looking. You dislike him, but you know you would get an epic asswhupping here if that comes out.
    You are a sneaky little prick, and a pompous assclown.
    Go back to the LoOG and prop your islamophobic co-blogger Kowal.

  110. 110
    Fred says:

    @gn: Spot on! Ditto! And all that!

  111. 111
    Fred says:

    @Hermione Granger-Weasley: Ditto, once again!

  112. 112
  113. 113
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    @Angry Black Lady: what she said.

  114. 114
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    @E.D. Kain:

    I’ll have more to say in a follow-up.

    spare us.
    we already heard your latest masturbatory vomitus. do us all a big fucking favor and drop it. or go form your own republitarian party with Sully and Greenwald.
    We don’t really need THREE frontpage posts about GaJo.

  115. 115
    E.D. Kain says:

    @Allan: Obama was a key figure in the decision to send American bombs raining down on Libya. He is the Commander-in-Chief of the US military. That’s his call. That he acted alongside the UN is meaningless in practical terms. Who is supplying the missiles? Who is avoiding putting boots on the ground by sending in drones instead? I’m sorry, but apologizing for the Libya mission is so reminiscent of Iraq war apologists it’s almost laughable. Bush had a ‘coalition of the willing’ including the UK. It doesn’t make the Iraq war right any more than French and UK jets make the Libya war right.

  116. 116
    Allan says:

    @E.D. Kain: I’m not apologizing for anything. I’m asking you to defend your choice of language. So far, all you’ve done is attempt to equate the situation in Libya with Iraq, which is not only laughable, it’s willfully, perversely ahistorical.

  117. 117
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    @E.D. Kain:

    Bush had a ‘coalition of the willing’ including the UK. It doesn’t make the Iraq war right any more than French and UK jets make the Libya war right.

    you are so fucking dishonest.
    Obama didn’t “start a third war in the ME”. He “reluctantly” joined a coalition of euros and the AL sanctioned by a UN resolution.
    I knew you were a secret Bush fellator.
    /points and laffs

  118. 118
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    @Allan: he didnt just say that on twitter, he said it at Forbes too.
    “started a third war in the ME”.
    He sneers at Obama whenever he thinks he can away with it.
    The sneaky little shit doesn’t dare do it openly, so just he concern trolls Obama here.

  119. 119
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    subhanallah! This whole GaJo thing is just a stealth way to concern troll Obama on foreign policy.
    A libertarian stalking horse so EDK can shoot at Obama from cover on his anti-war chops.
    Watch gg. He is employing the same device i betcha.
    ;)

  120. 120
    Bob says:

    It’s impossible for me to understand why E.D. would say he might consider voting for Johnson. Yes, I know, he says the right thing regarding the wars, including the drug wars, but stacking those two against his other positions, and still saying, sure I could possibly vote for him, is just weird. I believe E.D. is sincere when he writes in support of social safety nets and unions and other positions of the left. So, once again, I’m left scratching my head. How can E.D. narrow his focus and say, yes, possibly? And no, I’m not buying into the proposition that the president does not have that much power. The presidency is the first among equals, no question about that.

    On the matter of tone. I began commenting on blogs over at LoOG, when it first started. I’m not one of the regulars, my any means, but I did start there. I learned to keep a civil tone, on the whole I’m glad I did. I enjoy the trash talk here, up to a point. However, I will not engage. I’m not asking for anyone to change or for John Cole to banish any commentor. (In fact I argued with E.D. when he kicked MC off the League.) So, “assclown” and “asshat” away folks. I know what I’m getting when I come here.

  121. 121
    Hermione Granger-Weasley says:

    @Bob: wallah, Cheeks, the LoOG is mainstreaming islamophobia now.
    Do you honestly think a muslimah could comment there?
    Its disgusting.

    And I explained it. EDK dislikes Obama but he has to hide it here. He is just using GaJo to concern troll Obama on foreign policy and his anti-war chops.

  122. 122
    kay says:

    E.D, I wouldn’t support a libertarian or conservative for President not because I’m wandering through the marketplace of ideas and knee-jerk rejecting all of their ideas or policy preferences.
    I won’t support a libertarian or far Right conservative because they have a profoundly different view of the US Constitution than liberals or Democrats, and that view will have HUGE effect on everything from environmental to labor to health care law.
    This is a foundational argument. It isn’t bickering over food stamp funding, or a public option.
    Libertarians and far Right conservatives do not believe the federal government has the lawful authority to impliment the policy I favor. When they say that federal law regulating child labor is unconstitutional, they mean it. They think it’s unlawful under a proper interpretation of the commerce clause, E.D.
    I can’t get to “liberal” national policy from conservative or libertarian legal theory, even if I really, really want to be open minded and bipartisan. It won’t work.
    If Johnson thinks that the Tenth Amendment is not a “truism” but is instead a valid legal argument for nullifying federal law, we don’t agree, and, further, he doesn’t agree with 90 years of case law.
    This is foundational stuff. These were and are BIG battles. We’re not on the same side. I can pick and choose his “policy” all I want and drop it into my little market basket, but at some point (and soon!) we’re going to part ways, dramatically, over, oh, the tenth amendment, or the commerce clause, or the proper role of the federal government and the states, and there won’t be any meeting in the middle.
    I can’t paper these differences over. They’re HUGE.

Comments are closed.