If you have "no place to go," come here!

2012 Obama fans shaping up to be worse than 2008's

Citizen K slams down the racist card, right in the lead:

That The Nation is debating Ron Paul is an indication of how much the election of a black man as US President has unhinged a number of white guys who think of themselves as deserving a place in the elite - whether they call themselves "leftists" or "rightists".

Well, I don't blame them. The racist card is the only card they have to play, so that's what they do.

They really need to come up with a better scam. Hopey change won't work twice, so I wonder what it will be?

No votes yet


nihil obstet's picture
Submitted by nihil obstet on

That's their line. He tried to work with the Republicans, but they were too obstructive. Now, he'll just be progressive, because that's what he is in his heart. All Obamabots know that.

He doesn't need the full Hopey dope this time, because he's not being primaried. The Republican field is so ghastly that all he has to do is scare people into not bolting to third party. So meanwhile he'll do some little mainly symbolic stuff like the recess appointment of Cordray to the Consumer Finance Protection Agency which will be trumpeted as bold leadership. He'll do minor kabuki warrior -- not even major kabuki warrior, because that would hurt the banksters' fee-fees.

As for his miserable record, look at the attacks on Greenwald over at Salon for pointing out the Peace Laureate's destruction of civil liberties. His atrocious record shouldn't be discussed because, gasp, that helps Republicans and they're so much worse.

zot23's picture
Submitted by zot23 on

I was firmly in the camp of sitting out '12 and letting Obama sink or swim on his own, but between him or one of these ghouls I would have to hold my nose with both hands and vote for the O again. Had it been Romney or a standard robo-R in the race I would not care (what's the difference?), but Santorum? Gingrich? Cain? Ugh, these are fates worse than death. Letting those freaks into the presidency would be cutting off my nose to spite my face. If it was GWB running against one of those crazy asses I would have voted for him too, there truly are greater and lesser evils in this world.

At the same time, even if I voted for O my time, energy, and money will be flowing to OWS next year. That's where the real hope lies.

Submitted by lambert on

Obama has different class and cultural markers, that's all. Like any ghoul, he feasts on the dead; he just uses the right fork and raises his pinkie.

Roman Berry's picture
Submitted by Roman Berry on

Walter Wit Man had this as part of a reply over there:

The problem is that the Democratic party is a far right conservative party. So implicit in the criticism is the idea that liberals are claiming to be one thing but are actually doing another thing in practice–if they vote for Democrats.

So you may be against war in theory, but if you voted for the Democrats/Obama, you are actually pro war. Not only pro war, but pro war crimes and endless wars. You don’t get to pretend to be against war and war crimes and then vote FOR Obama.

Unless you are pro war, pro indefinite detention, pro assassination, pro Wall Street bankster, pro Social Security cutter, pro FISA, pro USA PATRIOT Act and...well...I think you see where I am going with this, try voting for someone who actually believes in what you believe in.

For me to hold my nose and vote for Obama would be to consent to and support a whole raft of things that I find not just merely objectionable but absolutely abhorrent. I will not support him. And I won't worry excessively if the candidate from the other wing of The Money Party gets in either. Nothing much gets done without the acquiescence of Democrats if that happens, and if they acquiesce, then you know they approve and it would have happened anyway. In fact, I posit that with Obama in the White House after 2012, a great deal of what you fear from Republicans will happen faster than if there is a Republican in the White House.

Obama's presence in the White House guts liberal/progressive/Democratic opposition, no matter what he does. It's the ratchet effect in play:

The electoral ratchet permits movement only in the rightward direction. The Republican role is fairly clear; the Republicans apply the torque that rotates the thing rightward.

The Democrats' role is a little less obvious. The Democrats are the pawl. They don't resist the rightward movement -- they let it happen -- but whenever the rightward force slackens momentarily, for whatever reason, the Democrats click into place and keep the machine from rotating back to the left.

Here's how it works. In every election year, the Democrats come and tell us that the country has moved to the right, and so the Democratic Party has to move right too in the name of realism and electability. Gotta keep these right-wing madmen out of the White House, no matter what it takes. ... So now the Democrats have moved to the "center." But of course this has the effect of shifting the "center" farther to the right.

Now, as a consequence, the Republicans suddenly don't seem so crazy anymore -- they're closer to the center, through no effort of their own, because the center has shifted closer to them. So they can move even further right, and still end up no farther from the "center" than they were four years ago.

On issue after issue, Obama has moved Democrats firmly into what was far right Republican territory. As a result of having no counter actually trying to move things leftward, Republicans, seeing that Obama is in effect occupying their positions from as recently as a few years back, have no choice but to move even further to the right in order to be to the right of Obama (who as far as I can see is solidly to the right of Nixon and Reagan and pretty much step for step in terms of policy if not rhetoric with Dubya.) And Obama is following them there. To vote for Obama is to further enable that rightward shift.

Submitted by Alcuin on

Thunderous applause ...