I’ve been trying to understand what the point of the Sadly, No post was about.

Disappointing once you boil it down to specifics.

Gas tax legislation is harmful to Iraq withdrawl?

1. How dare you badmouth the creative class
2. How dare you praise Hillary’s populism

And sadly, yes they are in the tank for Obama. But not usually in the mindless way that many Obamabots are. For example, Brad was shocked by all the misogyny directed at Clinton, when it was pointed out by Melissa McEwan at Shakespeare’s Sister. But reading this latest post and its associated comments was highly depressing.

It’s like they don’t acknowledge that there are poor people in America. Oh sure, there are people in poverty, but it isn’t so bad that $30 would help them out. Besides, they argue, if you save $30 on the gas tax holiday, you’re obviously driving too much to be considered poor! The outright dismissal of the fact that some people in America are helped out by as little as $30 is disconcerting. It really bespeaks of a narrowed world view in which most people are like me, and those that are in different circumstances can’t really be all that different.

… on “syrup sandwich.” I mean, I used to go there for the writing. Is there a memo on this I didn’t get?

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

They think I think Stoller’s gay? Do I need to change any of the wording? Anyhow, if I’d bothered to find out, I wouldn’t have cared, as long as he doesn’t frighten the horses. It’s what he writes that bugs me.

Maybe only gay people drink latte? Could that be it?

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

I asked the other day if anyone could remember the last time the MSM became so personally involved in bashing a relatively minor campaign promise? Every news channel pushes the narative that “THERE ARE NO ECONOMISTS THAT THINK THIS IS A GOOD IDEA!!!!” and “ISN’T SHE PANDERING???”.

“After decades in which any taxation — even, and maybe especially, taxation of the coddled robber barons — was treated as the highest blasphemy in America’s heartland, she’s making economic equity sound like not such a terrible idea.”

I submit that the only reason they are coming to the rescue of big bidness and pushing this pandering narrative is because she is starting to make an economic equity argument that could resonate with folks, especially poor folk. And the robber barons never want to see that happen.

to mock the idea that $30 helps anyone?

And that you’ve experienced hard times.

But what do I know?

Good point, friend Ludd, but when is the next peasant revolt against our faggot coffee overlords taking place?

And you’re somehow calling Stoller gay?

**I have no fucking clue

Heyyyy! Edited my comment and it moved it down the tread…

is, I believe, the line.

Not everyone who has been anti-Bush is also a progressive - or even a liberal. Plenty of conservatives and libertarians have turned against Bush, and many of them are enamored of Obama. Not on a political basis, but because backing him allows them to feel good about themselves.

Lambert caused them discomfort, and there’s nothing a latte-swilling creative elitist hates more than being uncomfortable. So they squeal.

Do it again, please.

Which is interesting in that it really is a disaster - another unfunded tax cut that will deprive us of infrastructure money.

If it’s Obama vs. McCain, I think there’s a chance that the gas tax holiday passes. It’s simply too appealing to too many struggling households.

That’s the political reality that the Ivory Tower types are ignoring. It’s not about what’s the best policy in the abstract. It’s about the best policy in a democracy. McCain vs. Obama means that the gas tax is the central issue, and I think McCain might win that debate, despite the fact that McCain is wrong and Obama is right. McCain vs. Hillary means that the profits of the oil companies are the central issue, and I am certain that Hillary wins that debate, and she is right.

The Obama folks are letting the perfect be the enemy of the good here.

In what sense is Obama perfect?

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

I’m saying that the Obama supporters’ insistence on the “right” policy ignores the fact that “wrong” policies frequently can and do pass. McCain’s gas tax holiday looks to me an awful lot like one of those bad policies that can pass.

…nothing.

1. It’s easy to advocate for something when (even if you and your former President husband disagreed with it back in 2000) when you know damn well it will never become law.

2. As the people here in the Mighty Corrente Building are very smart, most among you have to understand micro-economics. YES, politics (pandering) may trump, but logicially - what will happen if gas prices are cut by 18 cents?

Consumption will go up, supply will go down, therefore, prices will drift right back to the point where we started.

Oh yeah, then add that 18 cents back in the Fall.

In the Fall, consumption will lessen, supply will increase, and the prices will drift again back to the equilibrium point.

The issue is - where does the money come from to cover the loss of income to the infrastructure?

Clinton says, tax oil companies’ windfall profits. And where do you (honestly) think the oil companies will shift that cost? They certainly won’t take it on themselves if they can avoid it. They’ll increase the price of gas - thus, shifting the Fed gas tax to an oil company windfall tax.

More importantly - truly - does anyone think this idea will become law? Does Clinton think it will become law? — I’d like that question asked of her.

Of course, if it was asked, I doubt we’d get an answer.

The Bill of Rights is a born rebel. It reeks with sedition. In every clause it shakes its fist in the face of constituted authority… . it is the one guaranty of human freedom to the American people. - Frank Irving Cobb

Did you not read the memo? Do try to keep up.

Weird. -gate is reserved for scandal, and where am I writing about that? How could a sum as trivial as $30 matter to anyone. The audacity!

Again, it’s like somebody kidnapped the guys who used to write so well. That’s a terrible headline. And I really liked that place.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

This gimmick, and it is a gimmick, is a trial balloon for populist policies that:

a) Benefit folks on the lower rungs of society
b) Rekindle interest in shifting some of our economic burdens onto our most coddled and elephantine corporations

Despite what Obama endlessly says about shrill, bickering lefties in Congress — who, he tells us, are the “perverse” equal of the radical right — the national conversation has completely shunned this kind of leveling of the playing field for decades.

How dare Hillary harsh the ruling-class mellow by imagineering technocratic solutions to economic inequality! Definitely time to circle the economists’ wagons and stamp this sort of thing out while we still can!

This debate is not about policy but about identity.

And the kind of identity politics promoted by the Conservative movement which is all about creating false divisions among groups of people who, if they got together, could bring about good policy.

Examples

S,N!: making fun of people who could use $30 is stupid.

Lambert: “latte-sipping liberal elitist” is the standard definition of a right-wing meme, isn’t it?

Now it’s “Chablis-drinking limousine liberal.” An unimpeachable source tells me that it’s perfectly acceptable to call Democrats that.

The guys there are awfully talented, awfully smart, and (IMHO) genuinely liberal. I love love love S,N!, but as this primary season has rolled on, I’ve had to walk away, tragically. I think that one of the things that has happened is their usual targets - wingnuts on parade on teh interweb - are losing their sh*t over Obama’s candidacy, or even existence, in such colorful explosions, it’s hard to resist going back for the comedy crack they offer.

But I think something happens when you read too much of that, even if for professional purposes, and you have some level of enthusiasm for Obama to begin with.

All kinds of horrible spew is coming out of Right Blogistan about the anointed one, so it was a natural progression, I think, that in their hunt for the juiciest, looniest content day after day, they simply traveled a path strewn with toxic weeds, and it started getting under their skin. I’ll be very very glad to return to reading S,N! (and several other sites) after the GE. (Or maybe not - maybe the fun will just be beginning in January ’09).

That’s why I feel like I’m watching a freaking divorce.

I do think they are genuinely progressive/liberal, TonyRZ. (Some of) their writers have chosen to be Obama supporters so that is the place they are writing from.

What I see happening all over Left Blogistan, is folks using their rhetorical weapons, sharpened through years of battling right-wingers, against each other.

Much better. :)

You write:

“… latte-sipping liberal elitist… ”

Who said they were liberal? That idea went out the window a long time ago with the Harry & Louise ads that Obama ran, which poisoned the well for universal health care in the general.

And, as I keep saying to those who confuse “elitist” with rich, elitism isn’t about what you have, it’s about your attitude toward those who don’t have what you have.

I love good food, I love good wine, I love latte, in fact. But I also know that there are times when the post-dot-com menu I outline is an absolute necessity. Has been for me once, will be again. Same with Susie. And the Obama commenters, and the Boiz seem remarkably concerned to deny all that, and to mock those who are poor, and all based on whatever they retained from Econ 101. Susie has a great category for that, called “Fuck the poor.” And there’s a word for that attitude, I just know…

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

Methinks.

I’m a regular reader, a never-commenter.

They’ve been leaning toward Obama, but they have complained, as often as they’ve praised Obama, about the idiocy of the competing factions in this race. They are good guys. Like we are. We disagree about something, but we shouldn’t forget we’re on the same side, ultimately. (I see no signs that they are disgruntled Republicans of gruntled libertarians.)

Although they are almost always funny, they are not always right. In this case, I think they fail on both scores, especially in the nature of the personal attack they are making on someone despite not knowing a thing about his personal circumstances.

And that’s despite the fact that I don’t much like Clinton’s proposal myself, for complicated reasons, one in particular, I haven’t seen discussed much elsewhere. But there is also no question that the media has gone to town on this one - and come up with one of their most deeply held and beloved tropes - that it is a test of authenticity for all politicians that they not tell voters what the pundits think voters want to hear, especially, especially, when it’s about measures that might make life more secure, less work-filled, and more equitable for both the middle and the working classes. I’ve left off the poor because except for John and Elizabeth Edwards, and a few black activists and preachers, no one talks to poor folks anymore. And yes, middle and working class folks can find themselves suddenly poor because of circumstances.

I started to read the comments thread over there, but gave up; having been a social worker I’ve heard enough for several lifetimes of successful folks who’ve not yet experienced the kind of game-changing circumstances that can humble anyone’s perspective, lecturing the less fortunate on how they can, by more spit and more grit, become among the fortunate classes - whether it’s “find another better job,” or “don’t have so many children,” or “take better care of yourself and maybe you won’t get sick”…and on on…

I think VL makes some good points.

I’m less happy with the Obama is an elitist analysis that has become a staple here at Corrente, but now that I’ve begun to post again, we can talk about that anon.

I would say this much. I have no doubt that a majority of white working class voters would be willing to vote for Obama, but he has to ask clearly for their votes and be just as clear about why they should vote for him. Too often this issue is framed as a fault of racism among these voters, rather than a failure of the Obama campaign to reach out to them, and not only by the SCLM, who has spent decades overlooking the resurgent racism upon which the right-wing has built it’s conservative movement/moment, by SCLblogs, as well.

Could we remember, for a moment, that Jessie Jackson in 1988 spent a whole year courting white rural voters and white urban working class voters, and he convinced an awful lot of them that the rainbow coalition represented a real kind of unity.

Did I inadvertly aid Lambert in starting “RamenGate”? Sooou-weeeeeeeeet! (even though its really salty)

This is beautiful. Do they realize how much they are embarrassing themselves now?

Discuss. [back to work on the unemployment inducing dissertation]

Who are they attacking personally? Moi? My heart’s going pit-a-pat, because they’re double our size and we can always use the hits.

It comes with the territory—within reason, that stops with Malkin-esque maneuvers and DOS attacks—and it’s part of calling bullshit.

I just don’t think the post is a good job of calling bullshit, that’s all. Wrong on the points made, general “Fuck the poor” attitude — add them to the list of people the OFB has thrown overboard — and writing that’s a lot less excellent than I expect from S/N (“Ramen-gate”? Where’s the scandal?) And the deterioration reminds me of, well, posting a doctored video of what turned out to be copyrighted material without either checking provenance or getting a transcript. And what would be the common factor there? (And if there’s an equivalent example on the Hillary side, leaving aside the raw partisans like Johnson or Marsh, I’d like to have one.)

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

The OFB are in full melt-down.

I can just picture them with cheeto residue caked around their nostrils, waving paint-ball guns and screaming “Say hello to my little friend!

————————————————————————
Real ponies don’t oink- Patrick McManus

C’mon, myiq, this isn’t the crack den. Give some links and do some analyis. I like one liners as much as the next guy, but let’s not get all self-congratulatory.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

this?

when someone like Atrios calls himself DFH, he really means DFY. He, like apparently most of the commenters at SN and so many of the ’creative class’ apparently don’t know the difference between a DFH and a DFY.

Here’s a hint for Aristophenes at SN in case he is still in doubt…

The Democratic nomination process has become surreal. To the point where I really can’t tell if this post from Lambert of Corrente is a joke:

Of course it wasn’t a joke but a serious attempt to demonstrate the absurdity that Obama has let McCain completely grab the populist rug from underneath him.

Obama can continue to campaign as teh prinicipled one but it didn’t sell in Scranton or Erie, won’t sell in Muncie and by the time the general election comes around (if Precious One is the nominee), will get creamed by McCain in America’s heartland.

Apparently it is more audacity to hope for a $30 tax rollback than Obama can cope with.

As long as they continue to act that the reason that Obama is tanking big time is because of Jeremiah Wright, then they completely miss the real impact of the stupidity of ’bitter’, ’cling’, ’guns’, ’religion’, and of course that incisive commentary by Axelrod how the white working class doesn’t vote for Democrats anyway.

Good point, friend Ludd, but when is the next peasant revolt against our faggot coffee overlords taking place? I have my own pitchfork and I hate mechanical looms and espresso contraptions with unnatural gears and steam vents and such.

Keep the pitchfork handy…

so missed the “let them eat cake” ribaldry.

If drinking latte’s make you gay then maybe I have a chance with Hillary? Now if someone could slip her some latte’s…….

I was so upset on so many levels over this whole NC thing that my son said, “mom, just go into politics”
I said oh I couldn’t….I’m too in your face about stuff, I’d never make it as a politician, no one would leave the bathrooms so that the committees could get done…..I mean I did try to start a food drive for the female commentators out there…One bag of rice can feed a female commentator for a year….but it was rejected (too fattening).

*tap*tap*tap*

I just want to do something mean like terrorize tiny ants with a big magnifying glass….

*tap*tap*tap*

I think part of it is that blacks voted 91% for Obama, that’s not normal, that’s racist.

So after all my high falutin liberal BSing ways, the party I fought so hard for, harbors a block of people based entirely on skin tone, who will vote only for skin tone, that is extraordinarily racist.
This is not good folks. This is bad.

I miss Linda Ellerbee, I think she is the only one would could calm me down right now.

and so it goes…………

“The great divide in this country is not by race or even income, it’s by those who think they are better than everyone else and think they should play by a different set of rules,” —Bill Clinton

shystee said,

May 7, 2008 at 6:37

DA, Brad and Gavin,

Good to see you could take a whole day off from attacking right-wingnuts to attack a C-list progressive blog.

Nice work, bitches.

What fun they had, too! I never did read the whole thing, because first paragraphs were so off point, prolix, and sloppy — how unlike the S/N of old — that I didn’t bother to read to the end.

The word “progressive” has been contaminated for me by the Boiz. I think I’ll stick with plain old liberal.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.