Just Fucking Kill Me

These people are fucking clinical:

Any good liberal in the year 2011 would be confused when choosing between Obama and Bush for the title of “Worst President Ever.”

Fuck these lunatics. Fucking sociopaths.

400 replies
  1. 1
    Gordon, The Big Express Engine says:

    Frist!

  2. 2
    Linnaeus says:

    This isn’t even worth a post.

  3. 3
    PopeRatzy says:

    It has been taken down already.

  4. 4
    Carter says:

    You’ve make a mistake on your link – there is an extra apostrophe on the end.

  5. 5
    Ozone says:

    Who really cares what they think. Irrelevant people trying to deal with their irrelevance led by a shrewd businesswoman trying to make it impossible for candidates to not buy ads from her.

  6. 6
    OzoneR says:

    Who really cares what they think. Irrelevant people trying to deal with their irrelevance led by a shrewd businesswoman trying to make it impossible for candidates to not buy ads from her.

  7. 7
    PopeRatzy says:

    This isn’t even worth a post.

    Methinks that “that” would be a better proximal demonstrative.

  8. 8
    Rhoda says:

    Liberal being the operative word.

    God damned, but that is awesome.

  9. 9

    No, it’s still there, right on the front page.

  10. 10
    Derf says:

    Hell just froze over.

    I actually agree with something John Cole posted (notice I didn’t use the ‘Galt’)

    Or maybe I misunderstand the apparent logic and reason for sarcasm?!

    http://theobamadiary.com/2011/.....s-heroine/

  11. 11
    ruemara says:

    stop. taking. the. bait.

  12. 12
    hrprogressive says:

    Sounds like John has a bad case of that “Manic Progressive” he’s always talking about.

  13. 13
    Derf says:

    Just remember, these idiots do not matter. They have been on a fundraising drive to $1000 for 2 months and have only raised about $325
    http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/07/base.html

  14. 14
    MikeJ says:

    I’m tryin’ to be the shepherd here Ringo, so I went over there to see if this was a front pager or if it was just nutpicking.

    It ain’t nutpicking.

  15. 15
    Corner Stone says:

    Oh, thank the Gods John Gakk Cole!
    Thank you for the eleventy billionth useless fucking garbage post just today!

  16. 16
    Ron Beasley says:

    So we have Obama, a Reagan Republican who says he’s a Democrat and looks good compared to the 2011 Republican Party which is bat shit crazy. Where is the liberal Richard Nixon when we need him? Michelle Bachmann for President – let’s just get it over with! It’s time for Phoenix (not the city in Arizona) to rise out of the ashes but you have to have the ashes first.

  17. 17
    Gordon, The Big Express Engine says:

    Let me tell you a little story? I once knew a guy who could have been a great golfer, could have gone pro, all he needed was a little time and practice. Decided to go to college instead. Went for four years, did pretty well. At the end of his four years, his last semester he was kicked out… You know what for? He was night putting, just putting at night with the fifteen-year-old daughter of the Dean…

  18. 18
    Warren Terra says:

    I was wondering if it was a reader diary or something else that could make Cole’s post nutpicking. Nope. It’s right there, currently the second story on the front page.

  19. 19
    Trainrunner says:

    Well, except for the odious headline, I can’t disagree with the substance of the story.

    Anyone actually read it?

  20. 20
    Marginalized for stating documented facts says:

    It’s not at all clear that the title of that article refers to Obama, is it?

    Seems to me the title of the article refers to Bush and then the article itself compares Bush’s policies to Obama’s policies, and — aside from that little matter of unjustified wars of aggression — points out correctly that Obama’s domestic policies are essentially the same as Bush’s.

    How is that not true?

    Why is that not correct?

  21. 21
    Corner Stone says:

    @Trainrunner:

    Anyone actually read it?

    Heck no. That would deprive Blinky of his page views.

  22. 22
    different church-lady says:

    Oh, thank the Gods John Gakk Cole!
    Thank you for the eleventy billionth useless fucking garbage post just today!

    Oh, wait, I know, I know: because it feels so good when you stop! Right?

    I mean, does anyone else here see the irony of someone who can’t stand always reading shit he doesn’t like bitching about always reading a guy who keeps bitching about reading shit he doesn’t like?

  23. 23

    @Corner Stone: There’s a lot of blogs out there that presumably don’t feature “useless fucking garbage” posts you could be reading, yet you’re still here. Says more about you than Cole.

  24. 24
    Corner Stone says:

    @different church-lady: I would, except the Republicans took Irony out into the backyard and shot it fucking dead. They offered Irony a smoke first but Hypocrisy took it.
    Then they killed it too.

  25. 25
    Corner Stone says:

    @Comrade Kevin: Yes Kevin, it does.
    I’m in love! I can’t hide it any longer!!
    I can’t and I just fucking won’t!!

  26. 26
    Corner Stone says:

    I love every post every FP’er here does regarding FDL, Jane Hamsher and all the shenanigans that go on there!
    I haven’t visited FDL in years and years because I just don’t have to! It’s like taking methadone to get down from heroin!
    Coming here gives me all the FDL crazy bitchassfix I need without ever having to cut myself at night while I wonder what that crazy bitch Jane Hamsher and her eeeeeeebil minions are up to now!!
    Mwah ha ha ha!! Mwah!!
    Oooooga booga!!

  27. 27
    Linnaeus says:

    @PopeRatzy:

    Methinks that “that” would be a better proximal demonstrative.

    Indeed, you’re right. That isn’t even worth a post.

  28. 28
    Trurl says:

    Anyone actually read it?

    “Instead of using the financial crisis or the current debt hysteria to push through a progressive agenda like Bush used 9/11 to push through a conservative one, he’s using them as an excuse to capitulate to Republican budget chickenhawks, and even to cut Social Security and Medicare.”

    Of course, every word of this true. Even Cole isn’t able to pretend otherwise. So all he can do is crank up his witchburning act.

    And when Obama does lose in 2012 for presiding over a double-dip recession, Obama’s 22%-ers here will spend the next 20 years blaming the “pony wishers” for not clapping loud enough.

  29. 29
    different church-lady says:

    @ Corner Stone #26:

    Well, you’ve got kind of a point there: BJ is kind of like a radio call in show where the topic is how bad other radio call in shows are.

  30. 30
    Corner Stone says:

    Now don’t get me wrong. I still cut myself, and I still masturbate to all the possible outcomes Jane Hamsher presents me.
    Let’s be clear. I base all my decisions on what home base tells me.

  31. 31
    Yutsano says:

    And when Obama does lose in 2012

    Just out of curiosity, but is this something you wish to happen?

  32. 32
    Corner Stone says:

    Fuck, Matrix Revolutions makes more sense than this fucking post.

  33. 33
    Trollenschlongen says:

    Fuck these lunatics. Fucking sociopaths.

    You’re talking about the Obama administration, right?

    BTW, Cole, did you read the article? If so, please point out where the author is mistaken, ok?

    Thanks.

  34. 34
    different church-lady says:

    Instead of using the financial crisis or the current debt hysteria to push through a progressive agenda like Bush used 9/11 to push through a conservative one…

    OK, we are aware that Bush doing that was pretty fuckin’ evil, yes?

    It’s almost like people think the plot to Star Wars should have been Luke Skywalker building his own Death Star or something…

  35. 35
    Corner Stone says:

    God, I can’t fucking believe I used HER name in the clear like that!!
    Mistress bless and protect me!!

  36. 36
    Trollenschlongen says:

    Corner STone, you are fucking hilarious and correct.

    A good combination! :D

  37. 37
    Corner Stone says:

    @different church-lady:

    Well, you’ve got kind of a point there: BJ is kind of like a radio call in show where the topic is how bad other radio call in shows are.

    My tinfoil cap won’t allow any other broadcast than 24/7 FDL in!
    Mwah ha! Mwah ha ha ha ha!

  38. 38
    Gordon, The Big Express Engine says:

    Someone needs to loofah Corner Stone’s stretch marks…

  39. 39
    Larkspur says:

    I hate everyone. Everyone. That means YOU.

  40. 40
    piratedan says:

    she may think she speaks for liberals but she simply doesn’t, anyone with a working cerebellum knows she’s a grifter, she’s just not as established as her counterparts on the other end of the spectrum. She’s dismissed as having even less influence because her tally of loyal minions is dwarfed by those on the nefarious right.

  41. 41
    different church-lady says:

    Q: How do you know when you’ve spent far too much time reading a blog?

    A: When you feel the urge to publicly announce that you’re going to bed.

  42. 42
    different church-lady says:

    @ piatedan: And yet here we are talking about her again.

  43. 43
    Corner Stone says:

    @different church-lady:

    And yet here we are talking about her again.

    Oh hai!! Nice to see you here!

  44. 44
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    “Instead of using the financial crisis or the current debt hysteria to push through a progressive agenda like Bush used 9/11 to push through a conservative one,

    Wow, that’s some hard core stupid there. Is it Lady Jane herself?

  45. 45
    Finn13 says:

    John Cole: I hate FireDogLake but have nothing substantive to say about the content of the article I object to.

    Commentor #1: I like traffic lights

    Commentor #2: FireDogLake sucks, but I haven’t read the article in question and can’t say why I disagree with a substantuve comment either

    Commentor #3: I like calling people batshit insane because it’s easier than writing something intelligent about the points raised in the article in question.

    Commentor #4: I am a Dem loyalist so my brain shut off years ago. Boo FireDogLake!

    Commentor #5: Did anybody read it? makes some valid points.

    Commentor #3: Insult, insult, then some snark, just to avoid saying anything substantive.

    Commentor #4: Why don’t you go volunteer for Michelle Bachman, you’re obviously a Republican troll or a Firebagger, same zero sum.

    etc.

  46. 46
    different church-lady says:

    @ Corner Stone #43: Did I claim to lead a life free from irony? No, I did not claim to live a life free from irony.

  47. 47
    Malron aka eclecticbrotha says:

    Wow. Just unbelievable. And yes, I did read the text accompanying the deliberately leading headline.

    Here, John, this might cheer you up.

  48. 48
    Trollenschlongen says:

    Wow, that’s some hard core stupid there.

    Could you specify HOW the passage you quoted is “stupid?”

    Thanks.

  49. 49
    piratedan says:

    @42 well it’s natural when someone lets out a loud and obnoxious fart to look at the culprit. :-)

  50. 50
    different church-lady says:

    @ 47: In finishing school we were taught to tilt our heads slightly and avert our gaze.

  51. 51
    FlipYrWhig says:

    This story full of misreadings and exaggerations matches up exactly with my own personal misreadings and exaggerations! By validating each other, that means we’re both totally right!

  52. 52
    Jay says:

    Anyone know who the “Eli” behind the (apparently now removed) FDL post is? I’m asking only because I wonder if it’s Eli Pariser, who was in the thick of MoveOn’s work for many years, and may still be.

  53. 53
    Gordon, The Big Express Engine says:

    Fifty bucks Corner Stone picks his nose…

  54. 54
    Marginalized for stating documented facts says:

    Cornerstone:

    I haven’t visited FDL in years and years because I just don’t have to! It’s like taking methadone to get down from heroin!

    LOL.

    FTW!

  55. 55
    stinkdaddy says:

    @19 — All I saw was a headline and then a red haze. Was there a body? I’d look myself, but I might end up having to weigh something on its merits rather than freaking out about tone.

    (Also maybe expend some of your blogging energy suggesting Obama should consider doing fewer fucked-up things if seeing people point them out in admittedly over-the-top terms bothers you this much. )

  56. 56
    kindness says:

    I bitch about Obama because he doesn’t support what I do more often than I like. But I’m gonna vote for him over any of the chuckleheads running around for the Republican nomination.

    I wish he was more willing to fight for me, but he isn’t. Pragmatic is his middle name and that’s too bad. But I will still vote for him.

    A lot of you are saying the fdl folk don’t matter. They do in the respect that that is what the media will quote when they want to show Obama as being unwanted by ‘the left’.

  57. 57

    Trurl @28

    Of course, every word of this true.

    Except when it isn’t.

    Let’s walk it back a couple of days to the line in the NYTimes story that containeed the allegation that Obama offered up SS COLA cuts to Boehner:

    The president’s renewed efforts follow what knowledgeable officials said was an overture from Mr. Boehner, who met secretly with Mr. Obama last weekend, to consider as much as $1 trillion in unspecified new revenues as part of an overhaul of tax laws in exchange for an agreement that made substantial spending cuts, including in such social programs as Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security — programs that had been off the table.

    Note two things:

    1). The vague, anonymous source, very possibly not in the room.

    2).”…an overture from Mr. Boehner…”. Not “a concession”, not “a threat”, not even “an offer” – “an overture”. That John Boehner, he’s no weak-kneed concession maker, and he’s not a bully, he’s a gracious and graceful conductor. Five gets ya one that the source was a GOP official. And one of those would never prevaricate for political gain, would they?

    And everything- EVERYTHING- that’s followed in the media has been fueling a positive feedback loop. Rumor has, to some, become truth.

    ETA: Whoops! Link to the Times http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07......html?_r=1

  58. 58
    MikeJ says:

    @Jay:

    Anyone know who the “Eli” behind the (apparently now removed) FDL post is? I’m asking only because I wonder if it’s Eli Pariser, who was in the thick of MoveOn’s work for many years, and may still be.

    In spite of the fact that his personal website has a manifesto that says, “Accountability is the hallmark of democracy”, he doesn’t appear to put his last name anywhere on the site.

    But I don’t think he is. Pariser has a book to sell right now, so probably too busy for this, and while I would sometimes disagree with him, he’s usually not completely insane.

  59. 59
    dogwood says:

    her tally of loyal minions is dwarfed by those on the nefarious right.

    Out of curiosity what does that mean in numbers? And is there any relationship between the number of people who actually post on a blog and its influence?

  60. 60
    dr. know says:

    ok Cole, here’s what I want you to think about: Obama and his people are all over the teevee talking about reducing the deficit. They are not talking about spending money to create jobs.

    Now, you may say that this is because no jobs program would ever be enacted by congress. Ok, fine, maybe you are right.

    However, I want you to explain to me how it helps liberal/progressive causes (and how it helps the country) for the president (the DEMOCRATIC president) to be on teevee talking about deficit reduction, and buying into republican talking points, instead of vigorously agitating for the policies that (we all know and agree) are correct.

    Why is he acting as he is? Why is he embracing Hooverism? Why is he talking about “belt-tightening”?? Is it because of misguided political advice? Or is it because he actually believes the things he is saying?

    Either way, I really don’t understand how you (or your commenters) can support him. (I completely understand how ABL can support him: she will ____ his _____ no matter what he does). But you, Cole? Explain to us why what he is doing is the right thing. And try to do it without clearing your throat with all the “Republicans are crazy” b.s. Seriously. Lots of presidents have gotten things done without their parties having 60%+ majorities in congress. And I’m not even talking about actual legislation. Just saying the right thing publicly (i.e., telling the truth), shouting it from the rooftops, let the chips fall where they may, etc.

  61. 61
    Corner Stone says:

    @Gordon, The Big Express Engine: It’s a little late to start up with the all time movie quotes.

  62. 62

    When i read this fucking crap, I wonder which I will regret more: putting up the cash, making the phone calls, knocking on doors, fighting the good fight? Or kicking back, smoking another bong, and letting President Bachmann/Pawlenty/Romney/whoever run the fucking thing into the rocks, once and for all, so we can start the killings over what’s left in earnest?

    Really, when I read that shit, it is truly, dear Gaia, a fucking toss of a coin, call it in the air.

    As for FDL: lay down with those dogs, wake up with rabies. No need to click.

  63. 63
    Corner Stone says:

    @dr. know:

    (I completely understand how ABL can support him: she will his _ no matter what he does)

    God damn. She “will his _ ” ?
    Where do you go to find that?

  64. 64
    Allan says:

    I wonder why people are pretending that the offending post has been removed from FDL, when my browser sends me directly to it with a single click.

    Is this some sort of FDL Jedi mind trick, where they mob the comments section to claim, “These are not the Firebaggers you’re looking for”?

    Also too, the comments over there are a hoot. I’d swear everyone from Harriet Christian to linfar to the Larrys Johnson and Sinclair all have FDL IDs. Lots of inadequate black man puppet of Rezko freak action going down.

  65. 65
    psycholinguist says:

    Jesus Christ, that fucksticks defenders on here are more asinine than the article, and that’s saying something. I keep hearing Church Lady’s voice when I read Trollenschlogen’s posts. And so you won’t waste a post Shlog, I COULD tell you HOW your posts are asinine, but I ain’t. Its a secret.

  66. 66
    Mike Kay ( Geronimo!!) says:

    I’m setting the over/under on comments on this threat at 325

  67. 67
    Lysana says:

    @Corner Stone: Dude, it’s time for you to go back to the nice doctor and let him know your manic episodes are increasing in frequency and severity.

  68. 68
    Corner Stone says:

    Fuck you Blinky Cole!

  69. 69
    different church-lady says:

    Lots of presidents have gotten things done without their parties having 60%+ majorities in congress.

    That GW Bush sure got a lot done. If only Obama were more like him maybe he wouldn’t be worse than him.

  70. 70
    stinkdaddy says:

    @ 55 — If the SS cuts are bogus, it would’ve been pretty simple for Carney to shoot them down. Instead he played fingerpuppets and equivocated on the difference between “Cut” and “slash.”

    But hey, maybe SS is off the table. Maybe Carney’s just that incompetent. I’m not confident.

  71. 71
    Corner Stone says:

    @Lysana: Sure there’s not a DFD number for what you’re trying to say?
    Cuz you ain’t never been able to cogently post shit on your own.

    drops the spork

  72. 72
    Yutsano says:

    I wonder which I will regret more: putting up the cash, making the phone calls, knocking on doors, fighting the good fight? Or kicking back, smoking another bong, and letting President Bachmann/Pawlenty/Romney/whoever run the fucking thing into the rocks, once and for all, so we can start the killings over what’s left in earnest?

    Here’s the problem: after the crash and burn, what arises is highly unlikely to be progressive Nirvana. In fact, history suggests the opposite will occur. And during and after the crash, a lot of vulnerable populations will be hurt and/or killed. Since it seems like Democrats are the only remaining adults left, we’re kind of stuck with sucking it up and trying to make things better. And that means not only re-electing Obama, but trying to keep the Senate and re-taking the House. It’ll be a shit ton of grunt work and yeah it’ll suck that this is about the best we’ll have. But the alternative is sentencing a lot of innocent people to a large amount of suffering.

    PS: no matter what, I hope you keep the bong handy. It’s good for relaxation too I hear.

  73. 73
    Mike Kay ( Geronimo!!) says:

    I’m setting the usual Cole “apology” post over/under time for Sunday 3PM.

  74. 74
    Mike Kay ( Geronimo!!) says:

    it’s so cute how Cole tries to get Jane’s attention with these “pull her hair”/”I’m sorry” posts.

    really Cole, she’s just not that into you.

  75. 75
    Corner Stone says:

    @stinkdaddy:

    Instead he played fingerpuppets

    Actually, he played “Chinese finger cuffs”. Like Chasing Amy, but without the sexy blonde.

  76. 76
    wmd says:

    When are we going to see a “Even the liberal FDL” tag?

    FDL had a decent post on economics yesterday. The referenced post is just red meat for the left wing rage machine. Primarily heat, what little light it sheds does nothing to advance a solution.

  77. 77
    dr. know says:

    @different church-lady: I didn’t say he’s worse than him: I said: explain how he is doing the right thing. And I mean in terms of the economy, not elsewhere (yes I know about DADT and DOMA, good for him). The solution to the economic downturn is obvious: more spending, expansionary monetary policy, etc. But BHO is talking about *cutting the fucking deficit*!!! wtf. just that. someone explain to me, wtf.

  78. 78
    stinkdaddy says:

    @ 62 — Seriously? Cole initially put the link up with an extra character, then it was fixed. I gather you’re a bit into the FDL ratfucking conspiracy fantasies, but holy crap was that ever a massive leap you just made.

  79. 79
    Mike Kay ( Geronimo!!) says:

    The base vs “the base”

    http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/07/base.html

  80. 80
    dr. know says:

    @different church-lady: I didn’t say he’s worse than Bush: I said: explain how he is doing the right thing. And I mean in terms of the economy, not elsewhere (yes I know about DADT and DOMA, good for him). The solution to the economic downturn is obvious: more spending, expansionary monetary policy, etc. But BHO is talking about *cutting the fucking deficit*!!! wtf. just that. someone explain to me, wtf.

  81. 81
    handy says:

    @dr. know: There’s game called chess, see. And Obama is playing it. He’s like REAL good at it too. Watch.

  82. 82
    Montysano says:

    @ Trollenschlongen 33

    BTW, Cole, did you read the article? If so, please point out where the author is mistaken, ok?

    The author’s first sentence:

    No, I’m not ready to crown Barack Obama the Worst President Ever just yet

    is world class dumbassery. As to mistaken? Comparing Bush’s post-9/11 push to Obama’s deficit fight is moronic. You might remember that in 2001 the GOP owned the White House, Congress, and the Senate.

  83. 83

    But the alternative is sentencing a lot of innocent people to a large amount of suffering.

    And how. Thanks for the note of sanity in a batshit crazy thread.

    And to the “Obama is TEH! SATAAAAN!” crew: go find a speech, ANY speech, by “W”. Listen to the whole Gaia-damned thing. Then come back and cry me a fucking river. Wanting a Chief Executive who doesn’t sound like a simpering fucking moron is, yes, I realize, a stretch, but, shit brothers and sisters, right now it’s all I got.

    You got better? Bring it. Now’s the time.

  84. 84

    Check out comment #145 on that post, some serious crakpottery, yowza.

  85. 85
    dr. know says:

    @handy: ummmm, sure. I’ll just keep my thoughts to myself and trust that our leader knows what he’s doing and will make ponies appear in the end.

    and btw, don’t you mean 11-dimensional chess??

  86. 86
    Corner Stone says:

    @handy:

    There’s game called chess, see. And Obama is playing it. He’s like REAL good at it too. Watch.

    Sigh.

  87. 87
  88. 88
    Mike Kay ( Geronimo!!) says:

    When are we going to see a “Even the liberal FDL” tag?

    I used that yesterday. http://www.balloon-juice.com/2.....nt-2660610

  89. 89
    handy says:

    @Corner Stone:

    What, am I doing it wrong? I thought that was always the answer around here to why Obama does the “Tastes Great Less Filling” Republican Lite dance.

    @dr. know:

    Ahh, bless you I was doing it wrong. How could I ever forget about those damned ponies?! And you’re right of course, it is a game of 11 dimensions.

  90. 90
    dr. know says:

    @BruceFromOhio: no sh*t, eh? But I think you’re setting a really low bar there. WHy are you so eager to knock down the strawman of “why is BHO worse than GWB?”. That’s obviously ridiculous. What we need to discuss is why BHO is not as good as the BHO we want. Because, seriously, right now he is terrible.

  91. 91

    …explain how he is doing the right thing.

    Why? Why bother? What the fuck difference does it make to you, your neighbor, your fucking dog, the rest of the crew alive tonight putting keystrokes down on BJ? Or FDL?

    He isn’t saying what you want him to say.

    Worst. President. EVAH.

    End of story.

  92. 92
    Mike Kay ( Geronimo!!) says:

    Cole, you and Jane are just gonna have to start seeing other blogs.

  93. 93
    MS-NBC says:

    The solution to the economic downturn is obvious: more spending, expansionary monetary policy, etc. But BHO is talking about cutting the fucking deficit wtf. just that. someone explain to me, wtf.

    Deficit cutters won an election where they campaigned on…cutting the deficit.

  94. 94
    stinkdaddy says:

    @81 — Wow. So I’m not misunderstanding? You really did just say, “Yeah sure everything’s shit, but at least he can give a good speech”?

    I’m not trying to be an ass gratuitously, but if that’s all you got then you literally got nothing. But I will be sure to mention this thing about great speeches to my neighbor — maybe they’ll let him submit a DVD of the inaugural in lieu of those medical payments he’s been behind on since losing his job. Seriously, what is the point of even bringing this up? It’s just patronizing.

  95. 95
    danimal says:

    Mike Kay, I’ll take the over.

    Why do liberals FREAK OUT EVERY TIME THERE IS A NEGOTIATION? Every single fcuking time? Goddamn idiots, that’s what our side looks like. EVERY SINGLE TIME. AM I LOUD ENOUGH FOR YA??? Besides being wrong, it’s REALLY POOR NEGOTIATING. Counter-productive, even.

    I guarantee you that liberals will not look back at the presidencies of Nixon, Reagan, Bush and Obama in 2040 and conclude that Obama is the worst of the lot. Stupid hyperbole. Idiots.

    I’m becoming convinced they want a President Romney so that they can feed off of righteous indignation. And make some scratch in the process.

  96. 96
    OzoneR says:

    What we need to discuss is why BHO is not as good as the BHO we want.

    We have the discussion a million times and it still doesn’t get through, because Republicans sit in their largest majority in 65 years. End of fucking story.

  97. 97
    ABL says:

    Either way, I really don’t understand how you (or your commenters) can support him. (I completely understand how ABL can support him: she will his _ no matter what he does). But you, Cole?

    Indeed. Cole is not cursed with the skin of The Blacks. He maintains his wits about him because he is a paleface. I, on the other hand, would defend Obama until my last breath — nay! I would give my life for Him, even if I caught Him balls-deep in a goat. For that is the curse of The Mud People.

    All hail the Great and Powerful O! May we forever have His infinite wisdom and grace bestowed upon us.

  98. 98
    AnotherBruce says:

    I dunno Cole, after the 369th post about how the manic progressives are destroying the Democratic party, I ask you what the fuck is your point? I don’t particularly like what some of the clowns on FDL post, but I don’t really see a lot of difference here either. Can you fuckers get over your republican guilt for a minute? Long enough to see that you don’t like us and we don’t like you but maybe that doesn’t matter in the context of the long game that the fascists are playing?

    Really what the fuck was the point of that whiny kumbaya post a couple threads down. So some guy on the Nation tweets about something that Axelrod said and you use that as a metaphor for all that is wrong with the left. Really are you so fucking unaware that what you are doing is baiting a blog fight for hits? And it’s the same thing you’re doing on this post. It’s no wonder you and your girlfriend ABL get along so well. You’re both a nice hybrid of troll/poster. You start blog fights and sit back and giggle. It’s fucking psychotic. I would recommend you get married, except I’m pretty sure the kid would be pretty fucked up.

    Really this used to be a decent blog but it’s just turned into a boring bitch slapping party. Not all that different from what you see on Yahoo or any stupid newspaper commenting section. You really don’t give a fuck about politics, except as a means to stroke your own ego.

    Fuck you and yours, over and out.

  99. 99
    ABL says:

    Also, too, FDL is ridiculous.

  100. 100
    stinkdaddy says:

    @ 88 — That just isn’t how this place rolls. If you criticize Obama from the left, you’re saying that he’s the worst President ever. Incorporated into that is also a claim that you’re a member of The One True Base. If you say any one of these things you’re saying all three.

  101. 101
    OzoneR says:

    But I will be sure to mention this thing about great speeches to my neighbor

    I thought we wanted him to use the bully pulpit, you know, so his neighbor know he’s fighting for him even if he’s not getting anything passed.

    Or are we done with that now?

  102. 102

    Because, seriously, right now he is terrible.

    Yes, and we should make sure the GOP majority in the house starts impeachment proceedings forthwith. Call your congressman! Impeach Obama! Worst President EVAH!

    And by the way, cash those dollars in for euros. Or canned food and ammo! Worst President EVAH is gonna fail to resolve the debt crisis!

    C’mon, corner stone, chime in here, I need a good tenor to hold the rhythm.

  103. 103
    different church-lady says:

    Why do liberals FREAK OUT EVERY TIME THERE IS A NEGOTIATION?

    But it’s my only line!

  104. 104
    Yutsano says:

    C’mon, corner stone, chime in here, I need a good tenor to hold the rhythm.

    I saw what you did there.

  105. 105
    OzoneR says:

    I’m becoming convinced they want a President Romney so that they can feed off of righteous indignation.

    only NOW you’re becoming convinced?!?

  106. 106
    Mike Kay ( Geronimo!!) says:

    Gordon, The Big Express Engine – July 9, 2011 | 12:52 am ·

    Fifty bucks Corner Stone picks his nose…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-jlQS-Wuc0

  107. 107
    cbear says:

    @Lysana/drops the mike

    @Corner Stone: Dude, it’s time for you to go back to the nice doctor and let him know your manic episodes are increasing in frequency and severity.

    Would that be the same doctor who’s treating you for your narcissistic personality disorder and delusions of grandeur?

  108. 108
    dr. know says:

    @ABL: nothing to do with skin color — I’ve been reading your posts since you first came here. When it comes to Obama, you’ve never done anything but fellate. You’ve got a track record. I think you’re reliably liberal, but you’ve got a blind spot for BHO. Why that is, I don’t know and don’t care: the fact is, you have a track record of defending him at every turn, even when he is dead wrong. And *that* is what I was referring to.

  109. 109
    burnspbesq says:

    @Trurl:

    he’s using them as an excuse to capitulate to Republican budget chickenhawks, and even to cut Social Security and Medicare.”

    Are you really so fucking stupid and uneducated that you can’t’ tell the difference between something that might or might not happen in the future and something that has actually happened?

  110. 110
    dr. know says:

    Adding: even Cole criticizes BHO sometimes. You can correct me if I’m wrong, but I read this blog every day, and I’ve never seen you criticize him. I mean, really, the guy isn’t 100% perfect, is he? Surely not, no one is. But you’d never know that from reading your commentary.

  111. 111
  112. 112
    OzoneR says:

    Are you really so fucking stupid and uneducated that you can’t’ tell the difference between something that might or might not happen in the future and something that has actually happened?

    Ah, but in the firebagger mind, it has already happened and even when it doesn’t happen, it did.

  113. 113
    El Cid says:

    Who is this guy? Is he important? Is he just some guy posting a blog post?

    If the latter, I’m kind of thinking I’m not so shocked.

  114. 114
    burnspbesq says:

    @dr. know:

    someone explain to me, wtf.

    Can you count to 218? No? How about 60? Can you count to 60?

  115. 115
    Corner Stone says:

    @dr. know:

    When it comes to Obama, you’ve never done anything but fellate.

    Gott Damm!!

  116. 116
    handy says:

    @El Cid:

    He’s some guy on the internet, I think is the point. You know how they can be.

  117. 117
    Mike Kay ( Geronimo!!) says:

    Q. What did St. Peter say to Nicole Brown Simpson when she got to heaven?
    A. Your waiter will be along in a minute.

    Q. Why won’t Nicole Simpson and Ronald Goldman play in the NFL?
    A. They were cut by the Bills.

    Q. What’s the difference between O.J. and Colonel Sanders?
    A. The Colonel batters his chicks AFTER he kills them.

  118. 118
    dr. know says:

    @burnspbesq: Did you even read what I wrote? I understand if he fails to pass x y or z. The fact is, he’s pushing Republican talking points about ‘belt-tightening’ and deficit reduction. Come on! At least he could be out there pushing the right ideas.

  119. 119
    Marginalized for stating documented facts says:

    Dr. Know asked:

    Either way, I really don’t understand how you (or your commenters) can support [Obama].

    Well…jeez…look at the alternatives, guy.

    You gonna vote for Newt? I mean, seriously?

    Democrats are stuck between a rock and a hard place here. We bitch about Obama, and savagely criticize him for betraying so many of his promises (and deservedly so)…but at the end of the day, we’re gonna vote for the guy in 2012. No question.

  120. 120
    gwangung says:

    Deficit cutters won an election where they campaigned on…cutting the deficit.

    I would think this is relevant, but, who knows?

  121. 121
    Corner Stone says:

    @Yutsano: Yeah! Me too! I saw it too!

  122. 122
    Yutsano says:

    @ Bnut:

    YOU! Yes YOU dammit!! Where in Hades have you been??

    (hi!)

  123. 123
    Corner Stone says:

    @gwangung: Nick can not be stopped. In any of his familiar guises.

  124. 124
    dr. know says:

    @whoever: “Deficit cutters won an election where they campaigned on… cutting the deficit.”

    Ok, good point.

    Obama won an election where he campaigned on being a liberal/progressive. How does “the government is like a family, it should tighten its belt” fit into that scenario?

  125. 125
    Yutsano says:

    Obama won an election where he campaigned on being a liberal/progressive

    He did?

  126. 126
    Bnut says:

    @Yutsano

    To be perfectly honest, it’s been shit like this whole thread that keeps me away. I’m sitting in a Nashville hotel room atm listening to my sister snore in the other bed, as we both try to find houses here this weekend.

    But dont worry. I am up on all the minutiae of the BJ commenteriat. I just chose to take a break from my own words of wisdom lol.

  127. 127
    Caz says:

    AnotherBruce nailed it. I can’t even read this blog daily anymore for entertainment, it’s just too damned negative, hateful, and irrelevant.

    I never read it to be informed or hear intelligent statements, but at least as entertainment, it hit the spot sometimes. At this point, you should just shut it down and reopen in a month or so with a different name and all different writers. Oh, wait, that would be a different blog entirely then. Well, still a good idea.

    Cole, seriously, find a new line of work. This blog thing isn’t working for you at all, you suck at it. Although you probably hold the record among blogs for using the word “asshole.” Great accomplishment!

  128. 128
    amorphous says:

    Filename on the jpg is incredible. Slow clap.

  129. 129
    asiangrrlMN says:

    @Bnut, good to see you! Yutsy and I were just bemoaning your absence on one of the threads below!

  130. 130
    OzoneR says:

    The fact is, he’s pushing Republican talking points about ‘belt-tightening’ and deficit reduction. Come on! At least he could be out there pushing the right ideas.

    He was in his first two years, talking about spending on infrastructure and high speed rail and giving money to states, bailing out auto companies, etc. and then the argument lost and now he’s stuck trying to save the country from default in a few weeks.

    Obama won an election where he campaigned on being a liberal/progressive. How does “the government is like a family, it should tighten its belt” fit into that scenario?

    Being a liberal/progressive doesn’t necessarily mean spending money infinitey, I don’t see anything wrong with his argument, except that Republicans say it, which is the only problem you have seem to have with it.

    Kathy Hochul talked about belt tightening in her winning campaign that progressives love to herald. She did say, however, Medicare shouldn’t be how we tighten our belt.

    Obama said today Congress should pass an infrastructure jobs bill;

    President Barack Obama says the current economy demands an extension of the payroll tax holiday and a bipartisan infrastructure bill that will put millions of construction workers back to work after losing their jobs in the wake of the housing bust.

    http://www.housingwire.com/201.....dent-obama

    Really, even Bernie Sanders has endorsed the “belt tightening” rhetoric, but he, like Hochul, are saying we shouldn’t do it at the expense of Medicare and SS, and like Obama, at the expense of jobs programs.

  131. 131
    Corner Stone says:

    @Bnut:

    To be perfectly honest, it’s been shit like this whole thread that keeps me away.

    You mean threads where Cole pisses himself over something that’s irrelevant to 99.9% of the voting public? And drops a readymade pageviewfest?

  132. 132
    Yutsano says:

    I’m sitting in a Nashville hotel room atm listening to my sister snore in the other bed

    Southern Beale will be very interested in this factoid.

    Yutsy and I were just bemoaning your absence

    Sort of. She was teasing me about my Dawg collection. Which apparently she put you in. I KNOW NOTINK!!

  133. 133
    gwangung says:

    Bnut Well, I rather enjoyed the earlier thread where, if folks had to be assholes, they tended to be on the entertaining side….

  134. 134
    burnspbesq says:

    @dr. know:

    Obama won an election where he campaigned on being a liberal/progressive.

    Absolutely false. Obama campaigned as what he is, a centrist technocrat. If you can’t tell the difference, or if you can’t walk away from the illusion you sold yourself on three years ago, that’s your issue.

    Nobody, least of all Obama, promised you a unicorn that pisses Pilsner Urquell and shits Ben & Jerry’s New York Super Fudge Chunk.

  135. 135
    handy says:

    @Caz:

    I come for the Tunch and Rosie updates, what’s your excuse?

  136. 136
    Bnut says:

    @Cornerstone

    Pretty much. I figured with the party John had a post like this was coming. Maybe the predictability of it (and the replies) is more annoying than the substance.

  137. 137
    asiangrrlMN says:

    @Yutsy, oh sure, blame me for pointing out you had more than two Dawgs in your life.

  138. 138
    different church-lady says:

    Don’t you guys get it? The words “Hope” and “Change” were quite obviously barely disguised code for “Progressive Liberal Utopia.” What else could he have possibly meant?

  139. 139
    LT says:

    I wrote the other day something along the lines of, “You’re developing a formula where you go after little shit like this and ignore the larger point – in the grand(?) name of emobashing.” Same thing here. If nothing else – the jobs thing he mentions is really really REALLY important, and worth writing about. If he does it too fucking emo for you – so the fuck what? Why is that more important than the jobs thing?

    I do not get it. Am getting bored with it. Miss the writing that brought me here for so long.

    P.S. Emo.

  140. 140
    handy says:

    @different church-lady:

    Well, the “change” part could have had something to do with–wait for it–change.

  141. 141
    Corner Stone says:

    @Bnut: After the extension of all the Bush Tax Cuts, some people are rightfully concerned about the next agreement to be made.
    Blinky knows what he’s doing.

  142. 142
    Alison says:

    @ Corner Stone #129

    You mean threads where Cole pisses himself over something that’s irrelevant to 99.9% of the voting public?

    So irrelevant, you feel the need to leave *only* 20 comments (so far, the night is young!).

    Seriously, I think you’re the one who needs to get a life, not Cole. When I read a blog post I find irrelevant or boring or dumb, I, you know…go read something else. I don’t spend hours commenting repeatedly on something that I claim is pointless and stupid because that would be…pointless and stupid.

    (ETA: And while I was typing, it went to 21. Who’s taking bets??)

  143. 143
    LT says:

    On another note: Does anyone know where NHL hockey pucks are made?

  144. 144
    Pangloss says:

    GWB had unquestioning, total support from his GOP congressional majority for 6 of his 8 years in office. It enabled him to start two wars, spend billions in giveaways to Big Pharma, turn the US into a nation that tortures, and stuffed the Supreme Court with youngish radical right wing justices that will be there until the mid 2020s.

    Yet, apparently, the main problem with Obama is that he’s not nearly liberal enough, tough enough, or uses The Bully Pulpit enough to get total, unquestioning fealty from “Democrats” in congress like Blanche Lincoln, Evan Bayh, Ben Nelson, Joe Lieberman, Max Baucus, Mary Landrieu, Mark Prior, Joe Manchin, Mark Warner, Jim Webb, and Claire McCaskell. Yep, it’s Obama that’s the problem, not crappy Democrats that barely won their elections in Ruby Red states. If only Obama were more aggressively liberal, he could reliably depend on outspoken progressives in congress like Russ Feingold and Alan Grayson to rally support.

    In the meantime, unless Obama comes around to the Aggressive Progressive way of thinking, let’s undermine him and split the Democratic vote to teach him him a lesson that he has to be more like Bush.

    Did I get that right?

  145. 145

    @OzoneR: But… but.. he isn’t SAYING what I want him to SAY!
    Worst. President. Evah!

  146. 146
    mk3872 says:

    Why, why, why do you waste your time on FDL ???

    These creeps say the same ugly things about ALL presidents, including Carter and Clinton. Every prez is shit except FDR with those ugly purists.

  147. 147
    Mnemosyne says:

    However, I want you to explain to me how it helps liberal/progressive causes (and how it helps the country) for the president (the DEMOCRATIC president) to be on teevee talking about deficit reduction, and buying into republican talking points, instead of vigorously agitating for the policies that (we all know and agree) are correct.

    Because we kind of have this little crisis going on. Maybe you’ve heard of it, our problem with the debt ceiling and the August 2nd deadline? The one about which Paul Krugman says, “Failure to raise the debt limit would also force the U.S. government to make drastic, immediate spending cuts, on a scale that would dwarf the austerity currently being imposed on Greece.” That debt limit?

    Like it or not, the Republicans are in control right now, and they have the ability to crash not just the US economy, but the world economy. And if the problem is not fixed in the next three weeks, the whole fucking world economy blows up. What, you think that if Obama says exactly what you want, the spell will be broken and the Republicans will magically back down?

  148. 148
    dr. know says:

    @burnspbesq: ok, fine. so he’s not liberal or progressive. I’ll concede that point if you like. But if so, why do all you self-proclaimed liberals and progressives defend him on all of these issues? I mean, if we can all agree that he is a corporatist masquerading as a liberal, and that all his policies are designed to benefit the top 5%, then I think my point has been made, and then ABL, Cole (mostly), and the rest of the fan club can all STFU. Thanks!

  149. 149
    MikeJ says:

    @LT:

    Does anyone know where NHL hockey pucks are made?

    It has something to do with Don Rickles.

  150. 150

    Did I get that right?

    You forgot “Impeach Him!”

    And its more earnest when you say it if you shake your torch, or just raise your pitchfork higher. Or both.

  151. 151
    LT says:

    ‘Although you probably hold the record among blogs for using the word “asshole.” Great accomplishment!’

    I can’t believe that was not said sarcastically.

    P.S. Great accomplishment, sincerely! THAT I still love about this place.

  152. 152
    burnspbesq says:

    @different church-lady:

    Don’t you guys get it? The words “Hope” and “Change” were quite obviously barely disguised code for “Progressive Liberal Utopia.” What else could he have possibly meant?

    Oh.

    I was blind, but now I see.

    Fuck Obama. My checkbook is closed to all Democrats for the 2012 election cycle. I’m not canvassing or volunteering to be a poll-watcher. And when President Bachmann and Republican majorities in both houses of Congress tear up the Bill of Rights, reinstate the gold standard, reduce the tax rate on capital gains to zero, etc., it will be entirely Obama’s fault. Not mine. And surely not dr. know’s.

  153. 153
    Bnut says:

    @asiangrrlMN@ He should be so lucky. It’s sweet you guys missed me. I was caught up in school mostly, Organic Chem is a BITCH.

  154. 154
    OzoneR says:

    But if so, why do all you self-proclaimed liberals and progressives defend him on all of these issues? I mean, if we can all agree that he is a corporatist masquerading as a liberal, and that all his policies are designed to benefit the top 5%,

    No, because he’s not a corporatist masquerading as a liberal and his policies aren’t designed to just benefit the top 5 percent. Construction workers are in the top 5 percent, for example, neither are auto workers or unemployed workers who, thanks to his “sell outs”, got their unemployment extended, or 9/11 first responders who got healthcare thanks to his “sell outs”

  155. 155
    different church-lady says:

    Maybe it’s just me, but I can’t recall this mythical depth-driven Balloon Juice everyone keeps referring to. I just remember dear Mr. Cole as a quickie contrarian with a cranky voice, who occasionally had some insight, but spent most of his time calling idiots idiots.

    Eschaton, on the other hand… I do remember a time before Duncan reduced everything to a one sentence shtick.

    If nothing else – the jobs thing he mentions is really really REALLY important, and worth writing about. If he does it too fucking emo for you – so the fuck what?

    So, basically, ignore the obvious emotional manipulation built into the 50 point type at the top of the page, like the writer never really expected any reaction to it? He just kinda put that there to make sure you really WANTED to engage in his ideas dispassionately?

  156. 156

    But if so, why do all you self-proclaimed liberals and progressives defend him on all of these issues?

    OK, now I’m just laughing my ass off. Sorry, Yutsano, for the moment it’s bong hits, all the way.

  157. 157
    LT says:

    “These creeps say the same ugly things about ALL presidents, including Carter and Clinton. Every prez is shit except FDR with those ugly purists.”

    If that’s true, the only mistake they make is the FDR thing. Anyone who doesn’t think of every single president – even ones in their own party – as adversaries has got their head so far up their ass they should be deported.

  158. 158
    dogwood says:

    OK, I know I’ll get bashed for this but from a purely political standpoint here’s a theory of why Obama is talking deficit reduction right now and driving some people who are genuinely and disingenuously disappointed in him over the cliff. And no, I’m not talking about 3D chess. I’m not a scholar; I taught political science for 35 years so I’m not a moron either. Raising the debt ceiling is pretty unpopular right now, and just explaining how it works will move a few people, but for many this is the first they ever heard of it; many probably think its the first time its ever happened. Voters also think deficit reduction is a good thing. It might not be their first priority but they like the idea and think they want some of that, The deal that comes down is anybody’s guess, but I guarantee the President will declare it the biggest deficit reduction in history. This will cause another blogosphere blowout, but the average voter who thinks deficits must have had something to do with this terrible fix we’re in might be assuaged even if the claim is completely bogus. Dems do not want deficits to be the topic for the next 18 month. I’m not suggesting this is a brilliant strategy or a lousy one. I just think it might be a possible one.

  159. 159
    asiangrrlMN says:

    @Bnut, missed you tons! Loved your vids and trying to figure out which one was you. Glad it’s school and not bad shit that’s been stopping you from visiting. Chemistry was NOT my favorite subject. Good luck with house-hunting.

    P.S. Yusty will be crushed!

  160. 160
    dr. know says:

    @OzoneR: and the banksters and defense contractors? But I have to say, I don’t see how construction workers or autoworkers, or the unemployed are benefiting by his “belt-tightening” rhetoric. Explain how this helps them.

  161. 161

    I just remember dear Mr. Cole as a quickie contrarian with a cranky voice …

    Even through the coughing and laughing, I’m fairly certain you meant “quirky”.

    Unless you know more about him than, oh, everyone else?

  162. 162
    LT says:

    “So, basically, ignore the obvious emotional manipulation built into the 50 point type at the top of the page, like the writer never really expected any reaction to it? He just kinda put that there to make sure you really WANTED to engage in his ideas dispassionately?”

    I can’t tell if that’s hilarious or pathetic. Do you have any control over what you react to?

  163. 163
    David Brooks (NTO) says:

    People need to remember that budget bills start in the House. If any of these fucking fuckers sat on their fucking hands in 2010 as a protest, they have the House they deserve and they can shut the fuck up. Fuckers.

  164. 164
    burnspbesq says:

    @dr. know:

    all you self-proclaimed liberals and progressives

    All who? I’m a Rockefeller Republican whose party went slowly insane.

  165. 165
    LT says:

    “I taught political science for 35 years so I’m not a moron either.”

    It’s like T-ball around here…

  166. 166
    different church-lady says:

    I mean, if we can all agree that he is a corporatist masquerading as a liberal…

    We can?

  167. 167
    Yutsano says:

    Sorry, Yutsano, for the moment it’s bong hits, all the way,

    Hit all you want, we’re still 16 months out. We can re-visit the issue when the campaign really starts to ramp up.

    Organic Chem is a BITCH.

    I was getting an A in Chem in college until two things happened: A) a professor would not excuse me from an exam on a religious holiday (Yom Kippur, I wasn’t the best Jew in college but no way I could justify skipping THAT!) and O-chem. The whole “reactions do things unless they don’t” aspect made my brain hurt too bad.

    Yusty will be crushed!

    Meh. I’ll get over it. The truth is that exchange already happened a long time ago. He’s a certified heterosexualist. That’s just fine by me.

  168. 168
    Bnut says:

    @gwangung
    BOOM SOUL SHOT

  169. 169
    LT says:

    “It has something to do with Don Rickles.”

    I just took the acid ten minutes ago, so give me an hour or so on that one.

  170. 170
    dr. know says:

    @burnspbesq: yeah, sorry. I misunderstood the point you were making upthread.

  171. 171
    different church-lady says:

    Even through the coughing and laughing, I’m fairly certain you meant “quirky”. (graph) Unless you know more about him than, oh, everyone else?

    Whilst the editors may regret that phrasing (and any distress it may have caused), we in fact did not mean “quirky.” We meant “given to non-lengthy posts”

  172. 172
    Suffern ACE says:

    Christ. Based on the progressives I meet on the web, I wouldn’t vote for any progressive for any office with power. Too fucking embarrassing and erratic. Make Palin look like level headed leader, and I’m saying that knowing that her first impulse when faced with a crises would be to bomb Moscow and maybe Tulsa, she’s not sure which.

    Like it or not fucking not babies, we have a revenue problem and a gap of 1.5 trillion this year. As far as I can tell, Boehner offered to raise taxes substantially (which Grover won’t like at all) in exchange for Social Security and Medicare. Basically asking the President to commit suicide with his base in exchange for Boehner committing suicide with his base. Can’t get to $100 billion per year in revenue without raising taxes on both the rich and the middle class, so who wins? I’m sensing from the presser that the president doesn’t want you to freak about those discussions and guess what, Boehner tried to put SS on the table, not the President, if the story is to believed.

  173. 173
  174. 174
    different church-lady says:

    I can’t tell if that’s hilarious or pathetic. Do you have any control over what you react to?

    For my answer, let’s just say I’m not going to tell you what I’m thinking this second…

  175. 175
    LT says:

    Hey, have I mentioned that the thing I really hate about this blog is the commenters?

    Not all of them, for goodness’ sake! Just the ones whose comments immediately bring Comic Book Guy to mind. (You know who you are…)

  176. 176
    Jamie says:

    so FDL says Obama is the worst POTUS ever and Fox News says Obama is a Kenyan Communist Islamofascist. Is Jane Hamsher getting financial support from Grover Norquist? I am so confused.

  177. 177
    dogwood says:

    Every prez is shit except FDR with those ugly purists.

    Yup. Because there’s no policy that better describes the progressive dream than a Japanese-American interment camp.

  178. 178

    We can re-visit the issue when the campaign really starts to ramp up.

    It starts soon. Betty Sutton’s 13th (Sherrod Brown’s old District) has gained population, and I’m watching to see what the soulless ratfuck criminals in Columbus come up with based on the CSU analysis.

    So while the national debate over Worst President EVAH has plenty of room to morph, the local action is nigh.

    No rest for the wicked, it seems.

  179. 179
    Bnut says:

    @LT
    Worst comments EVER, lol

  180. 180
    LT says:

    “For my answer, let’s just say I’m not going to tell you what I’m thinking this second…”

    Oh, sorry, forgot to use 50-point type…

  181. 181
    Jamie says:

    well, if we have a gap in finances we just might want to get enact the Bush Tax hike. After all that’s what a GOP congress passed 10 years ago or so.

  182. 182
    dr. know says:

    By the way, if you all will excuse a digression, I don’t mean any disrespect to any of you (even ABL, who I absolutely hate as a blogger, though I’m sure she is a fine person), it’s just that I read this blog multi-daily, and sometimes I just get a gut full of all the Obama excuse-making regularly found here. Probably I should just be happy that there’s a bunch of semi-intelligent folks eager to support democrats — and there’s really nothing wrong with that.

    So, I’m more of a lurker by nature anyway. I’ll stick to that from now on. Cheers.

  183. 183
    Jewish Steel says:

    A few scenes from today’s pre-op screening:

    Thought 1: Wow there are a lot more young people working in hospitals these days. Thought 2: Hang on..

    Also, the x-ray tech, “You have nice long lungs!” Oh, thanks?

    I’m a Rockefeller Republican whose party went slowly insane.

    My grandfather. Down with civil rights. Believed in the importance of welfare programs and social safety netting generally. Republican.

  184. 184
    Bnut says:

    @Yutsano
    I’m just looking for that “dare to be gay” situation (John Cusack shoutout). Heterosexualist sounds too much like herpetologist. I prefer the term “breeder”. It’s much funnier.

  185. 185
    Yutsano says:

    No rest for the wicked, it seems.

    Does it start tomorrow? No? I believe the phrase is smoke em if you got em. :)

  186. 186
    Jamie says:

    well Obama is trying to be Clinton two and he has succeeded so far. yes on the HCR; no on the better tax policy.

  187. 187

    Probably I should just be happy that there’s a bunch of semi-intelligent folks eager to support democrats—and there’s really nothing wrong with that.

    “Semi-intelligent”? Why ~snif~ that’s the nicest thing anyone has said to me all day.

    Oh? You… meant … someone else. Oh.

    ETA: WORST. PRESIDENT. EVAH! Thanks for the love, LT, Bnut!

  188. 188
    PIGL says:

    My two bits: I would never say that President Obama is the worst president ever. His apparent weaknesses and centre-right-right preferences coupled with the vicious insanity of the Republican Party, and the vicious and unforgivable stupidity of the American electorate, thrown into the blender with some really bad timing…..well, that may conspire to make his legacy a lot worse than his ardent supporters would wish.

    I think the characterisation of Obama I have seen that makes most sense to me is “really good colonel promoted to Brigadier way too soon.”

    So a better description, and a totally honest one I feel, would be that the unfortunate Mr. Obama is the most disappointing president ever (or at least in recent decades). The absurdly premature award of a Noble Peace Prize, for example, to a president who has not exactly departed from main-stream America’s war-mongering consensus, well, the committee must be regretting that, don’t you suppose?

    Perhaps the hopes could never have been attempted to be fulfilled? That would make the disappointment irrational, but not dishonest or unreal.

    After Bush Jr., anybody would have looked pretty good. And I don’t think the president is a bad man. I just think that policy-wise, he is about the best of the terrible lot that can possibly be elected in the USA. There is no good outcome here, because the system is broken, and in terms of the permanent feudal state that is emerging, it does not matter who is president or what they are like. Caligula or Claudius, the USA is still a dying Empire.

    And when I say it does not matter, I mean, it matters at the margins, and to the people effected that will mean a lot. But the main tendencies and probable outcomes are no longer something that an elected official can change. The future is coup, revolution or collapse.

    I am sorry, I’m a little down and dispirited this evening, even in my west-coast Eden. I hope to be proved wrong, wrong firebaggy wrong by return post.

  189. 189
    Jamie says:

    if the FDL kids want a more liberal Gummint they gonna have to get more people to vote on election day. The current strategy isn’t going to do that.

  190. 190
    Corner Stone says:

    @burnspbesq:

    I’m a Rockefeller Republican whose party went slowly insane.

    Hoocoodanode??

  191. 191
    Martin says:

    But I have to say, I don’t see how construction workers or autoworkers, or the unemployed are benefiting by his “belt-tightening” rhetoric.

    You may not be aware of this, but rhetoric doesn’t actually benefit anyone. Legislation, however, that’s a different matter.

    Keep in mind that Obama proposed a payroll tax cut to help boost job growth. It’s known to help to a decent degree. But the GOP turned it down. They turned down a tax cut, simply because Obama supported it.

    When the GOP is turning down tax cuts, there’s not a goddamn thing Obama can say that will actually result in benefits for the unemployed. Don’t like it? Take it up with the GOP and the voters that gave them control of the House.

  192. 192
    Corner Stone says:

    @Alison: Oh Alison. You poor thing you.

  193. 193
    Corner Stone says:

    @Martin: Are you making the argument that rhetoric doesn’t work? or that it doesn’t benefit anyone?

    ETA, because clearly at least one of these arguments is false.

  194. 194
    Jamie says:

    well the belt tightening is a really bad idea. Austerity only works for the well off.

  195. 195
    dogwood says:

    Dr Know :

    and the banksters and defense contractors? But I have to say, I don’t see how construction workers or autoworkers, or the unemployed are benefiting by his “belt-tightening” rhetoric. Explain how this helps them.

    Well I imagine some of these auto and construction workers aren’t listening to this “belt tightening” rhetoric. They’re at work.

  196. 196
    Jamie says:

    Is there any way to get the GOP to stop playing the crazy card?

  197. 197
    Yutsano says:

    I’m just looking for that “dare to be gay” situation

    Been there done that, ended badly, not gonna do it again. Plus if it didn’t happen at Parris, then your best chance is pretty much gone.

    I prefer the term “breeder”.

    I sort of do too, but in some gay circles it’s used as a disparaging term for straight folk. So on that basis I tent to eschew.

    I hope to be proved wrong, wrong firebaggy wrong by return post.

    What will prove you wrong is whatever happens from here. No matter what I’m gonna try to get my CPA as soon as I can and get licensed somewhere outside the US. I’ve already glanced at the Australian standards, but I think my parents would freak if I went any further than Canada.

    I’m kidding ABL, you are beautiful and can sue me, that’s hot

    Oh will you two just fucking get married already?

    (I’m only half-joking.)

  198. 198
    Bnut says:

    @PIGL
    Wooaahhh, slow down there. We don’t need measured and reasonable responses here in this thread. You insult ABL NOW or GTFO. (I’m kidding ABL, you are beautiful and can sue me, that’s hot).

  199. 199
    dr. know says:

    @Martin: yes, I know. It’s all the fault of the GOP. Sorry for sticking my nose in. Everything will be just fine if all those poor, unemployed SOBs will just tighten their belts for a few years. Maybe eat some cat food, train for some new job skills, etc. No one should put too much stock in a weekly jobs report anyway, amiright?

  200. 200
    Uncle Clarence Thomas says:

    .
    .

    Fuck these lunatics. Fucking sociopaths.

    The lunatics and sociopaths were the Iraq War supporters, not the firebaggers, Mr. Cole.

    That article doesn’t qualify, although it is – GASP – critical of President Obama’s decisions, actions, and results from a progressive viewpoint.
    .
    .

  201. 201
    Martin says:

    or that it doesn’t benefit anyone?

    How many jobs have been created by your blathering?

    Obama talking doesn’t create jobs. Legislation does. There’s not a goddamn thing that Obama can say that will cause the House to pass a jobs bill. Their task #1 for the next 16 months is making sure that unemployment goes as high as possible. A jobs bill could poll at 95% among Republicans and the House still wouldn’t pass it.

    Seriously, Obama invited a tax cut and the GOP turned it down. What part of that aren’t people getting?

  202. 202
    Jamie says:

    The other big problem is the Citizens united decision. It’s gonna be impossible to elect non-banker friendly candidates for the foreseeable future. It killed us in 2010.

  203. 203
    Mike Kay ( Geronimo!!) says:

    if the FDL kids want a more liberal Gummint they gonna have to get more people to vote on election day.

    It’s gonna be a long wat, there’s only 325 of them. http://www.flickr.com/photos/deaniac83/5890573224/

  204. 204
    Jennifer says:

    Gotta say, I find this kind of thing preferable to the stupid “let’s change the subject” type crap we saw with the tweet response. I mean sure, the headline’s hyperbolic to the point of assholery, but consider the source. I write hyperbolic titles too, though I generally do it to be sarcastic. And Obama is due a good amount of criticism. This is how it should be done, rather than trying to divert every single conversation into a litany of grievance against the president. I probably disagree in part or whole with some or all of the points in the piece but at least it wasn’t another example of barging in on a conversation about a specific topic and hijacking it into a personal narrative of butthurt.

  205. 205
    Martin says:

    Everything will be just fine if all those poor, unemployed SOBs will just tighten their belts for a few years. Maybe eat some cat food, train for some new job skills, etc. No one should put too much stock in a weekly jobs report anyway, amiright?

    Nobody is saying that. Not even Obama is saying that. How about this – give us a step by step plan that Obama can take that will produce something known to stimulate job growth. Not talk – something measurable – payroll tax cuts, stimulus spending, unemployment benefits extension, you name it. Lay out the plan that causes those things to happen.

  206. 206
    Bnut says:

    @Jamie

    Is there any way to get the GOP to stop playing the crazy card?

    Well,if an ex-gf is any indication, we have to buy them shiny shit and compliment them when they act insane. So far, so good….

    @Yutsnao

    I sort of do too, but in some gay circles it’s used as a disparaging term for straight folk. So on that basis I tent to eschew.

    Meh, I find it funny as hell. I’ve lived in Park Slope in Brooklyn the past 2 years, and trust me, we straight single people call them breeders also.

  207. 207
    GregB says:

    This blog is worse than Hitler at a Justin Bieber concert drinking a Zima.

  208. 208
    Woodrow L. Goode, IV says:

    @ Montysano

    Comparing Bush’s post-9/11 push to Obama’s deficit fight is moronic. You might remember that in 2001 the GOP owned the White House, Congress, and the Senate.

    I think it’s “moronic” to say “Congress” when you mean to say “The House of Representatives” (“Congress” means both), but we’ll let that go.

    In 2001, the wingnuts had the White House, a 222-10 majority in the House (with three seats vacant), but did not have a majority in the Senate– it was split 50-50 when the Senate convened.

    It became a 51-49 Democratic majority when Jim Jeffords left the Republicans and became an independent who caucused with the Democrats on June 6, 2001. It stayed that way until Paul Wellstone died on October 26, 2002.

    Let’s be nice and pretend that you weren’t “moronic” about that, because there was a few months when Dick Cheney could break ties.

    But, by using reconciliation and a variety of nasty tricks, Emperor Bush I rammed his agenda through.

    In 2009, the Democrats had the White House, a 256-178-1 majority– that’s 34 seats more than Bush had in 2001.

    In the Senate, the Dems began with a 57-41 majority (with the seats vacated by Obama and won by Al Franken temporarily vacant). It got up to 59 on April 30th, 60 on July 7, dropped to 59 when Ted Kennedy died on August 25th and went back up to 60 on September 26th.

    That’s never less than six more Senate seats and as many as nine. If you really can’t differentiate the difference, then I would characterize your opinion as “moronic.”

    And, yet, given a much, much larger edge than Emperor Bush I had to work with. Barack Obama claimed his agenda was stifled by the Congress. People who actually understand how legislatures work were forced to listen to Benen and Booman and Matthew McArdle (who earns that title because he has eaten McSuderman barbecue and drunk their Kool-Aid) about how none of this was Obama’s fault because we didn’t understand House and Senate rules.

    How many people remember how the Bush Administration responded when Paul Wellstone died, leaving the Democrats a vote down? They worked that tragedy to their advantage.

    When the Democrats were handed a comparable gift– the time between Scott Brown’s election and his swearing-in– Obama insisted that the Senate not use it, and vowed not to sign anything that was passed.

    Let me point something out to the O-bots as a pre-emptive strike.

    George W. Bush used legal counsel like some people shop for cars– always shopping for the most favorable terms. He kept going until someone drafted an opinion that permitted him to do what he liked. If he couldn’t find someone to write an opinion to empower him to do as he liked, he fired people and hired someone who said it was legal.

    Barack Obama had a similar tool handed to him– the shaky logic that says that the 14th Amendment states that the government can run up as much debt as it likes, and congress can’t do squat to stop it.

    It’s not a sensational bit of legal reasoning, but it’s no worse than the Unitary Executive / Commander in Chief stuff that Bush used to work his ways.

    Has Obama used the 14th as a hammer? Has he told the House that if they don’t extend the debt ceiling that he’ll invoke it, and they can sue him if they don’t like it? That’d be a pretty good weapon to bring them in line.

    Of course not. The president who says “It’s OK for me to ignore the War Powers Act”– oveerruling the folks who have always ruled on this stuff– because he found some junior underassistant grunt who thought it was OK to drop bombs as long as you don’t build a PX in country has already ruled it out. He had Tim Geithner’s staff write an opinion that says he can’t– that the ceiling must be extended by act of Congress.

    There’s only one reason to throw that weapon away– if you want to cut a deal with the other side, and want to make it appear that you had no other choice. Barack Obama wants to cut Social Security and Medicare. And he’ll do it.

    To believe anything else requires you to imagine that Obama is so moronic that he believes he can make a deal that will stick– that the next wingnut president and congress won’t announce that both programs are in danger and needs to be cut further.

    It requires you to believe that Obama– who presumably is aware that the Democrats broke their necks to create balanced budgets and surpluses under Bill Clinton and paid the price by losing the Congress (both houses, so this is the correct use of the term) only to see Emperor Bush I immediately create deficits again– imagines it won’t happen again.

    As time passes and the evidence begins to pile up, it becomes harder and harder to believe that Obama was electioneering when he called Ronald Reagan one of our greatest presidents during his campaign.

    It’s difficult to look at the number of Republicans in charge of critical functions and believe it’s happening by accident.

    Beginning with Eisenhower– who stated flatly that it was dangerous to have the CIA run by a military officer because the country needed an independent viewpoint — presidents have kept the CIA in civilian hands (Exceptions being Jimmy Carter, when his first nominee had to withdraw, and Lyndon Johnson, for one year). Obama has put not one but two generals in charge.

    Obama is demonstrably farther to the right on civil liberties, human rights (torture), the rule of law and tax policy than Reagan. There are many areas where is he much better, but there are a growing number of topics (like the enforcement of NRC safety rules) where the differences are eroding, and one gets the impression that systematic investigation of all areas of the government would uncover many more shortcomings.

    People can hurl epithets at the folks watching this happen and expressing distress, disgust and frustration, but that doesn’t mean the critics aren’t correct.

    Especially the ones who got the critical issues right the first time.

  209. 209
    Jamie says:

    There’s an idea, what kind of benefits do federal employees get? I’m sure we could save a lot of money there. Lets put that first on the savings list. After all why are we paying for their health care. surely they could get better coverage on the open market;-)

  210. 210
    Jamie says:

    yes but the Dems aren’t nearly as unified as the GOP is about anything. Remember what Mark Twain said. It’s still true.

  211. 211
    Mnemosyne says:

    So a better description, and a totally honest one I feel, would be that the unfortunate Mr. Obama is the most disappointing president ever (or at least in recent decades).

    Define “recent decades.” Obama is more disappointing than Bush I? Reagan? Bush II? Do we have to go further back and argue that Obama is more disappointing than Nixon? Carter? Johnson?

    And if you think that Obama is more disappointing than Clinton, you should probably stop and remember who signed off on all of the bank deregulation that got us into this mess in the first place.

  212. 212
    Yutsano says:

    Remember what Mark Twain said.

    I think you mean Will Rogers, unless Samuel had a nifty little nugget of wisdom in there as well.

  213. 213
    Uriel says:

    Hey, have I mentioned that the thing I really hate about this blog is the commenters?

    Not all of them, for goodness’ sake! Just the ones whose comments immediately bring Comic Book Guy to mind. (You know who you are…)

    You know, that whole self-loathing thing became passé back in the nineties after Cobain offed himself.

    Oh, wait- you weren’t being ironically self-referential? Huh. Don’t know what to say to that…

  214. 214
    Uriel says:

    Damnit- stupid blockquote function. For the record- the first two paragraphs of that should have been in quotes.

  215. 215
    Mnemosyne says:

    It’s all the fault of the GOP.

    Wait, sorry, this was in doubt? We’re dealing with the aftermath of 30 years of horrendous GOP policies that are now exploding like land mines all over the country and you really think that Obama should get the lion’s share of the blame here?

  216. 216
    different church-lady says:

    Obama is demonstrably farther to the right on civil liberties, human rights (torture), the rule of law and tax policy than Reagan.

    Reagan allowed gays to serve openly in the military? Obama sold arms for hostages? Reagan pushed for universal health coverage? Obama reduced top tier income tax rates by over 30%?

    I mean, you’re just trying to validate Cole’s point now, right?

  217. 217
    Valdivia says:

    Wow. Came for some loungy after midnight insomnia thread and found this. Yikes. Now I’m all agitated. Anyway, what Cole said.

  218. 218
    Yutsano says:

    @Bnut:

    Lost the computer connection so migrated to teh Torch. I think the ternm here that’s appropriate is, “We can agree to disagree, but I’m right.” And we both win. :)

  219. 219
    Bnut says:

    @Yutsano
    Lol, of course. This is balloon-juice. If we didn’t disagree about things we actually felt the same about, we wouldn’t be Democrats.

  220. 220

    stinkdaddy @68

    Don’t over-emphasize that point. What you should have been paying attention to was the point about what is brought to the table- which is everything. But as Carney pointed out, just because it’s at the table doesn’t mean it’s about to be accepted- like the Ryan budget proposal- or given away- like SS.

  221. 221
    NR says:

    There’s not a goddamn thing that Obama can say that will cause the House to pass a jobs bill.

    Everyone here understands this. The point that all of you keep missing is that unless Obama actually proposes a jobs bill and forces the Republicans to block it, the Republicans will be able to run against him saying he didn’t do anything about jobs. And guess what? It’ll be true! And if Obama tries to say that he didn’t propose anything because he knew the Republicans would have blocked it, they can just respond “No we wouldn’t have!” And there will be no way to prove otherwise.

    Of course, all this assumes that Obama actually gives a shit about jobs in the first place. He obviously doesn’t, given the austerity measures he’s pushing so hard.

  222. 222
    Karen says:

    I think Obama should be impeached immediately for caring too much about the silly unemployment benefits that he accepted the Bush tax cuts. Because we all know, all that matters is that Obama never compromise and if it means unemployed people go homeless well they’ll just have to take one for the team. It’s not my fault that I didn’t look hard enough at Obama’s record to know that he was never the liberal I built him up to be, he’s a Democrat and there is only one type of Democrat and that is a Kuchinichian Democrat. Obama is Hitler revisited, even more Hitlerish than Hitler! He’s the most far right fascist that the world has ever seen! I’ll show him, I won’t vote and when he loses and Michelle Bachman is President it will be the happiest day of my life! She’s a bitch who hates everything I believe in and wants to kill what’s left of civil rights but at least she’s not Obama!

  223. 223
    different church-lady says:

    @ Karen #219:

    It’s not even a parody anymore.

  224. 224

    Karen @219

    I guess someone’s going to have to redo this, using the recently discovered director’s cut of the last State of the Union address then, huh?

  225. 225
    Karen says:

    @Dogwood

    Yup. Because there’s no policy that better describes the progressive dream than a Japanese-American interment camp.

    Let’s not forget anti-Semitic (he turned the boats carrying Jewish refugees away and refused to let them come here even though he knew what would happen to them.) My family has no love for FDR.

  226. 226
    Karen says:

    @Temporarily Max McGee

    I guess someone’s going to have to redo this, using the recently discovered director’s cut of the last State of the Union address then, huh?

    Dude, I was being sarcastic. I’m sorry it wasn’t obvious but I’m usually calling FDL people PUMA scum. I didn’t this time, for Corner Stone’s sake.

  227. 227

    On the one hand, you’ve got Jackson spreading the franchise to all white guys 21-years old and up, regardless of property, on the other you’ve got the Trail of Tears.

    On one hand you’ve got Lincoln, the Great Emancipator, on the other you’ve got Lincoln giving away land to railroad companies- no matter that it was used to finance the Transcontinental Railroad.

    Teddy Roosevelt, social reformer, meet Teddy Roosevelt, gunboat diplomat. LBJ, civil and voting rights, LBJ, baby killer…And on and on and on…

  228. 228

    Karen @223

    Dude, I know! Any chance to link that video, though, I take! :D

  229. 229
    Mnemosyne says:

    The point that all of you keep missing is that unless Obama actually proposes a jobs bill and forces the Republicans to block it, the Republicans will be able to run against him saying he didn’t do anything about jobs.

    That’s so weird, I could have sworn that only members of Congress could introduce legislation to Congress, but apparently the president has had the power to do that this whole time and just hasn’t bothered. The things you learn on Balloon-Juice.

    Obama can announce all of the jobs bills he wants, but unless you can also figure out a way to get it out of committee and onto the floor for a vote, it just looks like desperate, empty posturing on the part of the president. You know, the exact same thing that you’re here whining about 20 times a day.

  230. 230
    MikeJ says:

    @Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again): We’ve got to stop electing these goddammed humans and get some purity in the WH.

  231. 231
    kdaug says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    The things you learn on Balloon-Juice.

    Be careful what you “learn” on Balloon-Juice.

    Critical thinking is the real national deficit.

    Just fling your poo like everyone else, you’ll do fine.

  232. 232
    Suffern ACE says:

    @Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again):

    It’s been almost a year now. When exactly are you going to stop impersonating Packer and broadcast legend Max McGee?

  233. 233
    different church-lady says:

    @ 226: Wait, it’s true he can’t actually introduce bills, but to be fair, he could announce policy initiatives, even knowing that they wouldn’t go anywhere.

    But, of course, if he did, they would be “just words” that he “didn’t have the spine to push through congress” and the wheels on the bus would go round and round.

  234. 234

    MikeJ @227

    We’ve got to stop electing these goddammed humans and get some purity and ponies unicorns in the WH.

    FIFY

    Oh, did I forget to mention Tommy Jefferson ran against the Alien and Sedition Acts, but failed to get them taken off the books? And that he, ya know, owned slaves? Did I leave that out?

  235. 235

    Suffern ACE @229

    Dude…It’s been like 6 months. I adopted it, iirc, after the win over the Eagles in the playoffs. Maybe after the last regular season game….Anyway, I might change it if we fail to follow up with another championship…Or not. I like the ring of the name. It was influenced by this, ya know.

  236. 236
    Suffern ACE says:

    @Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again) – 231. We could elect people of unimpeachable character and intelligence, but for 20-odd years now we’ve elected men who’ve been to Ivy League schools. Can’t have everything.

    ETA-I had always assumed you lost a bet and were forced to change your name. Odd bet, to be sure, but well with in the range of normal proposition betting.

  237. 237
    BDeevDad says:

    Can someone explain to the idiots who want a Democratic challenger, when there is a real one, it usually backfires:

    Bush I/Buchanan
    Carter/Kennedy
    Ford/Reagan
    Johnson/McCarthy/Kennedy
    Taft/Roosevelt

    All lost the general election.

  238. 238
  239. 239

    I had always assumed you lost a bet and were forced to change your name. Odd bet, to be sure, but well with in the range of normal proposition betting.

    Ha!

    If I’d lost a bet, the name would be something like Temporarily Paul Ott Carruth or Temporarily Jim Del Gaizo (god, ’73 was terrible after the success of ’72).

    I loved Max. I’m too young to remember having seen him play, but he was the consummate color guy. He had great chemistry with Jim Irwin, too. Those two kept us sane through a lot of shitty seasons.

  240. 240
    AAA Bonds says:

    So we’re back to FDL Juice, huh.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_wEs9x7G3w

  241. 241

    @Corner Stone:

    i disagree, and your comment is so exceptional i have chosen right now, this very moment, on a friday night no less, to point out how this outrage that has caused me to give an exceptionally jagged and voluminous shit on a friday night, is just like everything else they post, they do it all the time.

    shorter:

    What’s everybody so down about?

    Didn’t everybody make it
    with a beautiful MP tonight, huh?

  242. 242

    @Corner Stone:

    i disagree, and your comment is so exceptional i have chosen right now, this very moment, on a friday night no less, to point out how this outrage that has caused me to give an exceptionally jagged and voluminous shit on a friday night, is just like everything else they post, they do it all the time.

    shorter:

    What’s everybody so down about?

    Didn’t everybody make it
    with a beautiful MP tonight, huh?

  243. 243

    @Corner Stone:

    i disagree, and your comment is so exceptional i have chosen right now, this very moment, on a friday night no less, to point out how this outrage that has caused me to give an exceptionally jagged and voluminous shit on a friday night, is just like everything else they post, they do it all the time.

    shorter:

    What’s everybody so down about?

    Didn’t everybody make it
    with a beautiful MP tonight, huh?

  244. 244
    DPirate says:

    @Yutsano

    the crash and burn

    That’s going to happen at some point no matter what. Probably the democrats will prevent it for a handful more years than the republicans, so our children and their children can enjoy the slaughter instead of us and our children. It’s little more than a grasping way of passing the buck – that thing we accuse our predecessors of doing to us. Thinking either party is going to actually do any meaningful good is just exceptionalism.

  245. 245
    Sly says:

    This is like the Wade-Davis Manifesto of the modern era, except significantly more stupid and irrelevant.

  246. 246
    WereBear says:

    Name me a figure on the Left who gets quoted by the MSM when they say something nice about President Obama. In fact, name me anyone.

    To get pundit cred, someone HAS to fit the Narrative. The rending of garments and the fundraising all play a part, but mimicking the Republican outrage machine is not the right way.

    Nor is refusing to recognize that almost all our “news” is in truth a propaganda outlet, and anyone who reports actual, factual, information on the political scene is usually marginalized into oblivion.

  247. 247
    Poopyman says:

    Glad to see this post got you all through the night. I also see that thisFDL post (by Eli, not Jane) is still on the front page, and the comments — sad, sad little comments — are all variations on Cole’s tag OIWTBHSUO.

    Meh. Posters gotta post and commenters gotta comment, meself included. FDL has to feed their hungry commenters same as BJ does. There’s a certain similarity/symmetry to Eli putting up some late night red meat for his commenters, then Cole pointing to it as red meat for us.

  248. 248
    harlana says:

    wow, one tweet from Chris Hayes gets 423 comments – way to marginalize liberals :D

  249. 249
    Fred says:

    f/uck Jane Hamsher and FDL and Aravosis;Dan Choi;Greenwald.ALL a bunch of Republican infiltrators.Racist and liars

  250. 250
    Kobie says:

    Can someone explain to me why a supercool, generally all-around awesome person like TBogg has his blog hosted on that shithole of a website?

  251. 251
    Parah Salin says:

    Mnemosyne

    That’s so weird, I could have sworn that only members of Congress could introduce legislation to Congress, but apparently the president has had the power to do that this whole time and just hasn’t bothered. The things you learn on Balloon-Juice. Obama can announce all of the jobs bills he wants, but unless you can also figure out a way to get it out of committee and onto the floor for a vote, it just looks like desperate, empty posturing on the part of the president. You know, the exact same thing that you’re here whining about 20 times a day.

    Here’s where things in the congress haven’t been functioning like they should be, since Dirty Dick Cheney’s secret energy meetings where he hammered out legislation with the Oil companies in the room.

    This is another continuation of the Bush Presidency–on steroids. Take a look right now at how this is being conducted. Congeressional dems are being shut out. Who is working to negotiate and craft this bill, in leau of a budget? It’s a bill that hasn’t even been allowed a vote in the Senate by Harry Reid because he doesn’t think it’s necessary despite Tom Coburn having one ready. Currently The budget and debt limit deals aren’t happening in a commission where they could even be passed out of one.

    Here’s someone else’s description:

    They’re always blindsided for a simple reason: (65+ / 0-)
    President Obama doesn’t negotiate with Democrats. He only negotiates with Republicans and then browbeats Democrats into taking whatever pathetic deal he gets with Republicans.
    If he isn’t negotiating with Republicans, he’s negotiating with Blue Dogs.
    And if not them, maybe, he’ll negotiate with Senate Democrats.
    No matter what, though, these negotiations are always done in secret. Never, ever, ever out in the open. Its just not his thing. You find out when its finished.
    But there is one group President Obama absolutely does not negotiate with: House Democrats. Out in the open OR in secret. ESPECIALLY the Congressional Black Caucus. They get a once a year meeting where they are told how they can help him get re-elected.
    Yo.
    by brooklynbadboy on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 11:10:43 AM PDT

    powwow on icky FDL, who doesn’t have cooties writes about the corruption of the senate, and Harry Reid is one of the worst offenders in years. This is the best source that I know of if you really want to understand what is happening vs. what we are being told. See diaries at the link but eat brain food first.

  252. 252
    harlana says:

    I’m sure Obama will be just devastated by this, how will he recover?

  253. 253
    harlana says:

    President Barack Obama says the current economy demands an extension of the payroll tax holiday and a bipartisan infrastructure bill that will put millions of construction workers back to work after losing their jobs in the wake of the housing bust.

    If Congress controls everything because they are the ones introducing and passing the legislation and Obama is completely helpless to even exert some kind of influence, set the debate, and pressure his opponents into doing something positive for this country (instead of obsessing about the deficit), why is he bothering to say anything at all?

  254. 254
    pluege says:

    A) its the obama duplicity – makes people really mad.With bush you knew the first second you heard/saw him that he was a skank. obama seduced a hell of a lot of lefties and they resent having been exposed as stupes

    b) obama is even worse than he seems. lefties continue to give a lot of benefit of doubt to obama because they’re “invested” personally/emotionally in him, and because they’re desperate for hope of something better than more plutocratic pillaging. But the facts are not with obama supporters – the facts are mounting steadily with obama detractors.

  255. 255
    harlana says:

    the guy who wrote the article looks like Matt Kibbe

  256. 256
    Parah Salin says:

    @harlana, Bills are being written by the Administration, Boehner, or Harry Reids staff, and then introduced by Harry Reid and Boehner to their respective chambers. Congress leaders control what is introduced, what amendments are allowed to be offered, and even what is allowed to be debated. Power of Congress has been usurped by 2 branches of the money party, in Service of a unitary executive.

    Read the links I provided, there is evidence and you can watch CSPAN. It’s a really big deal, but no one pays attention, and it’s becoming lost knowledge to even understand. We as Americans are being screwed over big time.

  257. 257
    harlana says:

    Don’t you guys get it? The words “Hope” and “Change” were quite obviously barely disguised code for “Progressive Liberal Utopia.”

    Not for this progressive, I knew he was a moderate from the get-go, not sure why others got so starry-eyed. Do I get frustrated and angry with Obama? Yes. Do I engage in Obama-bashing, no, except for the occasional cynical comment and complaining in “safe zones” – this is certainly not one of them. Whatever, I enjoy all the fighting, it’s entertaining and doesn’t affect outcomes so what’s the big deal?

    I’m not looking for utopia, I’d just like for the middle class and poor to be able to eat, pay their bills, have safe shelter and get decent health care. Yeh, I’m a stinky liberal, I guess.

  258. 258
    pluege says:

    can’t wait to see if Cole changes his tune when (not if) obama’s “Grand Bargain” does serious damage to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

  259. 259
    Lavocat says:

    The truth hurts, doesn’t it, John?

    If you can’t see this for the truth it obviously is, then you have not yet made the full conversion from Republican to Progressive.

    Tell me, were you in this much self-denial and self-loathing when you were a Republican?

    Obama merely puts the lie to the myth that only white men are ineffective presidents.

  260. 260
    Keith G says:

    its the obama duplicity – makes people really mad.

    Among the newly mad is that famed firebagger, Nancy “Smash” Pelosi. She is feeling just a bit undercut by our rock steady POTUS.

    But what interests me is that Axelrod (and many here) think that sniping at Romney via twitter is a path to success. Romney will be the nominee and he will come heavy, and at best Obama will squeak narrowly by in a massively hard-fought and bitter campaign.

  261. 261

    Glad I spent Friday night drinking beer instead of wading into this outrage.

  262. 262
    kth says:

    They could be forgiven for viewing the TEA movement as a model for how to re-energize the left, as the teabaggers have had an influence on politics (albeit mostly destructive) well beyond their numbers. But the FDLers would be wrong. Our side isn’t composed in the same way theirs is, and destructive extremists play a far smaller role.

  263. 263
    El Tiburon says:

    What Finn @45 said.

    I ain’t got no problem with the content of that post. At all. None. In fact, I agree with it.

    Obama may go down in history as the president who solidified the ratfuck conservative ideology by not doing anytthing about it. I am becoming more disappointed in him by the day. Kind of hard t be disappointed in bush as you knew what he was.

    Oh, Lily Ledbetter.

  264. 264
    El Tiburon says:

    And Cole, maybe you had one too many mojitos, but the gistnof the article seemed to fly right by you.

  265. 265

    well, our destructive extremists don’t have a built-in and inherently (mostly) revered platform – religion – upon which to stand.

    Godliness is next to cleanliness, whereas Soshulism is next to pinko Commie-bastardism. There are few in the Democratic party with the balls to put forward a pragmatic, America-friendly version of democratic socialism. It’s a sad state of affairs when gun-wielding, bible-thumping, wide-eyed tea partying conspiracists seem more reasonable to our media (and moderates?) than do hippies and tree huggers.

  266. 266
    The Sheriff's A Ni- says:

    The predominantly, older, white, well-off, and child free self-proclaimed ‘base’ of the party has been waiting two and a half years for Obama to sell them out. What makes you think they’re going to stop anytime soon, John?

  267. 267

    However, I want you to explain to me how it helps liberal/progressive causes (and how it helps the country) for the president (the DEMOCRATIC president) to be on teevee talking about deficit reduction, and buying into republican talking points, instead of vigorously agitating for the policies that (we all know and agree) are correct.

    A lot of liberals seem to think that we actually run the country now. I’m sorry, but nothing could be further from the truth. I think Obama is doing the best he can in the face of an enormous wave of fear and anger that goes back to 9/11 and continues as our economy crumbles. People hate teachers, they hate unions, they hate doctors, they hate lawyers, they hate taxes, they hate government, they hate EVERYTHING right now. With all the comforting norms disappearing, it’s a terrible time to try to put ANY sort of progressive program into place.

    I also don’t think Obama is wildly liberal, and anyone who thought otherwise was fooling themselves. But to my mind he’s a vast improvement over Bush. Against all odds, the new health care law might actuially survive the battering it’s taking, the cause of gay marriage is advancing (and no, I don’t think it’s wise for Obama to become embroiled in that fight), the American death toll in the Middle East is vastly diminished, and we might even sneak some badly needed infrastructure improvements. And Republicans are behaving like utter asses, which will certainly create some backlash in large swaths of the country.

    I don’t see how harping on what Obama *hasn’t* been able to do really helps much at this point.

  268. 268
    JGabriel says:

    Why is it Balloon-Juice’s job to be the anti-FDL?

    Don’t we have more important issues and people to target and mock?

    Maybe it’s just me, but I find it much more fun to mock batshit wingnuts than butthurt lefties — the latter of whom I have some sympathy for, despite the instances when I think they’re being self-destructive doofuses or otherwise disagree with them.

    .

  269. 269

    Also, the FDL crowd, as it were, seems to have no idea of how negotiations and politicking actually happen. Yelling really loud that you want somerthing never works. Just look at the Republicans.

  270. 270
    Brian R. says:

    Can someone explain to me why a supercool, generally all-around awesome person like TBogg has his blog hosted on that shithole of a website?

    No idea. I had to stop reading him when he went there.

  271. 271
    Lawguy says:

    Um, did you actually read past the headline?

  272. 272
    Ash Can says:

    I’ll start paying attention to people who wail about how Obama has let them down once they start showing evidence that they understand 1) how federal laws are made, and 2) how politics in DC works. An understanding of the history of race relations in the US would be an added bonus.

  273. 273
    Brian R. says:

    Um, did you actually read past the headline?

    The headline that said “This post was written by someone with no grasp on reality”? No.

    Sorry, even if you’re suggesting Barack Obama is the worst president of the 21st century, I’m not wasting any of my time reading your fevered-dream bullshit.

  274. 274
    kth says:

    Y’all, Eli wasn’t saying Obama is the worst president ever. Rather, like Fox News, he was merely posing the question. Because it’s out there.

  275. 275
    Kobie says:

    IS OBAMA THE WORST PRESIDENT EVAR?

    We’ll ask Bernie Goldberg, Michelle Malkin and Ted Nugent what they think at 11.

  276. 276
    RossInDetroit says:

    For some on the Left Obama is like the boyfriend who turned out to be a disappointment. They saw what they wanted to see when they met him, read what they wanted to read between the lines, figured they could change him into their ideal and got hitched. When he failed to give up his old ways they figure it’s his fault. He was always a pragmatist, not the progressive firebrand you saw in your mind’s eye.
    Get over that.

  277. 277
    Billy Bob Tweed says:

    Worst President Ever? Well, he’s not even the worst of my lifetime. That would be GWB. But… Obama is on a downward slope, and fast becoming the equal of GWB as a useless plonker and just as big a sociopathic liar, and if unemployment doesn’t turn around soon, yup, he makes the All Time Worst List, no doubt.

  278. 278
    Kobie says:

    Shit, Billy Bob, how young are you? Reagan was worse than Bush.

  279. 279
    Icky & the Spooges says:

    Lotsa Obama Cult Members throwing all kinds of lame excuses protecting Dear Leader. Fact is, most of these same excuses were trotted out by Bush Loyalists for most of 2000-2008. Maybe it’s time we forgave Dubya, yeah? Obama has. He’s doing a great job of making him look better all the time, and perhaps that’s why he’s given Bush-Cheney-Rummy a free “Look Forward, Not Backward” hall pass. Those gangsters used to be the “opposition,” now they is kin-folk brothers-in-arms. Warmongering and sucking up to corporate whores is Very Hard Work, People. Please stop victimizing our precious “bombs-away” President and award him another Nobel Peace Prize already, yeah!

  280. 280
    bystander says:

    Whoa, Ash Can.

    An understanding of the history of race relations in the US would be an added bonus.

    Um, surely you aren’t intimating that at this point in our history we would have been better off selecting a white male to follow BushTheLesser.

    Are you?

    Surely not. Surely not. Surely not.

    :: scrub, scrub, scrub that thought right out of my head ::

  281. 281
    Marc says:

    My only question: do the firebaggers get paid by the republicans, or do they do their work for free?

    I understand that Republican donors have deep pockets. If you’re working for the interests of the wingnuts you should at least get minimum wage.

  282. 282
    gbear says:

    Can someone explain to me why a supercool, generally all-around awesome person like TBogg has his blog hosted on that shithole of a website?

    When TBogg was an independent blog, his comment section was wide open – no registration was needed. He’d often run up hundreds of comments on a thread. It was a thing of beauty, totally fun and amazing.

    FDL hadn’t quite reached the level of whack that they’re at now, but it was still a major disappointment to see him go over to the site. His posts are still great, but the comment section is desperately dull in comparison to what it used to be.

  283. 283
    Kobie says:

    Also, anyone who insists that Obama belongs in the bottom half, even, of “worst presidents ever” needs to look up the following names:

    Bush, Bush, Nixon, Hoover, Tyler, Harding, Taylor, Buchanan, Grant, Johnson (the other one), Pierce, Fillmore. Those are no-brainers.

    Then we get to Harrison, Hayes, Van Buren, Taft, Coolidge, Cleveland, Garfield territory. Guys who didn’t do a whole lot or were stopped before they could.

    THEN we can start having a discussion about the rest of the fuckers. I even left Reagan off the first list to give people shit to play with.

  284. 284
    Kobie says:

    @gbear 279: It was disheartening to see him move over there.

  285. 285
    Trollenschlongen says:

    Hmmm…TBogg is awesome.

    Tbogg posts at FDL.

    Maybe, just maybe, a non-hysterical, unbiased person could learn something from this…

    …nah.

  286. 286
    gbear says:

    We’d learn that awesome people sometimes make bad mistakes.

  287. 287
    pluege says:

    for progressives, obama is a Trojan Horse.

    However one ends up ranking obama among horrible POTUS’, his obama’s betrayal will be legion.

  288. 288
    Kobie says:

    @Trollenschlongen:

    Well, obviously because TBogg has his blog hosted there, that means Jane Hamster is right, and we should start burning our Obama effigies tomorrow.

    Idiot.

  289. 289
    Rock says:

    I think Obama is potentially a worse president than GW Bush. Obama is worse on civil liberties, has presided over a worse economy and has engaged in more wars. Those are simply indisputable facts.

    The disputable fact is that he’s probably in the process of cutting social welfare spending. I agree that the freak out should wait till it happens, but Carney’s response to the press really makes it sound like they are on the table. Bush didn’t succeed in messing with social security…if Obama does, you can do the math about who was a worse president.

  290. 290
    RossInDetroit says:

    @Rock;

    has presided over a worse economy

    You get what causation is, right? And why the economy is bad?

  291. 291
    Ronnie P says:

    I’m not reading through all the comments, but has anyone pointed out how narcissistic the “betrayal” argument is? Dubya did a lot of shitty things, but he didn’t betray me. Neither did Pierce or Buchanon. Their failures don’t matter as much because they didn’t betray ME.

  292. 292
    Lawguy says:

    @Ross In Detroit.

    You do understand that the stimulus was at least half of what it should have been? And that was the amount Obama asked for. Right? You know that a sginificant amount of the stimulus was tax cuts which do no good when the problem is a lack of demand? Right? You are aware of whom Obama named as his economic advisors? Right?

  293. 293
    Corner Stone says:

    @Martin:

    How many jobs have been created by your blathering?

    I’ll wager that I’ve hired/approved the hiring more people this last 6 weeks than you have.
    Of course, you’ve got me beat in the “job eliminating” category.

  294. 294
    Corner Stone says:

    @Rock:

    Bush didn’t succeed in messing with social security…if Obama does, you can do the math about who was a worse president.

    Actually, there is zero evidence they are capable of doing the math if that event does occur.

  295. 295
    Corner Stone says:

    @RossInDetroit:

    And why the economy is bad?

    Why is the economy bad?

    ETA, because I’m hearing conflicting reasons. Republicans and the WH are telling us one set of things. And a majority of economists are telling us another set.

  296. 296

    @Ash Can 272: Good points–but you’re going to be waiting a long, long time. They haven’t understood jack-s**t since 1968.

  297. 297
    Bobby of Mississippi says:

    Tbogg is the only reason to visit FDL. And by that I mean I have to look at their masthead when reading his blog. If FDL spent as much time explaining to their readers the ins and outs of politics in Washington as they do criticizing the Presidnet, progressives wouldn’t be sitting on the sidelines licking their wounds and complaining. They would be out in force trying to get their messages heard. Where were the progressives when the teabaggers were organizing and marching during the healthcare debate? Crying about the administration giving up on the public option that had absolutely no chance of passing. Losers.

  298. 298
    RossInDetroit says:

    @Lawguy

    Yeah, I know all of those things very well. And you’re aware that the Executive is not the only branch of government and the President does not rule by fiat.
    It’s not enough but it’s what we could get.
    Get off the porch. The pony’s not coming.

  299. 299
    Anya says:

    Corner Stone @294 ~ Do you ever say anything that’s more substantial than what can fit into a fortune cookie?

  300. 300
    Lawguy says:

    @Ross in Detroit You know you responded to none of my points. There were two American Noble prize winning economists out there in real time saying you need to ask for more. Is two and a half years so far back that you don’t remember that is all he asked for and that is more or less what he got?

    But let’s just go back a couple of months, shall we. The republicans were screaming about the deficit and suddenly what does Obama start to be concerned about? Now the deficit not jobs is what is his concern is. YOu can remember that far back cant you?

    Finally, I do love being told that what Obama got is the most he could have gotten ignoring that in most cases what he got is pretty much his starting point.

  301. 301

    What do you expect from The Crier Bog Flake and the other emoregressives? McCain was supposed to win the election thereby causing America to rise up and launch a totally rad and bitchin’ liberal revolution complete with marshmallow unicorns and junk.

    You know, like what happened when Bush II was elected. Just like they promised.

    Seriously, I don’t know how you can get so angry at people who are so damn funny. Even if the comedy is unintentional.

  302. 302
    RossInDetroit says:

    Corner Stone

    Why is the economy bad?
    ETA, because I’m hearing conflicting reasons. Republicans and the WH are telling us one set of things. And a majority of economists are telling us another set.

    Long story but I’ll go with Krugman because he has a long record of being proven right. It goes back many years. Inflated housing bubble and consumer debt spending supported the economy through the early Bush years when it should have been cooling off at the end of a growth cycle. Inadequate regulation of financial markets allowed gambling on risky, abstract investments based on junk debt. Financial markets locked up and crashed growth. I could find ways to lay all of that at the GOP’s feet but there’s blame for all.

  303. 303

    So ol’ Jaun Cole here is a coward and will not approve my trackback.

    Here is my response to his little rant.

    Click here please.

    It might sound like hate, but it ain’t. I just think it is about time someone said it and I did.

  304. 304
    The Sheriff's A Ni- says:

    Marc: Neither. You’re dealing with white privileged retirees with too much time on their hands. Their idea of political activism is that they once donated $20 to Dennis Kucinich. Sound, fury, signifying nothing.

  305. 305
    Hawes says:

    OK, I read the damned thing. His point seems to be that Bush did a bunch of terrible, terrible things, but Obama hasn’t fixed them all, so he’s actually the worstest president EVAH.

    Once again, the pre-emptive freakout over Social Security and Medicare is reflexive. We freaked out that ACA would never pass. When it did, we freaked out over no public option.

    We freaked out last December when Obama gave away the store to keep unemployment benefits, working class tax cuts, DADT repeal and START ratification. You think we need UI and payroll tax cuts right now?

    We freaked out over the capitulation on the budget in the spring. Only turns out many of the cuts were book keeping tricks.

    Now, we’re freaking out over something else that hasn’t happened.

    Lincoln was married to a crazy woman. Obama’s married to a crazy movement.

  306. 306
    pluege says:

    more facts, less hot air. Here are the facts so far (obama has a long way to go in betraying progressives) – you decide:

    ANTI-PROGRESSIVE AGENDA
    both obama and bush:

    • Indefinite detention, extraordinary rendition, and black sites
    • Commission of war crimes
    • illegal military aggression on sovereign nation
    • escalation of illegal military occupations
    • Promotion of Patriot Act
    • Tax breaks for the very wealthy
    • massive giveaways to healthcare insurance companies
    • monkey trial Military commissions
    • attempted destruction of Social Security
    • abuse of US citizen in military custody
    • Guantanamo prison
    • Promotion of financial industry misdeeds, protection of bankers and Wall Street financiers
    • Promotion of corporate welfare and deregulation: Big Pharma, Big Oil, financial industry
    • Incessant increasing of military budgets regardless of condition of the economy

    bush only:
    • undermining public education with NCLB
    • 2 extremists put on SCOTUS, many extremists in lower levels of judiciary
    • keeping war budgets “off the books”
    • ignoramus

    Obama only
    • Assassination warrant on US citizen
    • Undermining social security financing with “temporary” (likely to be permanent) 2% reduction of payroll tax
    • Further reduction in estate tax
    • Escalation of drone attacks in Pakistan killing many civilians
    • Promoting erroneous deficit hysteria to eliminate social programs
    • eliminated the public option and Medicare for all. Ignored universal healthcare
    • promotion of companies to stop offering health insurance
    • inability to get progressives in important government positions.
    • expanded Federal restrictions on funding for women’s ability to get an abortion.

    PROGRESSIVE AGENDA
    Obama only

    • Elimination of DADT
    • Stimulus package (but was insufficient and wrong stimulus)
    • Some promotion of infrastructure projects
    • Bailout of auto industry
    • 2 moderates put on SCOTUS
    • Potential elimination of pre-existing condition jeopardy in health insurance (yet to be proven effective)
    • eliminated foreign aid ban on organizations involved in reproductive health

  307. 307
  308. 308
    Lawguy says:

    @Sheriff, that would be opinion, I think. That is you are telling me what people’s opinions are (is?), not whether or not his policies are liberal or conservative, but what people tell you they think.

  309. 309
    bystander says:

    Kevin Drum does one picture is worth a thousand words. Answers the question, Why do the Democrats get rolled over, and over, and over again…

    All of Modern Politics in One Chart

  310. 310
    The Sheriff's A Ni- says:

    Lawguy: Exactly. They tell me that, two and a half years into his Presidency, a great majority of the liberal Democrats that comprise the party’s base still has no problem with the HMFIC.

  311. 311
  312. 312
    Lawguy says:

    @Sheriff, well I can’t be respopnsible for other people’s delusions.

  313. 313
    pluege says:

    perhaps obama’s greatest sin (to-date) is his single-minded, single-handed resurrection of an insidious, batshit insane republican party that was otherwise defeated, disgraced, demoralized, and relegated to irrelevance. obama, and obama alone returned them to relevance.

  314. 314
    Trurl says:

    Obama’s Bush’s approval rating is currently 86% among self-identified liberal Democrats conservative Republicans.”

    Very impressive.

  315. 315
    bystander says:

    One can wonder what percentage of those 86%-ers are represented in this group?

    Half of US social program recipients believe they “have not used a government social program”

  316. 316
    Brian R. says:

    As a card-carrying ACLU member who’s marched in dozens of antiwar protests and worked at the precinct level for progressive Democrats for more than two decades, I’d just like to say FireDogLake can go fuck themselves.

    You know what we call people who work with Grover Norquist and tear down a sitting Democratic president? Republicans.

  317. 317
    Suffern ACE says:

    @bystander-308 Yep. Reading the full set of graphs that Drum links to, especially the independents, will pretty much provide a clue as to why Obama is a Democrat that won an election.

  318. 318
    Brian R. says:

    And Lawguy, we can’t be troubled by your delusions either.

    But seeing that your perspective is held by one-eighth of liberal Dems and ours is held by seven-eighths of liberal Dems, maybe yours is the true delusion.

  319. 319
    bystander says:

    @ Suffern ACE: Uh-huh. And we hope those Democrats and Independents are just fine with the President and Congress whittling away at those social programs that they “don’t use”.

  320. 320
    Corner Stone says:

    @Anya:

    Do you ever say anything that’s more substantial than what can fit into a fortune cookie?

    Nice try! But we both know that’s a trick question.

  321. 321
    AlphaLiberal says:

    I am very pissed off at Obama for capitulating to the Republicans and Plutocrats on economic policy. (WTF does Social Security have to do with the deficit??)

    But this guy’s choice of headline was dumb, I agree.

    You can be more loyal to your President than the people, if you like. But, I won’t. Obama is now promoting Republican policies from the bully pulpit.

    You would never have seen FDR promote Hooverism. Apparently, Obama really believes in it. Unless the words coming out of his own mouth are not to be believed!!

    Krugman’s points are hard to deny:
    The Obama-Keynes Mystery

  322. 322
    Lawguy says:

    @Brian, right its people who think like me who caused the democrats to lose over 60 seats in the last election. Oh yeah, it is because Obama did what I suggested that there is no recovery and those jobs figures are so terrible.

    We can discuss who people still say they support Obams, but so far no one has addressed my points except to say but it is so hard being president and to suggest that I do not understand American politics. For your information my major in college was 20th century American history and I helped organize two different unions in the 80s (locals).

  323. 323
    Emma says:

    I hope Obama loses in 2012. And then I am going to spend the next four years laughing in the face of every idiot, including my father, who loses out on social security and has to eat cat food; on every imbecile whose job is yanked unless he accepts $2.25 an hour; on every moron who can’t buy health insurance because he has a pre-existing condition; on every numbnuts whose kids have to pick strawberries for a living at $25 a day. AND I WILL ENJOY IT.

    And for those of you who think it will cause the second great american revolution, I refer you to a true statement made by one of the great robber barons: “I can hire one half of the working class to kill the other half.” The vast majority of Americans are content as long as they have 5000 crappy tv channels, two weeks a year to go to Disneyworld, and the freedom to blame everyone else but themselves.

  324. 324
    Jennifer says:

    You know what I’D really like to hear?

    Your explanation of how this right-sized stimulus would have passed. You seem to have forgotten that everything going through the Senate has to have the approval of the Queens of Maine.

  325. 325
    AlphaLiberal says:

    Jared Bernstein, one of the many actual real economists to have fled the Obama Administration recently:

    Washington needs to quickly and aggressively shift from its long-term debt obsession to the much more immediate jobs problem. To do otherwise at this point would be deeply irresponsible.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....93118.html

    Barack Obama cares more about the deficit fetish of the elitists than he does about joblessness. Cutting back now will prolong the jobs crisis.

    It’s not unreasonable for people who helped a politician win and office to be upset when he uses that office for the opposite purposes they shared during the campaign. Judge Obama by his own words: he believes this bullshit about the deficit being more important than chronic unemployment.

  326. 326
    AlphaLiberal says:

    @Jennifer:

    A) By advocating for it and opposing Republicans more than they opposed progressive Dems. Not done.

    B) By having an “outside game” to mobilize the huge base we all built up in 2008 to pressure these Repubs (as the Repubs did w/Teabaggers). Not done.

    C) By using the bully pulpit for something besides repeating Republican economic dogma (I can’t stand it) and mewling about bipartisanship and asking the Republicans to be nice.

    D) See LBJ. FDR. Fuck, see Dubya! Use that power we won!

    E) Speak forcefully. Stand for something. Articulate a better and alternative vision to the voodoo economics of the right wing, rather than adopting same.

    F) Stop catering to Wall Street.

    That’s really off the top of my head. There is a lot they could have done. They are not powerless and they need to try.

    Look at this Admin now. Economists have all fled and the Banksters (Daley, Geithner) are running the joint.

  327. 327
    Corner Stone says:

    @Emma:

    I hope Obama loses in 2012.

    Firebagger!!

  328. 328
    tommybones says:

    Here’s my take…

    We have two traditional viewpoints on how to help the economy during a time of high unemployment and low demand.

    Traditional Democratic view: Stimulus spending, progressive tax hikes, increased regulations, closing of corporate loopholes etc.

    Traditional GOP view: Lower taxes, cut spending, weaken regulations etc.

    The debate which we should be having is one where Obama leads as the voice of the traditional Democratic view, while the GOP leadership leads as the voice of the traditional GOP view. Both sides make their case to the people and eventually hammer out legislation somewhere in the middle.

    Now, we are clearly in an age when the GOP side of the aisle has jumped the shark and will not compromise on anything. Everyone certainly realizes that.

    But how does GOP intransigence excuse Obama’s decision to embrace severe austerity measures, which are clearly GOP ideals and not traditional Democratic ones?

    In other words, the real debate never happened. Stimulus vs. Austerity. That debate was passed over. Instead we have a battle between two traditional GOP positions. Obama has staked a more center right GOP position and is battling against a far right GOP position.

    It’s the equivalent of negotiating the terms of surrender. If Obama wins, the GOP wins. If Obama loses, the GOP wins.

    Why is it that the average american is convinced spending and the deficit are really huge problems? Yes, the GOP propaganda machine is very loud and the mainstream media is complicit, but also, and importantly, Obama has put his bully pulpit into the closet and chosen to publicly embrace those myths.

    Why wouldn’t those who support progressive causes be severely disappointed in his decision to embrace and legitimize GOP economic falsehoods??? Is that not a legitimate criticism to make?

    Is there some reason Obama hasn’t spent the past few months EDUCATING the public as to the absurdities of the GOP position? Instead, he has publicly EMBRACED Hooverisms. Why? What could possibly be the strategy in Obama embracing such myths?

  329. 329
    NR says:

    That’s so weird, I could have sworn that only members of Congress could introduce legislation to Congress, but apparently the president has had the power to do that this whole time and just hasn’t bothered.

    For fuck’s sake. Introducing a bill and proposing a bill are not the same thing. Don’t be deliberately obtuse. And anyway, I’m quite certain that Obama could find a Congressman to introduce his bill for him, if he really wanted one.

  330. 330
    bystander says:

    @ Jennifer:

    There is no answer to that. Both Obama’s defenders as well as Obama’s critics are making a forward prediction for which there was no test. There is no empirical evidence to refute, or to support, either claim. Each could be equally right, or equally wrong. Since there was no test for the hypothesis – either one of them – there is nothing that can be said, other than, he didn’t try to find out if a bigger stimulus could have passed. The Queens of Maine is a catchy identifier, but – at best – it signifies a hypothesis that wasn’t tested.

  331. 331
    tommybones says:

    I’m with post #326

  332. 332
    Corner Stone says:

    @NR:

    Introducing a bill and proposing a bill are not the same thing.

    You forget. When a bill is passed it is the president’s legislative victory. When a situation is at a standstill the president has no role in legislation.

  333. 333
    Anya says:

    AlphaLiberal @319

    I am very pissed off at Obama for capitulating to the Republicans and Plutocrats on economic policy. (WTF does Social Security have to do with the deficit??)

    Anytime Obama or anyone in his adminstration made a statement about SS, it’s a variation of: Social Security isn’t facing an immediate funding crisis and should be viewed separately from moves to reduce the federal budget deficit.

    Aside from the claim in the WaPost. by an anonymous source, what’s your proof that he’s already “capitulating”?

  334. 334
    tommybones says:

    Bystander:

    That’s false. Post #326 is a pretty solid answer.

  335. 335
    tommybones says:

    #333 Anya:

    Obama’s own words are evidence enough. No need for anonymous sources. As Krugman pointed out recently:

    Barack Herbert Hoover Obama
    From today’s radio address:

    Government has to start living within its means, just like families do. We have to cut the spending we can’t afford so we can put the economy on sounder footing, and give our businesses the confidence they need to grow and create jobs.

    Yep, the false government-family equivalence, the myth of expansionary austerity, and the confidence fairy, all in just two sentences.

  336. 336
    Another Bob says:

    @Anya

    Aside from the claim in the WaPost. by an anonymous source, what’s your proof that he’s already “capitulating”?

    Do you think that Nancy Pelosi is saying things like the following because she doesn’t know anything and is just a dupe of baseless rumors, even after having just had a “contentious meeting” with the White House?

    After a contentious White House meeting with President Obama and other Congressional leaders, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) returned to the Capitol and drew an important red line: Members of her caucus won’t vote for a grand bargain to raise the debt limit and reduce future deficits if the final deal includes cuts to Medicare and Social Security benefits — and that means it probably won’t pass.”

  337. 337
    Suffern ACE says:

    Traditional Democratic view: Stimulus spending, progressive tax hikes, increased regulations, closing of corporate loopholes etc.

    Traditional GOP view: Lower taxes, cut spending, weaken regulations etc.

    The majority of the president’s own party says “yes” to both of the above. And everyone thinks social security isn’t going to be part of any austerity discussion, cause that’s why.

    I think what happened in 2008 is that somehow the Democratic primary process produced a candidate who represented Democratic positions, and those positions aren’t very coherent or clear.

  338. 338
    Corner Stone says:

    Is Nancy Smash going to give Jane Hamsher a run for the title of Queen Firebagger??

    Let’s start a betting pool on how quickly the BJ commentariat turns completely against Nancy Pelosi.
    I’ve got Tuesday for $5.

  339. 339
    Jennifer says:

    You have the benefit of hindsight here. So it’s easy to complain in retrospect about how things SHOULD have been done. Of course at the time the stimulus passed, coming back for another bite, if needed, was not clearly out of the question. That option was kneecapped by the loss of a Senate seat which should have never gone Republican, and of course with the huge Republican gains in the House in 2010, it’s off the table entirely.

    Bad judgement on the president’s part to not insist on getting it all in one bite? Perhaps. But under normal conditions, working with a sane opposition, it wouldn’t be out of the question, and he would have been seen as being more fiscally prudent for only asking for more as needed. And of course the GOP of early 2009 was markedly more sane than the GOP of 2011, which just underlines how truly off the rails they are now.

    As for the “outside game”…I don’t see how that would have come together. Getting people out to rah-rah ih the streets for more federal borrowing? Not really likely…it’s a lot easier to turn out people when they’re upset over real (or imagined) threats than it is over something like stimulus spending. No one really wanted to have to spend that money. You could argue that the reason why no one was excited about the feds borrowing for stimulus spending is because of poor messaging, not using the power of the bully pulpit & etc, and then we’ll be back to talking about how the media adopts a right-wing frame which generally goes unchallenged and how every time it is challenged, we can count on some attention-seeking tool who supposedly is on “our side” w/r/t what needs to happen, to quickly point out how the president, or people on “our side” are as bad or worse because of some compeltely unrelated reason, kind of like Chris Hayes did yesterday with that tweet to Axelrod.

    So yeah, he could do more – but mostly in the realm of telling the GOP to kiss his black ass and making a speech that he’s going to let the motherfucker burn to the ground if they don’t get on board, which is how I would have liked to see the tax cut extensions handled. With a flat “fuck you, rich people are going to have to pay more, and if you won’t pass the cut extensions for everyone else, we’ll just be sure to remind the voters about how you raised their taxes.” Same with the debt ceiling – one speech to the effect of “investors and rich people – you’ve got the most to lose here, and you own these guys. Tell them what they have to do.”

    But getting this stuff done by “mobilizing the left”? Not bloody likely, for reasons all too apparent in these threads – if you can’t get people to even temporarily set aside butthurt unrelated to the issue at hand, you’re not going to get them off their asses to actually DO anything.

  340. 340
    Corner Stone says:

    @Jennifer:

    But getting this stuff done by “mobilizing the left”? Not bloody likely, for reasons all too apparent in these threads – if you can’t get people to even temporarily set aside butthurt unrelated to the issue at hand, you’re not going to get them off their asses to actually DO anything.

    IMO you’re now doing a little of the hindsight. President Obama was elected with a massive turnout electorate. In record numbers for several different categories, IIRC. Comparing the drive, energy and enthusiasm at that point in time to some of the draining divisiveness we’ve seen since then isn’t fair, IMO. There was a huge pool of people who were so emotionally plugged in they could’ve been engaged to do just about anything. As far as I recall.
    And regarding the stimulus, anyone who considered the Republicans a potentially “sane” opposition at that point, and made plans accordingly, got what they deserved. Or wanted.
    Because, in real time, not hindsight, several prominent voices were screaming for a larger stimulus because they knew it was a one and done. Not in hindsight.

  341. 341
    susan says:

    Maybe Jane and her pups are onto something:

    Choreographed Budget Cave In – The Money Party Stabs Citizens in the Back

    By Michael Collins

    So this is how it is going to be:

    “After putting controversial cuts to Social Security and Medicare on the table in negotiations with congressional Republicans over a plan to raise the nation’s debt ceiling, President Obama still doesn’t have a deal in the works.” Chris Moody, Yahoo News, July 7

    Who told President Obama to put “controversial cuts on Social Security and Medicare on the table”? Hasn’t the president seen his public opinion polling numbers lately? He is consistently at or below 50% job approval. (Image)
    Didn’t he pay attention to the special congressional election in the highly conservative, long-time Republican upstate New York district that elected a Democrat for the first time in years?

    Isn’t the President Obama aware that there’s an election coming up; that many of the people he is so willingly and openly betraying rely on Social Security to live and Medicare to stay alive?

    What planet does he live on? (Unless this is what he truly desires.)

    We expect just this sort of behavior from his negotiating partner, Republican House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio. Boehner is part of the unashamed corruption that is the Ohio Republican Party. He learned at the feet of disgraced former Governor Robert Taft, jailed Representative Robert Ney, and voting machine magician, former Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell. Boehner will get reelected no matter what he does the way they count votes in his home state.

    The president’s behavior over the coming weeks (and past years) will make little sense unless you view the Democrats and Republicans as the distracting sideshow of the ruling elite. Obama, Boehner, and the rest of them are in place to play democracy, make us think we have some say in things. They make it look so complicated and difficult to address problems rationally and equitably. How could we, the mere citizens, ever do better, we are supposed to think.

    The bipartisan sideshow exists to crush all hope that anything will change. That’s just fine with The Money Party. The more things change, the more they stay the same. The rake off by the very top fraction of a percent continues unimpeded, a mighty flowing river of cash into their gated communities.

    They make it look like conflict but there’s no real conflict. Benefits will be cut. How much more obvious do they have to be? It was Obama, after all, who cozied up to Peter Peterson, the decade’s long foe of Social Security. Peterson’s deficit commission worked in tandem with Obama’s hand-picked deficit commissioners to produce this conclusion – Social Security and Medicare will be cut.

    The government will continue to use payroll taxes to fund the deficit. It will continue to write IOUs for future repayment of that money to those who rightfully deserve it. But the benefits will dwindle and vanish, by design.

    If there was one ounce of sincerity and intellectual honesty in this budgeting process, we would know that war is expensive. The current two are at $4 trillion right now. That’s a big chunk of the federal deficit. We would know about the extensive, expensive, and unnecessary subsidy and give away programs for corporate farms. We would hear that the Bush tax cuts plus the defense increases account for a huge portion of the current deficit. And we would hear all about how both parties gave away millions of jobs through “fair trade” deals and by encouraging flight of good jobs to places with slave wages and no labor regulations.

    But we won’t hear that. The corporate sponsors of team democracy won’t stand for it.

    Over the past three decades, at least, the leaders of the United States and Western Europe have failed at governance at an accelerating rate. At this point, to varying degrees, the primary strategies of the US and its transatlantic partners are: wage war; demolish the middle class; swindle large groups of people and entire nations through no-win financial schemes; and pollute at a breathtaking rate in full awareness of the outcome.

    The level of incompetence is stunning. It can’t be tolerated any longer.

    END

    This article may be reproduced entirely or in part with attribution of authorship and a link to this article.

    The Money Party RSS

  342. 342
    Ives says:

    As far as I can see there is little to differentiate Obama and Bush on reigning in Wall Street, reigning in the permanent war state, reigning in the domestic surveillance state or the use of ‘unitary executive powers’ to wage war. In Obama’s case he has additionally claimed the right to assassinate American citizens he decrees (from the thrown?) to be terrorists. Had Bush declared the right to do the same, I trust there would have been a chorus of righteous outrage on the liberal left and from Democratic politicians. Obama has said he’s now willing to cut SS, Medicare and Medicaid. When Bush tried the same (with SS) he was crucified by the liberal left and Democratic politicians.

    Yes the Republicans are horrible and crazy and all that. Yes there are some well-intentioned Democrats. On social and ethical issues there is some difference between the two parties. But you can’t effectively vote against the corporate state or the permanent war state or Goldman Sachs or routine violations of civil liberties. There’s bipartisan consensus on the big stuff.

    Obama has disappointed a lot of people, especially I think some younger and more naive people who voted for the first time with great hopes. That’s a fact that liberal supporters of Obama have got to deal with. If your aim is to get people to repeat their earlier enthusiasm for BHO, I’d suggest you address their critiques by some other method than calling their authors ‘fucking sociopaths’.

  343. 343
    tommybones says:

    The problem in a nutshell, as pointed out by Krugman:

    Barack Herbert Hoover Obama
    From today’s radio address:

    “Government has to start living within its means, just like families do. We have to cut the spending we can’t afford so we can put the economy on sounder footing, and give our businesses the confidence they need to grow and create jobs.”

    Yep, the false government-family equivalence, the myth of expansionary austerity, and the confidence fairy, all in just two sentences.

    Can someone explain why Obama would publicly embrace these blatant GOP falsehoods? Anyone?

  344. 344
    Another Bob says:

    @Ives

    If your aim is to get people to repeat their earlier enthusiasm for BHO, I’d suggest you address their critiques by some other method than calling their authors ‘fucking sociopaths’.

    You mean, scolding people for their rhetorical excess by calling them “fucking sociopaths” wasn’t meant as a self-chiding ironical joke?

  345. 345
    The Sheriff's A Ni- says:

    “After a contentious White House meeting with President Obama and other Congressional leaders, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) returned to the Capitol and drew an important red line: Members of her caucus won’t vote for a grand bargain to raise the debt limit and reduce future deficits if the final deal includes cuts to Medicare and Social Security benefits—and that means it probably won’t pass.”

    A message to Obama or kabuki to put more heat on John Boehner?

  346. 346
    Another Bob says:

    @The Sheriff’s A Ni

    A message to Obama or kabuki to put more heat on John Boehner?

    I realize that there could be a game of liars’ dice going on, and that each side might want to keep an air of uncertainty about what they might or might not do, but I just can’t see how it would benefit the Democrats to make the Republicans wonder about whether Social Security was or was not on the table. Wouldn’t you want them to think as concretely as possible that SS security definitely was not part of the negotiation, and what are they gonna do about it? Why would Obama even want to muddy the waters?

  347. 347
    Corner Stone says:

    @The Sheriff’s A Ni-:

    A message to Obama or kabuki to put more heat on John Boehner?

    Your opinion is?

  348. 348
    dustycrickets says:

    @ Trollenschlongen #285

    “Hmmm…TBogg is awesome.Tbogg posts at FDL.Maybe, just maybe, a non-hysterical, unbiased person could learn something from this…”

    Yes….Tbogg has been working on this …here’s one of his better post on this…

    “A comment left over at digg regarding Ralph Nader:

    “The Democrats really hate Nader because he points out the fact that they are asking those of us on the left to vote for them but they aren’t doing anything for us. Did they end funding for the Republican’s crime spree in Iraq? No. Have they moved for UHC? No. Have they tried to stop corporate crimes? No. Have they tried to reform the tax code to be progressive? No. Have they tried to protect homeowners from predatory lenders? No. Have they defended our constitutional rights? No. Take back the FDA from the corporations? No. The FCC? No.

    The Democrats don’t deserve my vote. They aren’t helping the left, why should the left help them?”

    Let me see if I can explain it this way:

    Every year in Happy Gumdrop Fairy-Tale Land all of the sprites and elves and woodland creatures gather together to pick the Rainbow Sunshine Queen. Everyone is there: the Lollipop Guild, the Star-Twinkle Toddlers, the Sparkly Unicorns, the Cookie Baking Apple-cheeked Grandmothers, the Fluffy Bunny Bund, the Rumbly-Tumbly Pupperoos, the Snowflake Princesses, the Baby Duckies All-In-A-Row, the Laughing Babies, and the Dykes on Bikes. They have a big picnic with cupcakes and gumdrops and pudding pops, stopping only to cast their votes by throwing Magic Wishing Rocks into the Well of Laughter, Comity, and Good Intentions. Afterward they spend the rest of the night dancing and singing and waving glow sticks until dawn when they tumble sleepy-eyed into beds made of the purest and whitest goose down where they dream of angels and clouds of spun sugar.

    You don’t live there.

    Grow the fuck up.”

    http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2.....n-anymore/

  349. 349
    tommybones says:

    Dustycrickets (#348) wins the award for the most obnoxious, condescending response on this entire thread. Additionally, he didn’t bother to actually answer the post he was responding to, choosing instead to simply be a dick.

  350. 350
    Jennifer says:

    Another Bob @346:

    It has occured to me that part of what’s been going on has been biding time and running out the clock. Kind of an effort to keep the barbarians at the gates, so to speak. And with the 2012 elections about to heat up in earnest after Labor Day, if that’s been the game it’s been well-played ot that end, anyway. The “debt slashing” turned out to be nothing, and it got strung out the same way. W/R/T Social Security, if the anonymous source rumors floated aren’t true, there’s 2 possibilities: GOP rat-fucking operation to sow discord on the left (hugely successful, BTW) or Democratic bait-n-switch to get the Republicans howling about how it isn’t on the table when they were led to believe it would be, which then gives Dems in the elections the opportunity to point out that Republicans not only voted to get rid of Medicare, but they were really upset when they weren’t given the opportunity to fuck up Soc. Sec. either.

    Understand I’m talking completely out of my ass here; I have no more idea of what the truth of the matter is than anyone else here, and won’t know until it’s put out there.

  351. 351
    The Sheriff's A Ni- says:

    Your opinion is?

    Kabuki. To put the heat on Boehner and/or give him cover for an eventual deal.

    I realize that there could be a game of liars’ dice going on, and that each side might want to keep an air of uncertainty about what they might or might not do, but I just can’t see how it would benefit the Democrats to make the Republicans wonder about whether Social Security was or was not on the table.

    Its liar’s dice, any time, all the time. Obama wants to look bipartisan to win over the moderates. Boehner wants to look like he tried to get the best deal possible for the Tea Party so he’s not toppled over by Cantor. Neither of them want to deal with grannies upset that they both fucked over their Social Security and Mecicare. Both of them want to look like they did something. Thus you’re going to get a ton of kabuki leading up to a mild nothingburger of a deal much like we got back after the last budgetary crisis.

  352. 352
    The Sheriff's A Ni- says:

    Jennifer made some good points as well.

  353. 353
    Brian R. says:

    For your information my major in college was 20th century American history

    Sounds like you didn’t pay much attention in class.

    If you had, you would realize that all the half-measures and capitulations that Obama has done that send the FDL dolts into apoplexy are precisely what FDR and LBJ did in their presidencies.

    For instance, for all the options that were being discussed about old-age insurance in the early 1930s, the Social Security Act that FDR actually passed was incredibly conservative, especially when compared to things Townsend, Long, and Lewis were advocating. It relied on employee contributions, it delayed payment on old-age pensions until 1945, and it entirely excluded farm workers and domestics, which accounted for 80% of African Americans in the nation.

    And FDR accomplished all that as the FireDogLake douchebags of his era — the nutjobs who backed Huey Long and Father Coughlin — screamed that he had sold them out, that he was “Franklin Double-Crossing Roosevelt,” that he was aligned with the bankers against the little people, that he wasn’t doing as much to redistribute the wealth as the political times demanded, and therefore that FDR needed to be challenged in the 1936 election because he was No True Progressive.

    And then, well, FDR got re-elected in the greatest landslide in American political history and was soon remembered as the most important progressive president of all time.

    If you actually majored in American history and don’t realize all this, you should really ask your university for a refund. Because you apparently learned dick-all in school.

  354. 354
    Tonal Crow says:

    Thanks again for all the ad revenue.

    — John

    You remind me of myself when John puts that catnip mouse on a fishing pole and waves it in my face.

    — Tunch

  355. 355
    tommybones says:

    Brian R,

    FDR fought from the economic left and compromised with an end result moving the needle to the left. Obama is embracing a center right economic position and negotiating against a far right economic position. There’s little hope this tactic will result in history seeing him as FDR the 2nd.

  356. 356
    dustycrickets says:

    @ tommybones #

    What the hell are you taking about….JC titled this thread “Just Fucking Kill ME”…and mentioned “Fuck these lunatics. Fucking sociopaths.”

    TBogg”s ” fluffy bunny bund” post was clearly directed at these lunatics and sociopaths…

  357. 357
    Corner Stone says:

    @Jennifer:

    Democratic bait-n-switch to get the Republicans howling about how it isn’t on the table when they were led to believe it would be, which then gives Dems in the elections the opportunity to point out that Republicans not only voted to get rid of Medicare, but they were really upset when they weren’t given the opportunity to fuck up Soc. Sec. either.

    One side is united in saying, “Everything is on the table except for tax increases.”
    And one side is saying, “Everything is on the table including “entitlements”.”

    When a deal gets done, and it will, what do you believe the stated outcome will be represented as? Because I think it will be something like, “Republicans kept the Democrats from raising your hard working taxes, and then the Democrats signed off on killing your hard working grandma!”

    And what will be the rebuttal? “Loopholes were closed.” and “Cuts to SS didn’t happen, we just changed the formula for benefits.”
    Cue the collective “Whuh??” from the electorate. They are going to remember two things. Republicans held firm on no new taxes. And Democrats cut SS.

  358. 358
    Suffern ACE says:

    @tommybones – yep. That center part is actually troubling, as “moderate” or “centrist” economic policy is the crazy gut feelings of people who took econ 101 to satisfy the social science requirement in college because its business friendly and might look good on a resume. Upper end careerist social science theory usually makes bad policy.

  359. 359
    Jennifer says:

    @357 – like I said, no one here knows whether the anonymous source rumors are true, and if they are, what the goal is or what the outcome will be. Forgive me for not going into full dryer-tube-arm-flapping-Danger-Will-Robinson mode.

  360. 360
    kay says:

    This is a letter from the chairs of the progressive caucus to Pelosi:

    On July 7, you made very clear that “We are not going to balance the budget on the backs of America’s seniors, women and people with disabilities” and that “we do not support cuts in benefits” for vital safety-net programs. We agree completely.

    Especially in these tough economic times, we should not be cutting Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid benefits that millions of our constituents paid into and depend on. Such benefit cuts should be off the table in current debt discussions.

    Our Republican colleagues should be embarrassed by their insistence that unless Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefits are cut, the nation will default on its debts. Middle-class families have sacrificed enough, and a deal that pushes the American Dream further out of reach, in order to pay for extending tax breaks for the rich and corporations, is simply unacceptable.

    We are united as Democrats in saying that it’s time to stand up to the Republican hostage-taking. We will not be forced to vote for a “final agreement” that we do not agree to — and that the American people do not agree to.

    We stand united with you in insisting that benefit cuts for working families, our seniors, children, and people with disabilities must be off the table, and we stand united with you in fighting for millions of Americans who need Democrats to be firmly on their side.

    The important phrase here, IMO, is “benefit cuts”. They use it five times.

    I think reading these things they’re saying carefully may avoid some confusion down the road, and perhaps help to show where the real dispute is, and how far apart liberal Democrats are (or may be, I don’t know) from Obama.

    Providers are different than beneficiaries re: Medicare and Medicaid, and the payment formula re: Medicaid is different (more generous) under the ACA than it is now.

    Just something to keep in mind, maybe, if we’re all reading tea leaves.

  361. 361
    Brian R. says:

    FDR fought from the economic left and compromised with an end result moving the needle to the left.

    Not uniformly. The Economy Act of 1933 was an incredibly conservative bill that slashed federal payrolls, the National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933 was a measure that practically let industry write its own rules, and the belt-tightening of 1937 was thoroughly conservative.

    Yes, for the most part he came from the left and attacked the right, but that’s because by the time he came to office, the right had been given three full years under Hoover to demonstrate the impact of its policies and they only made them worse.

    Obama didn’t have that luxury, and so he has to act like FDR did if he’d come to power in early 1930 rather than early 1933.

    Obama is embracing a center right economic position and negotiating against a far right economic position. There’s little hope this tactic will result in history seeing him as FDR the 2nd.

    Well, maybe we could ask the actual historians (and not Lawguy, who puffs out his chest to say he was a history major as an undergrad)?

    Let’s see … According to the latest Siena Poll in which presidential scholars rank the presidents, which was a year ago, Obama comes out as the fifteenth greatest president.

    FDR tops the list, so no, Obama’s not FDR. No one ever will be.

    But “worst president ever”? That’s glue-huffingly stupid.

  362. 362
    FlipYrWhig says:

    kay sees it as I do. Obama is signaling that he’s willing to accept program-cuts-that-are-not-benefit-cuts. Case in point: Medicare in the HCR discussion. Everyone from the media to professional politicians to amateur bloviators in the blogosphere has been lumping all “cuts” together. It’s not that hard to understand, unless you’re deliberately wanting to stoke a kerfuffle, or you’re just a dimwit who doesn’t understand simple yet important terms common to every recent policy discussion that includes numbers and quantities, like most political reporters.

  363. 363
    susan says:

    Recently, I attended a fundraiser for a local Dem and Madeleine Albright was there. She spoke to us about the importance of remaining in Iraq and Afghanistan, and she stated that if we knew what she knew we would provide unwavering support for our President’s foreign policies.

    Unfortunately (according to her) because of security risks, she couldn’t share any of what she knows with us. But, she assured us that Obama is an awesome president and we should trust him and support him in all matters foreign and domestic.

    When asked who she considered a dangerous threat to the Democratic Party, she literally spat out the word “Bloggers.”

    Perhaps her contempt for bloggers has to do with Hillary losing the nomination; she didn’t offer context. However, it was very clear that she hates bloggers and sees them as some sort of existential threat to the Party elites who expect the rank and file to line up at the polls and otherwise keep our mouths shut.

    I was rather pleased to witness her animosity toward the “unwashed basement dwellers” and I hope that we can keep up the pressure on our “elites.” Without our prodding and pushing (and dollars), many of them are only too happy to forget that they serve at the pleasure of the people.

  364. 364
    dogwood says:

    FDR fought from the economic left and compromised with an end result moving the needle to the left. Obama is embracing a center right economic position and negotiating against a far right economic position. There’s little hope this tactic will result in history seeing him as FDR the 2nd.

    If the great compromise on SS was ok because it moved the needle to the left; will you at least concede that the same case can be made for the ACA? Republicans don’t fight health care reform because it moves the needle to the right. Can we at least agree on that?

  365. 365
    kay says:

    FlipYrWhig
    kay sees it as I do. Obama is signaling that he’s willing to accept program-cuts-that-are-not-benefit-cuts.

    Well, I’d go a little further. The House Dems, including Pelosi, are saying (not signaling, but saying) benefit cuts. I think that’s an important distinction, because providers are not beneficiaries. I think it’s LESS of an important distinction re: SS because there are no providers in SS.

    Further, Medicaid has problems with recruiting primary care providers, because Medicaid (currently) pays +/- 70% of what Medicare pays.

    So they did this to address that disparity, in the ACA:

    In an effort to boost provider participation and access, the ACA increases Medicaid payments for primary care services provided by primary care physicians to 100 percent of the Medicare payment rates for two years, with full federal financing for the increased costs.

    Which makes me think they have some wiggle room there. 28% increase to providers, right?

    So, when I’m reading all these rumors on Medicare/Medicaid, I’m folding in the upcoming changes re: the ACA and drawing a distinction between providers and beneficiaries, because that’s what every single Democrat who has made a statement is doing, if I’m reading the qualifiers (“benefits, harm”) correctly.

    I think there are real substantive differences between Democrats (Obama and the liberals in House), but they are not as large as they appear. I (of course) have no fucking idea what Republicans are thinking, because they don’t say anything substantive.

  366. 366
    dogwood says:

    susan:

    I was rather pleased to witness her animosity toward the “unwashed basement dwellers” and I hope that we can keep up the pressure on our “elites.” Without our prodding and pushing (and dollars), many of them are only too happy to forget that they serve at the pleasure of the people.

    If it weren’t for the diction and the syntax this sounds like something Sarah Palin would say.

  367. 367
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @ kay: You explained the specifics better than I did. IMHO there aren’t very many substantive differences, but House Democrats are very leery about how it will play to endorse anything that could be _depicted_ as a “cut,” especially because the last time around it was a total debacle, and especially-especially because running against the Ryan plan’s cuts was looking like a very appealing tactic, and I’m sure they don’t want to give that up for some technocratic word-splitting about the real meaning of “cut” — (ETA:) even if it might be a meritorious reform that does actual good to sustain the welfare state.

  368. 368
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @ dogwood / 366 : If Madeleine Albright knows what a “blogger” is, I would be astonished.

  369. 369
    kay says:

    but House Democrats are very leery about how it will play to endorse anything that could be depicted as a “cut,” especially because the last time around it was a total debacle, and especially-especially because running against the Ryan plan’s cuts was looking like a very appealing tactic, and I’m sure they don’t want to give that up for some technocratic word-splitting about the real meaning of “cut.”

    They’re right, too. I’m fine with Pelosi lobbying or parsing or whatever the hell she’s doing. She can stand on her head for all I care, as long as she actually holds the line on Medicaid cuts to beneficiaries :)

    IMO, Medicare could use a little paring on the provider side. I’m not a big fan of throwing money away. I don’t know why we’d pay every provider demand on receipt, with endless increases, but saying that’s forbidden, at this juncture, right?

    Maybe some other time :)

  370. 370

    Do you think that Nancy Pelosi is saying things like the following because she doesn’t know anything and is just a dupe of baseless rumors, even after having just had a “contentious meeting” with the White House?

    Have you ever heard of political theatre?

    I have to go with John on this whole issue. “Progressives” who are screaming about “betrayal” seem determind to relegate themselves to the sidelines.

  371. 371
    Another Bob says:

    @ Jennifer & The Sheriff’s A Ni

    Obama wants to look bipartisan to win over the moderates.

    I just don’t see how any sort of double-jujitsu kabuki over Social Security is helping Obama or the Dems. Protecting Social Security and making it loud and clear is a winning hand, and I don’t see how the White House’s muddled approach is satisfying or winning over anyone. I saw this story just recently:

    “A new national poll shows that while most people aren’t satisfied with the current performance of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, neither do they want benefit cuts.

    The survey, conducted in June by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, found that 60 percent of respondents say it is important to keep Medicare and Social Security benefits as they are. Only about half as many — 32 percent — say it is more important to reduce the federal budget deficit than to maintain the status quo.

    […]

    Half of Republicans say maintaining benefits is more important than deficit reduction, while 42 percent favor reducing the deficit. Independents favor maintaining the benefits over deficit reduction, 53 percent to 38 percent. Among Democrats, 72 percent view preserving current Social Security and Medicare benefits as more important, compared to 21 percent more concerned about the deficit.”

    See — even HALF of frickin’ Republicans say that maintaining benefits is more important than deficit reduction. How on earth is this confusing negotiating approach helping the Dems do anything but get painted into a corner and ultimately pissing off a huge majority while perhaps taking the blame for what would be a political catastrophe? I’m not getting the logic here.

  372. 372
    kay says:

    If Madeleine Albright knows what a “blogger” is, I would be astonished.

    What a weird thing for her to say. Great. Is she nuts too, now?

  373. 373
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @ Another Bob: See kay’s explanation. It’s not that confusing. Cut things that aren’t benefits, for example, no-questions-asked reimbursable services that don’t improve health outcomes. Cut wasteful and underperforming kinds of spending, protect benefits, cut deficit. Can it be done? I’m not a health economist, I have no idea. But there are surely things to “cut” that don’t give actual sick and elderly people less benefit.

    If the Pentagon had a program whose purpose was to buy toilet seats for $1000 apiece, and that was replaced by a program that bought toilet seats for $20 apiece, would that be a troubling cut? Would it be playing games with national security? No. It would be a cut, but it would only hurt the profit margin of grifters. Now envision that happening in health and social-welfare programs. That’s the idea.

  374. 374
    Jennifer says:

    Another Bob – you must be thinking of someone else, because I never said anything about Obmaa wanting to look bipartisan to win over moderates. I said that 1) we don’t know if the rumor floated by the anonymous source is even true and 2) if it is, if it’s not just a ploy to get Republicans to the table, or even if it’s not something floated by the Republicans as a rat-fucking operation. In other words, I never even considered that it might have anything to do with appealing to any segment of the electorate.

  375. 375
    dogwood says:

    Brian @353&361:

    Good posts rooted in fact not fantasy. There’s a lot of myth in the FDR legend and that’s not all bad. Nations need heroes and cultural icons. The War solidified FDR as an icon and it drove the right crazy. I remember being a kid in the 1960’s and hearing some old FDR hater spout off every once in awhile; it made them seem crazy, and I lived in an Eisenhower Republican household. Populist impulses are easy pickings for grifters eager to gin up anger, hatred, and fear and cash in. The left is no less immune to it than the right. Father Coughlin and Huey Long are no different than Sarah Palin. Right now the angry crowd on the left doesn’t have a Sarah Palin or a Michele Bachmann, and it will be interesting if one or two emerges. I’m sure there are some far right institutions willing to pony up if they think it will pay dividends.

  376. 376
    Another Bob says:

    @Jennifer

    you must be thinking of someone else, because I never said anything about Obmaa wanting to look bipartisan to win over moderates.

    Sorry, Jennifer, that quote was from The Sheriff A Ni and I was trying to respond to both of you in saying that SS is so popular that I don’t see how it helps Obama to do anything other than make it crystal clear that he intends no cuts whatsoever, in any semantic sense, to SS or Medicare. Maybe he intended to say that he wants to improve efficiency, but when I read his spokesman Carney’s response to the controversy, it looked like classic beltway weasel words. Not only did it not make their position look clear, if anything, it looked like they really DID want to cut SS and just didn’t want to come right out and say so in plain English. That was not GOP ratfucking, that was the administration itself refusing to say categorically “No cuts to benefits, period. Social Security is most definitely off the table.” Why would they refuse to make their position more concrete? Maybe this is a “poker game,” but it’s not really a poker game. There’s no advantage to pretending not to hold a winning hand when you actually do — or at least COULD.

  377. 377
    dogwood says:

    Flypp:

    You explained the specifics better than I did. IMHO there aren’t very many substantive differences, but House Democrats are very leery about how it will play to endorse anything that could be depicted as a “cut,” especially because the last time around it was a total debacle,

    This illustrates an essential problems that Democrats will never be able to overcome. Dems really do try to improve upon the status quo and that involves some hard work and yes, some tough choices at times. Empirical data does influence liberal policy wonks. Different wings of the party can cherry pick data to make a case, but they do value facts. There is no doubt that you can make cuts to programs without significant cuts to benefits. And there’s no doubt that Republicans will hang it around the Dems. neck. Many here will as well. But they do have the Ryan budget as an example of how Reps. will deal with the issue.

    When you talk about the difference between cutting a program and cutting a benefit it reminds me of a friend of mine who freelanced and had one client. It was an amazing gig at about 250 grand a year. Funny thing is she was well aware that what she was doing could have been handled by one of the secretaries on staff. It went on for about 5 years and then when facing the need to cut the budget someone figured out my friend wasn’t providing any service that couldn’t be handled in-house. You can look at that budget savings and freak out or you can look at it and see it as a no-brainer. Businesses don’t have to run for re-election so they can ignore the the panic brigade.

  378. 378
    dustycrickets says:

    Some Right Wing spin…..via Kos

    “Such internal squabbling comes at the same time that many prominent Democrats seem to be privately expressing concern about the direction the “netroots”—the self-described Internet grassroots movement of liberal bloggers and their loyal followers—are taking the Party. This seemingly inconvenient planetary alignment is not only threatening the long-term viability of this crusade, but also is putting Kos in an uncomfortable position just as his notoriety is skyrocketing. …

    Such a civil war within the liberal blogosphere certainly has the potential to further discredit it, while likely making the mainstream media as well as the candidates they revere less apt to associate with this developing train wreck.”

    Translation..This good for McCain.

  379. 379
    S. Marchio says:

    The comments are far too long for me to read through them all, so forgive me if something along these lines has been presented, but really we should take some of what FDL has said to heart. It is the same thing that happens when people attack public pensions and the like as too unrealistic because we have been accustomed to so little. Maybe Obama could not have accomplished more with the “no” republicans, but he could have at least tried. Maybe he did,but he never verbalizes it.

  380. 380
    Lawguy says:

    Yes FDR was more conservative than some or maybe many, but as it was said he move to the left shortly after 33. Frances Perkins was a major influence on him as was his wife, both of whom were to his left.

    When he moved back to the right economically in 37, he screwed the pooch.

    However, he did crack down on Wall Street and I do not see your guy doing anything at all like that.

    At any rate FDR had no president to look to who had come before him and dealt the the economy in the way he did. Obama did have a president who had gone before him who had fixed the economy, he just chose instead to look to Ronnie Raygun, who screwed the middle class and workers, not FDR.

  381. 381

    they want republicans in control. they need a foil to bring in the bucks.

  382. 382
    Kane says:

    President Obama has accomplished so much in such a short period of time, I think some forget how much has actually been accomplished. One can disagree with the policies. One can argue that certain polices haven’t gone far enough. But the long list of legislative accomplishments of this president in a short period of time, and all in the face of republican obstruction, is quite amazing.

    I don’t agree with President Obama on every policy decision, but as an adult, I understood that going in. Presidential legacies are complex. There has never been a politician that makes their constituen­­­­cy happy all the time. You take the good with the bad, and in the end, hope that it all comes out in the best interest of the country.

  383. 383
    Corner Stone says:

    @Kane: Slurp…slurp…slurp

  384. 384
    ABL says:

    kay sees it as I do. Obama is signaling that he’s willing to accept program-cuts-that-are-not-benefit-cuts. Case in point: Medicare in the HCR discussion. Everyone from the media to professional politicians to amateur bloviators in the blogosphere has been lumping all “cuts” together. It’s not that hard to understand, unless you’re deliberately wanting to stoke a kerfuffle, or you’re just a dimwit who doesn’t understand simple yet important terms common to every recent policy discussion that includes numbers and quantities, like most political reporters.

    it’s amazing how simple and accurate a point this is.

  385. 385
    ABL says:

    I don’t see how it helps Obama to do anything other than make it crystal clear that he intends no cuts whatsoever, in any semantic sense, to SS or Medicare.

    ooh ooh pick me!

    this is an election season. he’s trying to woo the middle. if he looks like he’s willing to negotiate the left predictable chimes in with “omg he’s putting social security on the table, let’s all freak out!” then you get what’s been happening over the past few days which is Dems all over the MSM promising to save social security for their constituents. they get gold stars.

    on the other side of the aisle, republicans come back with “we’re not raising taxes” and “ryan plan 4-evah.” their constituents no likey.

    the right is intransigent. the left is freaking out that obama is compromising again. given that the middle likes bipartisanship, which side is the centrist voter going to lean towards? certainly not the side that is hell-bent on maintaining give-aways to the rich. and why, the fact that the left is apoplectic about whateverthehell obama is doing surely means he’s giving up something that the left likes, right? i’m voting for obama.

    meanwhile obama hasn’t given up diddlysquat. he screwed boehner over in the budget fight in april. and now boehner has already come out and said, essentially, that the Tea Party needs to quit fucking around with the debt ceiling.

    but don’t mind me, i’m just the resident obamalover and i would say or do anything for My Dear Leader mostly cuz i’m blackity black.

    (edited to add link)

  386. 386
    Genghis says:

    Link doesn’t work.

    Best…H

  387. 387
    Just Some Fuckhead says:

    Sorry for causing another shitstorm. I was drinking scotch.

  388. 388
    Yutsano says:

    Sorry for causing another shitstorm.

    Yer not sorry. You just want this post to get to 400. Which being an admirable goal I decided to assist you in that ambition.

  389. 389
    Just Some Fuckhead says:

    Yer not sorry. You just want this post to get to 400. Which being an admirable goal I decided to assist you in that ambition.

    I’ve always believed size doesn’t matter.

  390. 390
    Yutsano says:

    I’ve always believed size doesn’t matter.

    Tunch chooses to disagree with you. And we all know his is the only opinion that matters.

  391. 391
    Malcolm says:

    Well, Cole, I guess I’ve got you and your fellow Obamabots to thank for Obama trying to cut my Medicare and Social Security so the Rich can get tax cuts. Gawd, you’re awesome, dude! How do you Centrist SOBs plan to screw us next? I’ll admit I do have to give you a tip of the hat for the extension of the Patriot Act. Sweet.. And for taking care of my Wall Street pals. Punch a hippy for me,too, will you John?
    A$$hat.

  392. 392

    This is what I just posted on that thread:

    “you have to be the most mean spirited, disgruntled, and unrealistic people I have ever met” (part of another comment I was replying to)

    Bravo! This is the best description of Firebaggers I have ever seen.

    Oh, and you can add to that “paranoid,” because the instant anybody disagrees with them (and does so intelligently, with facts) they accuse the person of being a Daily Kos troll.

    It’s as if their tiny little brains can’t comprehend the fact that some adults in the room think they’re full of it.

    Let’s see if that gets me banned. Har.

  393. 393
    Poopyman says:

    Hey, since this is the post that refuses to die, I’ll just chime in that Boehner folded. What will those wily Republicans ever do now?

    And I love ya JSF, but everybody knows you can create shitstorms sans scotch.

  394. 394
    Steaming Pile says:

    Imagine this news item:

    August 6th, 2013 – Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dies of stroke. President Pawlenty to decide soon on replacement. Court goes to 6:3 conservative split.

    Would that scare the living shit out of you? Probably not if you’re a firebagger.

  395. 395

    @Steaming Pile 394:

    Nope. I would reckon that it would not scare the FBers one bit.

    Hell, the thought of more conservative judges on the Supreme Court didn’t scare the Naderites in 2000, either. One of them even told me that the Supreme Court did not matter, and any fears were groundless.

    Of course, we all know who decided the 2000 election.

  396. 396
    pwc says:

    What we need to discuss is why BHO is not as good as the BHO we want.

    An earnest troll, defender of Hamsher, wrote this. That’s it. We can no longer parody them. (As good?? lol. Yes, they wrote “as good,” non-ironically!)

  397. 397
    John G says:

    If I could fucking kill you, John, I would. Gladly.

  398. 398
    Sharl says:

    398

  399. 399
    Sharl says:

    399

  400. 400
    Sharl says:

    400

    {Sbeesh, commenters here used to be reliable in matters like this. Must I do everything?!}

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

Comments are closed.