amazing thing is how quickly everyone has been able to say "I told you so". You could even start before he was inaugurated with the pastor disaster.

I was going to post on this, but I figured I'd sleep on it so as not to respond to the post in the same manner in which the post was written (i.e. petulant attacks).

Kids these days...

don't always know best.

Sirota's mistake was the nasty crap and personal attacks, but it was prevalent. Those guys had nothing else except hopey, dopey change. Obama and Hillary weren't that far apart on policies (if you could actually figure out what his were), but where she was long on goals and possible solutions, he was king of the blather. She had seen it all and had experience. She had been dealt quite a few blows, but remained standing and strong. He was in the right place at the right time.

Now, reality has kicked in and the Sirotas of the world have no defense. Instead, they resort to throwing their litte tantrums. I mean, how immature was that litte rant?!! No wonder he can't see the forest for the trees.

Sirota needs to go the corner and have a time out and be honest about the politcal landscape for a change. Grow up, dude.

from the campaign last year that found 43% of men feel anger or anxiety at the thought of a woman in the White House as president, and 48% of men felt anger or anxiety at the thought of Hillary Clinton as president.
http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_...

I know of not a single issue where Clinton consistently voted to the right of Obama's votes - this is a little hard to judge because he ducked out of a lot votes that they were compared on. So, this idea that Obama is to the left of Clinton on anything is bizarre in the extreme. There was no issue in his platform where he more progressive than her and quite a few where he was to the right of her.

I just think Sirota is one of those guys who cannot deal with the idea of a woman as president. So, supporting an African American allows him to keep his progressive street cred in order while engaging in bigotry the likes of which we haven't seen since the heyday of racism in the fifties.

is not only alive and well in America, it shamelessly thrives among Fauxgressives.

... I'm never brutal enough in my parodies.

"Sheer personal awesomeness"?

Paper towel, David?

Off topic, but not really (or only slightly): "New Zealand Maori win haka fight." Hmm, did they win haka by doing haka? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7882775.stm

on how self-serving this is:

I just think Sirota is one of those guys who cannot deal with the idea of a woman as president. So, supporting an African American allows him to keep his progressive street cred in order while engaging in bigotry the likes of which we haven't seen since the heyday of racism in the fifties.

Thanks. Just that. I keep trying to come up with an idea for "Sorry News" but I'm too overwhelmed these days. (That's my story, and I'm sticking to it! It can't be that I'm just less observant than you are!)

[Just how vast is your conspiracy, anyway? Really vast, I'm thinking!]

Is where on Tuesday, he's telling Clintonites and Naderites (all of them! Because if one emailed him to say I Told You So, they all did!) to STFU because they lost and they're bitter and nobody wants to hear what they have to say ...

... and then on Wednesday, he's whiningly accusing Nate Silver of "telling progressives to STFU:"

This is neither the time nor the place for those who say America should STFU and simply take orders, and this is not the time for "expert opinion" if "expert opinion" is (as the term always is) defined as "Establishment opinion." We've been there, done that, and gotten shitted on because we took this kind of advice for way too long. It's time that mass movements assert their will, and if there's any set of people who should STFU, it shouldn't be mass movements, as Silver suggests - it should be power-worshiping sycophants of the eliteocracy.

So it's uncivil and undemocratic to tell a group to STFU, but only when David belongs to the group being told (or so he imagines) to STFU.

The Clinton argument, in particular, is so utterly stupid and silly. A big part of what Obama has to do right now is clean up after Clintonism.

...

Among Clintonites, the "I Told You So" rants are just straight-up sore-loser-ism. Unable to accept that a first-term senator defeated their candidate who had every single advantage, they cannot embrace the new president, even as that new president (wrongly, IMHO) appoints her to a top position in his administration.

3. To Clintonites, just STFU and slither back to your rathole of bitterness. Your candidate lost because she helped create the problems we now have to fix. Deal with that and become a productive member of society, or again, just STFU.

Really? I actually don't know where to go with this; I'm speechless. I'm not sure how he could possibly redeem himself from this. This isn't something he mistakenly said in anger. It's more than apparent that he means all of this with every fiber of his being.