What a clusterfuck.

The nomination is Obama’s. I’ve called my shot.

And I agree…Obama’s gonna pick someone other than Hillary.

Who is now the question.

CRY

Not normal tears…I’m talking uncontrollable sobbing.

Watch it and weep.

This is just nuts. You make two enormous leaps here: from what Obama actually said to the ’dolchstosslegende’ (i.e., the notion that opponents of the war caused us to lose); and from there to, I guess, putting old people out on ice floes to die. The text simply does not support your interpretation.

… This is like an Op-Ed piece, as opposed to an analytical, data-driven piece, or a quick hit. Leaps are OK! Vivid memes, too — glad to see that “ice floes,” for example, which I from your comment has already begun to propagate. Call it “nuts,” if you will…

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

Sure, whatever. But when you claim somebody said something they didn’t actually say, and extrapolate from what they didn’t say a set of policies they haven’t actually embraced, it looks a little…deranged.

The craziest Obama supporters see the Clinton inside their heads, not the real Clinton. Seems to me you’re looking at the Obama inside your own head.

In context of the Webb GI bill which Obama has been hammering McCain over this makes perfect sense. The military these days, not an inconsiderable chunk of the electorate, is just as fed up with the War in Iraq and never ending deployments.

I don’t expect the paranoid Lambert to get that, he’s gone way over the bend into “Obama’s a manchurian candidate!” flailing, seeing Barack as nothing more than Reagan in sheep’s clothing.

And what the hell brings on uncontrollable sobbing from a video of Obama talking on the phone on a plane? Seriously wtf?

but I think I’m with Tom Hilton on your point #1, Lambert. Stab-in-the-back is going too far, IMHO. But I agree with your points 2 and 3, although I’m not sure about point 4. I think in some ways you’re overanalyzing the OFB, who I think just wanted to back a winner who could “beat the bitch.” They’re not committed to any particular ideology other than bitch-beating, which is why they’ll probably have no problem back-flipping around the hard way to embrace Obama’s center-right platform and governing strategy (especially if Clinton is not on the ticket.)

I agree with you on your major point, which is that there won’t be a unity ticket (although I think there’s a possibility that it will be forced on Obama by the Supers). I don’t think he’s confident enough to put her on his ticket without coercion, and moreover (and perhaps moreso) he’s really not confident enough to have Bill Clinton lurking around the OVP or his administration in any way. (Maybe if Bill drops dead of a massive MCI this summer, in which case Obama could benefit from sympathy and nostalgia by putting Hillary Clinton on his ticket.) Otherwise, I don’t think it will happen.

These are Obama’s, complete with “some say” locution:

Too many of those who opposed the war in Vietnam chose to blame not only the leaders who ordered the mission, but the young men who simply answered their country’s call.

And who, one wonders, would the “too many” be? And then you would ask, why make this remark now? Surely, if the battles of the 90s are to be put behind us, the battles of the 60s should be, as well? But then, I’ve been taught to be cynical…

You might add the link to aimai….

UPDATE Oh, anyone want to focus on the central thesis of the post?

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

…that Steve M has an excellent post defending Obama’s comments, to which Aimai responds [in comments to Steve’s post] with a reasonable and persuasive case against what Obama said. Both are well worth reading.

The image of a man preening in front of a bunch of bobbleheaded journalists…

all the while the left has been bemoaning the press’ treatment of McCain.

As has been said…

the netroots has squandered it’s media critique.

For what?

Come November, you’ll be sobbing right here with me markg8.

I’m kind enough to offer you a tissue when that happens, my friend.

That’s why it’s wrong to claim that someone is saying something he isn’t actually saying. To characterize what Obama said as ’Dolchstosslegende’ is to do extreme violence to language.

Edited my prior comment to clarify: Aimai’s response was in comments to Steve’s post.

is nothing compared to the extreme violence done to vital Democratic issues, principles, and policies.

I won’t even bring up the extreme violence of the language used to paint the Clintons as evil racists, and her as evil—and the language used to denigrate millions of Democrats.

I see a man talking on the cellphone being distracted by people yelling (not at all clear they are journalists yelling or videoing him with a phone) at a secret service agent to sit down. He puts his foot up on an armrest and then turns his back to the camera. How you extrapolate that to “preening” something to do with “bemoaning the press’ treatment of McCain” and/or the “the netroots has squandered it’s media critique” I don’t know.

Obama is the presumptive Democratic nominee with a very good shot to be the next president. He’s gonna get a lot of attention.

because I don’t like the guy, and I don’t believe for a second he’s going to be anything but one of the worst presidents in history, and the worst Democratic president since Buchanan.

Taking that swipe at boomers who opposed the war is just so hurtful. I think he wants to antagonize us.

I’m a self-employed 53 year old with no health insurance. I’m not gonna get it if Obama’s the president - that’s clear. He’s already letting us know he won’t withdraw from Iraq - so soldiers and Marines will keep dying. So, what’s the essential difference between he and McCain? I don’t think there is much difference between how the two would ultimately govern,

IF he is the nominee. But regardless, Clinton has the math to approve the VP nominee, if not force herself on the ticket. Just like Kerry had to pick Edwards, Dole had to pick Kemp, Clinton had to pick Gore, Reagan had to pick Bush, Kennedy had to pick Johnson, etc., etc..

Likewise, if Clinton is the nominee, Obama would have his choice of approving the choice if not forcing himself on the ticket.

This is political reality, both candidates ignore it at their peril.

——————————————-

Good night and good riddance!

He will offer it to her very publicly and she will decline.

Then he will go with a conservative white guy, possibly military—trust me on this. He won’t even pick Richardson.

He would lose the HillaryHaters (his second largest constituency) and he knows she’d play Cheney the ventriloquist to his G-Dub the Dummy.

Plus, purging Hillary and Bill from the party is the goal of his establishment eleet backers.

—————————————————————————
“We must separate loyal party members from counter-revolutionaries. The first shall inherit our glorious future. The second must be purged from us and history” -Mao Zedong

And I’ve committed to vote for him if (as is very likely) he gets the nomination. But a Republican VP is a big, big problem for me.

markg8.

How you extrapolate that to “preening” something to do with “bemoaning the press’ treatment of McCain” and/or the “the netroots has squandered it’s media critique” I don’t know.

You have not been paying attention in class.

Let’s start with the title of the video:

Sen. Barack Obama surprises the press corps by wearing jeans.

Now read Bob Somerby - Part 4 specifically.

But should senior brass from our biggest news orgs be scoring tickets for all that big fun? To their credit, a few major scribes (Joe Klein and the late Lars-Erik Nelson, for example) wrote pointed pieces about the way their colleagues were misbehaving. But the clowning never stopped. Not on the bus, and now in the pages of the news orgs which were making this great man a saint.

Of course, at the same time they were clowning this way, they were inventing two years worth of tales about Gore. They made one man a demon—and one man a saint. We all know how Part One turned out.

The Dems now have their own McCain.

All show, no go.

Sorry, I would have to cut/paste that to get it right.

Isn’t this just the first shoe to drop regarding his “excesses” of the 60’s (oh, and 70’s too)? Reagan had “ideas” (who knew?) apparently as well. Maybe Barry can help bring us all together on those.

Certainly we won’t see any “divisive” talk about bringing the criminals in the current WH to justice for their crimes against the Constitution (let alone humanity).

But to your point 4, which I think is the most interesting. I agree completely. It dumbfounds me that this tsunami, designed to wreck the already tenuous broad coalition of the working class, limosine liberals (gentry aka “creative class”) and African Americans, has been created. I guess the PERCIEVED chance of inevitable Dem victory in Nov. got the gentry in a greedy high froth to remake the party in their image. And now, how dare the prols get in their way?

——————————————-

Good night and good riddance!

markg* at 11;47

“flailing” is precisely the word i would use to describe your comment here.

as for senator obama,

i doubt he has any emotional connection whatsoever with the experience of americans who served in vietnam and/or americans who opposed the vietnam war.

furthermore, it is not “the one vs the other” which obama employs to create a false dichotomy (in order to pander to the right).

you may recall there were a large number of veterans who returned after service in vietnam and then became vehement opponents of the war.

further still, the notion of solders who served in vietnam being mistreated is a myth - a right-wing myth by the way. obama is appropriating this myth for his own use, for his own political purposes.

the fact is that while some soldiers under some circumstances were harassed or treated rudely, these occurances where rare for a country of 250 million people.

there was never any mass effort to excoriate vietnam vets. in fact, there could not have been, simply because nearly every family in america had a vietnam vet in the family somewhere.

58,000 died in vietnam, but i believe somewhere over 2 million served in vietnam. these two million were spread through out the nation.

so, markg8

senator obama brings up and uses a right-wing argument and you, neo-right lefty, or is that neo-left righty, are all for it.

obama does not give a rat’s ass about american soldiers from iraq or vietnam. he cares about taking votes from mccain and showing his “soldier” side and “soldier sympathies” to mccain voters.

dukakis without the tank.

if he picks a Republican for VP, he’ll finally lose me, and lose even more loyal Dems than the many he’s already lost. I never have voted GOP and never will—i have held my nose in many elections but will not vote for any Democratic ticket that has a Republican on it— ever.

Doing that would be a dealbreaker beyond excusing. And it would alienate me from my party forever, leaving me with nowhere to go.

If Democratic bigshots allow any Republican on the ticket, then all hope is lost.

Like I said earlier in context of the Webb GI bill which Obama has been hammering McCain over this makes perfect sense. But it’s more than that. The military these days, active and retired, not an inconsiderable chunk of the electorate, is just as fed up with the War in Iraq and never ending deployments. Obama is trying to get their votes, the votes of anti-Vietnam and anti-Iraq War voters, and former GIs of any stripe by standing up for them.

A third of the homeless in this country are Vietnam vets. We’re creating another generation of soon to be ex-soldiers with the same problems, the same hidden or unhidden disabilities that we as a nation right, left and center had best not neglect this time. The damaged and wasted lives are individual tragedies. Collectively they are wounds on the soul of the nation and in cold hard financial terms if they can’t function in society are a drag on the economy.

We can’t expect the Pentagon to fight for them, the DoD has a tradition of shunning ex-soldiers in favor of funding new weapons for the next war. If anybody knows of a retired general who fought politically for benefits for his men after a war besides George Washington please let me know.

A lot of bitterness ex GIs have felt against the government since Vietnam is because they’ve been shafted time and time and again as the military fought against recognition and treatment for Agent Orange, Gulf War Syndrome, and now Traumatic Brain Injuries from IEDs. It plays right into the Republican meme that all government sucks and doesn’t work even though more often than not they’ve been the party cutting funding for these benefits.

It’s the right thing to do morally and economically, and yes smart politically for Obama
to try to bring us all together this time in support of vets young and old. The only losers will be Republican politicians who refuse to vote with us on these bills and a few big budget war profiteers and their enablers in the pentagon and congress.

If you’re trying to say the Dem presidential candidate is getting favorable media then I say it’s about time. OMG! He’s wearing jeans! That’s something to sob about?

and i hear McCain really only has 2 serious choices—Romney or Huckabee. The money people and noise machine want Romney, and for the base he needs Huckabee.

So whoever our pick is will probably push McCain one way or another too.

Obama supporters got this shit down pat baby.

LOL

It took you 5 paragraphs to explain one of Obama’s.

Good luck with that in the future.

If you’re trying to say the Dem presidential candidate is getting favorable media then I say it’s about time.

I predict massive cases of PTS come November.

do you really think Obama will be able to push ANY costly things thru with the GOP obstructing everything that doesn’t directly benefit the rich or their cronies? They’d probably demand the VA be privatized with the no-bid contracts going to their buddies in exchange for any support—or demand SS be privatized or something.

They don’t care if they get bad press for not helping vets or homeless vets or the VA, etc—only Congressional Dems care. The GOP brags about voting against SCHIP which was to help kids—vets rank far lower on their scale than even poor kids.

markg8 (13:04)

what you are doing is using the emotional power that attaches to speech about the destructiveness of war and the failure to properly medically treat returned soldiers

to rationalize your candidate’s pandering remarks to the right-wing.

in my view, your style of argumentation is as sly and manipulative of emotion as are senator obama’s original remarks about vietnam vets being hissed and dissed by war opponents.

and you do understand, don’t you, that senator obama has a far-left track record. his big job in the general election is to paint himself as the opposite of his record, so mccain can’t get a hold on him (wrestling terminology)

Who are “Too many” in the minds of the audience to which Obama is appealing? That’s the nut here — which mercg8’s diversionary tactics reveal quite clearly. (When he says “Look over here,” don’t. Look over there.)

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

“extreme violence to language” is nothing compared to the extreme violence done to vital Democratic issues, principles, and policies.

I won’t even bring up the extreme violence of the language used to paint the Clintons as evil racists, and her as evil—and the language used to denigrate millions of Democrats.

I understand that your perception of Obama is that he is so vile, so monstrous, that it excuses any misrepresentation of him by any of his opponents. I don’t agree with your perception, but more importantly I don’t agree that it excuses any such misrepresentation.

One other comment, and this one applies to a lot of people here (including Lambert): your perception of Obama is the exact mirror image of the frothing-at-the-mouth hatred of Clinton you (rightly) decry in the more deranged Obama supporters. Surely that should give you pause.

Points 1,2, and 3, but 4 not so much.

I think Obama will indeed go center right and a lot of the great programs will be at least watered down, some eliminated.

Obama will not repair the wounds to the Constitution and separation of powers.

As to #4: I want a third party and I think this election may well give rise to one. I’m sick of being told that I have nowhere else to go.

become 28 percenters like the people who, despite all evidence to the contrary, think Bush is doing a heckuva job?

Maybe we could start a pool. Because they won’t get what they think they’re getting. A few are starting to realize it, but they’re rationalizing it as okay.

————————————————————————
“We must separate loyal party members from counter-revolutionaries. The first shall inherit our glorious future. The second must be purged from us and history” -Mao Zedong

treatment and presumptions and pathologizing he gives her and Bill—and that he gives to all of Hillary’s voters.

I’m not giving him any benefit of the doubt, and in fact do always ascribe bad intentions and motivations—as he does with her, and as his supporters always do.

I intentionally will do that, and i do not hate him or believe him to be vile or monstrous at all. I know he has treated millions of loyal Democrats as vile and monstrous and racist and bitter, etc, so he gets the same treatment.

It’s only fair. If people won’t look in the mirror or realize they live in glass houses before they accuse so many others of being monstrous and vile, then they won’t get the benefit of the doubt and will be treated as they treat others.

I’ll ignore your assholishness for the moment and ask you if think this Rambo rant rings true or has ever rung for any part of the American electorate:

Nothing is over!!! Nothing!!! You just don’t turn it off! It wasn’t my war! You asked me, I didn’t ask you! And I did what I had to do to win! But somebody wouldn’t let us win! And I come back to the world and I see all those maggots at the airport, protesting me, spitting. Calling me baby killer and all kinds of crap! Who are they to protest me?! Who are they?! Unless they’ve been me and been there and know what the hell they’re yelling about!

Republicans have been shoving that speech up our ass with voters, some of whom weren’t even alive when the movie was made, let alone when the Vietnam War was fought, for decades. Whether any returning soldier was spit on or not is immaterial. They have successfully promoted the myth, that they and they only care about national security, our military and our soldiers. Even before Rambo they used it successfully against the B-24 pilot McGovern, Carter and his nuclear sub work, the marine Dukakis in his tank, Gore and his service in Nam and with the swiftboating of Kerry in 2004. Clinton was lucky enough to run at the end of the Cold War when Cheney and Powell were gutting our standing forces in Europe and we were in recession.

It’s an imperative that our nominee outflank the lapel pin nutcases and show that he’s not going to let it happen this time. Dems passed the GI bill over Repub objections late in WW11 and have been fighting for vets rights ever since. It’s about time the electorate knows that.

If that bothers you too bad.

You’re wandering far afield from Obama’s pandering to the rightwing.

Why am I not surprised. It’s hard to defend the indefensible.

———————————————————————
“We must separate loyal party members from counter-revolutionaries. The first shall inherit our glorious future. The second must be purged from us and history” -Mao Zedong

with the GOP obstructing everything that doesn’t directly benefit the rich or their cronies?

You’re presupposing the moribund GOP is going to be in any position to effectively oppose much of anything next year. I think we’re going to kick their butts in house and senate races and the only place they’ll be able contest a lot of issues over the next few years will be in the courts with all those activist judges they’ve appointed the last few decades.

before responding please.

I know he has treated millions of loyal Democrats as vile and monstrous and racist and bitter, etc, so he gets the same treatment.

How can this possibly be justified as a rational response? If the demonization of Clinton by some Obama supporters (which you impute to Obama himself; I disagree, but set that aside for the sake of argument) was wrong, how does responding with your own wrong—demonizing Obama—do anything other than make the situation worse?

Overconfidence Mode.

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

Many here already seem to be suffering from it.

n/t

“We must separate loyal party members from counter-revolutionaries. The first shall inherit our glorious future. The second must be purged from us and history” -Mao Zedong

I didn’t believe, I really didn’t believe, that mergg8 would go from Overconfidence Mode right to Gloat Mode but he did! He did! He’s a blogging machine!

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

Okay, I’ll focus on it: Clinton is not going to be the VP candidate, because a) there’s nothing in it for her, and b) there’s nothing in it for Obama. Clinton can be far more effective in the Senate than as VP. Obama needs to reach out to constituencies among whom he hasn’t done as well as she has (working-class white people, basically), but I think there are potential VP candidates who do a better job of that than Clinton.

So while I reject the crazy-world logic you used to get there, I agree with your conclusion that Clinton will not be the VP nominee.

markg8 (13:49)

when a commenter, such as you, reaches way, way down in his vocabulary for words to express himself,

and all he can come up with are scatological words

then he has let the rest of us know that he is at the end of a failed argument.

nothing any right-winger ever did justifies senator obama behaving like a right-winger.

nitwit.

Garcon, more popcorn!

——————————————-

Good night and good riddance!

was simply championing for vets rights…

how about:

“Dems tried to pass a new G.I. Bill, Repubs blocked it.”

Very simple stuff that even virginia rubes can understand. (to snark or not to snark)

Obama, too smart by half.

“how does responding with your own wrong—demonizing Obama—do anything other than make the situation worse?”

Because the language and threats and painting her and her voters as vile and monstrous keeps escalating and is seen as wholly acceptable—and the media has joined in gleefully, further giving encouragement to those who do it inside and outside his campaign and his endorsers.

If they see it as acceptable then demonizing him in return has to be acceptable also. There actually are real reasons to paint him and his crowd that way—For instance, if Teddy Kennedy says this—”… he did not think it was possible that Mr. Obama, whom Mr. Kennedy has endorsed, would pick Mrs. Clinton for his ticket should he clinch the nomination.
He went on to say that Mr. Obama should pick someone who was “in tune with his appeal for the nobler aspirations of the American people,” adding, “If we had real leadership — as we do with Barack Obama — in the No. 2 spot as well, it’d be enormously helpful.” …’ — http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/…

then they need to be shown that they are as they paint her to be —exactly the opposite of any sort of “appeal for the nobler aspirations” and that they are showing the opposite of “real leadership”. They’ve taught us all how it’s done, so of course, we’re doing it.

If he and his campaign want her gone, and him anointed nominee while 7 million voters have yet to vote, we’ll point out how vile and monstrous that is, especially after Florida 2000, and how exactly Bush/Rovian it is too. We’ll point out that refusing any revotes or truly accurate solutions to FL and MI is also vile and monstrous. Painting millions of white Democrats as racists simply because they prefer Hillary is vile and monstrous too. Many things they’ve done are exactly that.

There actually are vile and monstrous things he has done and is still doing. Then there are all the things he accuses her of and the way he paints her—that’s vile and monstrous as well.

Glass houses. Mirrors. The Golden Rule. All apply.

accusing and demonizing others for things you yourself do=classic Republican tactic, and vile and monstrous.

Denigrating and dismissing the very vital and ongoing partisan, divisive fights for rights and opportunity that made your achievements and current run possible=vile and monstrous.

Ignoring the devastating damage the GOP alone does, and assigning equal blame falsely to your own party=vile and monstrous.

…

Hyperbole. Pushback? Sure. Politics not beanbag? No doubt. Demonize? Not even close. If I wanted to demonize Obama, you’d know it. Stuck pig squeals.

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

Huh. Okay. Well, I was specifically replying to a comment from Amberglow; if you want to argue that there’s a meaningful difference between “represent[ing] as evil or diabolic” (from the definitions you linked to) and calling someone “vile” and “monstrous”, go right ahead…but I have to tell ya, it ain’t the strongest argument. ;-)

As far as your own posts go, I’m not interested in quibbling about whether they constitute demonization; suffice it to say that you have employed a great deal of hyperbole in your own negative characterizations of Obama—including, as I have pointed out, in the post that started this thread.

Serious case of.

——————————————-

Good night and good riddance!

here is a part of the speech obama gave in west va. the rest of it is at TPM (that’s talking propaganda memo).

[… Allegiance to these ideals has always been at the core of American patriotism - it’s what unites a country of so many different opinions and beliefs. It’s why some of us may disagree on our decision to start this war in Iraq, but all of us stand united in our support for the brave men and women who wage it. That’s how it should be. But it’s not how it’s always been.

One of the saddest episodes in our history was the degree to which returning vets from Vietnam were shunned, demonized and neglected by some because they served in an unpopular war. Too many of those who opposed the war in Vietnam chose to blame not only the leaders who ordered the mission, but the young men who simply answered their country’s call. Four decades later, the sting of that injustice is a wound that has never fully healed, and one that should never be repeated.

The young men and women who choose to serve are defending the very rights and freedoms that allow Americans to speak out against government actions we oppose. They deserve our admiration, respect and enduring gratitude….]

to each his own, but to me this sounds like orwellian speech.

- all for free speech

- all for appreciating vets

- “some” used their free speech to denigrate vets

- ergo, no free speech that denigrates vets?

this is some tricky rhetoric; a quality i noticed also in his philadelphia “race” speech.

on another tact,

guess who introduced senator obama to the crowd in west virginia

none other than west virginia’s own senator “jello jay” rockefeller, the gutless wonder who heads the senate intelligence committee and looked the other way as the bush administration engaged in wholesale, illegal electronic spying on americans.

the same “jello jay” who is, at this moment, trying once again to get a bill passed that gives legal immunity to the telecommunications firms who assisted the bush administration in violating americans’ search and seizure rights.

senator obama, in my view, is the head of a really unholy coalition of “the worst and the oldest” of the democratic leadership.

and not having any luck finding it. Shorter lambert:
1. Obama dissed boomers and anti-war protesters when he didnt’ have to
2. It’s the same kind of pandering he’s been doing all along
3. It’s why there won’t be a unity ticket.
4. Why there will never be one
5 And why there never was going to be one.

As for markg8’s comments, orionATL had it right both times: rationalizing pandering. There are 50 million ways to argue for veterans that don’t include dissing 60’s protesters.

“I find it ironic that Hillary has been done in by the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy”—Dennis Miller

—pretending it’s not the way it is — and that he’s exempt from things others aren’t, and that he is in any way innocent of the very same actions and hyperbole and slandering and demonizing and hypocrisy and bs he denounces when others use it is truly and deeply inherently vile and dishonest.

we’ve seen it before—most recently from Dubya, and always from Republicans —and will not let it pass unnoticed.

Politics and elections and governing are all inherently partisan and divisive and oppositional. And so are all issues and programs that matter.

[joke about pie on the way, except, not.]

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

…like somebody called you poopy pigs at Kos and ruined your mood forevah. Oh well, I was mocked by DHinMI over there for my concerns about the NH recount. Turns out he’s a former chief of staff for a NH congressman. Just covering for his good buddy the Secretary of State I guess who runs an incredibly sloppy election and a recount that looks like a Monty Python sketch. So there’s at least a couple of things to avoid Kos for, Hillary love and election integrity, you won’t find them there.

No nuts today!

————————————————————————-
“We must separate loyal party members from counter-revolutionaries. The first shall inherit our glorious future. The second must be purged from us and history” -Mao Zedong

i’m with you, i think he intends to govern from the center right too, but if this is true:

Mrs. Obama says she dislikes politics — she insists there will be no second run for the presidency if her husband falls short this time —

that explains obama’s ’scorched earth’ primary campaign. any democrat could beat mccain, but not every democrat could beat hillary clinton. she’s his real competition and this is his only chance.

he said he wouldn’t run in 08 too—that was a lie. this could be too.

they say once you get the bug, you want the job forever.

I’m not supposed to show similar emotion or passion when my views are disrespected by either Obama’s supporters or sockpuppets;

I’m not supposed to curse, defame or antagonize supporters or sockpuppets who come into my blogging haunts, to deliberately cause dissension, mischief and turbulence, either through stubborn, sociopathic and/or abusive postings;

and, somehow, I’m to defend my points with pacifist high-ideals, cheerfulness and good taste throughout?

Fuck that.

The only lesson I took away from martial arts classes was that I should avoid a fight — but once I’m attacked, fight back, fight hard, and fight until the opponent is down.

If you’re shocked, shocked that our minds aren’t right or that we’re not gentlemen with our words, well, I didn’t ask Obama’s supporters or sockpuppets to come here and call me a fool because I did not fall in love with him at first sight, because I did not believe his hype when I’ve waited at least two years for him to do a goddamn thing to justify my acceptance of him as qualified to be president, and because I refused to believe that media that has been 100 percent wrong about Bush, terrorism, the war and the GOP has suddenly gotten it right about him.

I guess my brief response should be: Tough Noogies.

This campaign stopped being rational once a man with few socioeconomic ties to African-Americans decided as an adult to cloak himself in a strong Black nationalist religious congregation, with the foreknowledge that one day he’d have to appropriately denounce their extremism. (Jesse Jackson’s “Hymietown” and Farrakhan controversies happened within Obama’s lifetime, I think.) This campaign stopped being rational with a woman with one of the most impressive Ivy League educations had to demonstrate her expertise with a shot-and-a-beer-back. It stopped being rational when two center-right candidates had to dig out their campaign constituencies with a scalpel, instead of merging their party’s core strength of poor and middle class people of all colors under a populist platform.

In short, it stopped being rational when the one man concerned with the downturn of our economy was hounded out of the campaign by the press shunning him and the corporation lobbyists backing all of the other players encouraged his national derision. We had John Edwards, and somehow we were talking about the issues, weren’t we?

To quote:

“How can this possibly be justified as a rational response?”

that we’ll still have a corrupt and obfuscatory Dept. of Justice, a fully cronyed Federal court system, and a complement of congressmen and senators so batshit crazy that they’re sticking fast to their posts in a year where we are facing recession, collapse of our overextended military, and possible calling of our debts from our betters in China?

Even if we do better than we expect in the down-ticket elections, those are junior seniority positions gained on committees on which still sit the same old Democratic bastards who refused to consider impeachment or prosecution of the many crimes admitted to by this administration. Solidifying control of Congress would be progress, but what difference would it make in a post-partisan era? The Republicans will govern anyway, because they’ll be the ones Obama will be concerned with pleasing.

I sent it out to all my family and friends. We would say that response was “code yellow.” Right now, the media is on full alert: code red (attack/gloat).

I’ve heard every one of them, over and over and over and over…

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

cg.eye (23:04)

you’re comment is on the money.

it’s time to clean the democratic augean stables of the old do-nothing-when-it-counts democrats like kerry, kennedy, leahy, rockefeller, feinstein, mikulski.

there are others, no doubt. feel free to add to this list.

the democratic party has been rotting for a long time. former senator tom daschle, now one of obama’s political “handlers” belongs with the group above.

it’s time for the democratic party to begin getting rid of all these old, soft influence peddlers

who never seem to be able to place the interests of the nation above their own political interests.

Der dolchstosslegende is a political tactic; I assume you’ve done your reading? I think indeed it does say something about the person employing it; but I’d put it far from being “evil” or demonic — it’s not torture, for example.

But if calling bullshit is hyperbole… Well, the fainting couch is in the other room. Feel free to use it. Heck, I didn’t call him a racist or say he belonged to the dry pussy demographic, so what are you on about? Or create endless threads of, yes, the most vile Hillary hatred. If you’re concerned with hyperbole, why don’t you go and clean up that mess? It’s sure God a lot more prevalent and important than a C list blog.

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

:-)

it could well be a deliberate lie, although it struck me more as blackmail — vote for barack now! or you’ll never ever get the chance to vote for him again!

*waah*.

Seriously, I’ve never heard that term. And I’ve heard plenty of terms.

Nah, not a one time thing. Part of the general purge at Kos that caused the strike, got some new sites set up, and incidentally gave us a lot of new readers and traffic (by the standards of a C list blog).

God, it was amazing. They came in human waves, and they all used the same talking points. It went on for weeks. I finally boiled it down to the following:

* OFB PROPHLACTIC Yes, I am paid by the Hillary campaign. Yes, I hope to get a job in Hillary’s administration. Yes, I am a shill. Yes, I am a hack. Yes, I am a liar. Yes, I am a racist. Yes, I am a purist. Yes, I am a troll. Yes, I am ignorant. Yes, I hate Obama. Yes, I ignore all facts that don’t square with my [lying|racist|purist|shilling|hackish|trollish] preconceptions of Obama. Yes, my reading comprehension is poor. Yes, I have a hidden agenda: I hope that the Democrats lose, and to that end I support [not Obama]. Yes, I could be older than you. Yes, I think all young people are stupid. Did I mention I’m a shill and a hack? Good. Anything else?

Poopy pigs.

And so uncreative. Here, we make up a new form of abuse every time. No thanks necessary!

“Poopy pigs…” My God. But hey! It achieved the desired objective. Kos is now the functional equivalent of an Obama 527. Well done, all.

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

We’re racist poopy pigs!

….except where replaced by Cindy Sheehan and other progressive primary challengers, where applicable — I want them *changed*.

We thought they’d do it once we fought tooth and nail for a slim majority, but they ignored us as if we didn’t exist. And, since we weren’t their main lobbyist backers, we didn’t. If we have to fight the corporate hacks state by state, AG office by AG office, until the DC entrenched see that the winds blow away from corruption, then that’s what we’ll have to do.

Gotta love comments like Orion’s. What is it about the left that it always ends up eating its own? So many Jacobins here, with Lambert as their Robespierre.

and Lambert was our Lenin.

Steve Soto over at LeftCoaster has been generally supportive of Obama and critical of HRC, so I find his seconding of Lambert’s concerns in #4 interesting:

“I am also troubled this morning by the news that Team Obama wants to control all the Democratic money this campaign cycle themselves. The campaign has apparently put the word out that Obama doesn’t want his supporters to contribute to the pro-Democratic independent committees that make up the emerging part of a counter-GOP infrastructure. The campaign may be arguing that it wants to ensure a unified message consistent with Obama’s own, and therefore doesn’t want any independent players doing a Tier Two negative campaign against McCain, especially if former Clinton people head those groups. However, a successful Democratic candidate at the national level needs a Tier One/Tier Two effort to win, whereby the candidate stays on the high road pitching voters a positive message himself while Tier Two organizations pin the GOP opponent up against the wall and keep them on the defensive through surrogates that have some distance from the campaign. This is the way successful GOP campaigns have operated against Democrats for years, and Democrats had reached the point of parity with the GOP over the last several years, with better funding. It was supposed to be an essential part of the pushback effort against McCain this year, and Obama just pulled the rug out from under it, because he apparently wants to control the whole message, whatever that will be. I guess I wasn’t aware that the whole party was being taken over by the Obama movement.”

“I find it ironic that Hillary has been done in by the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy”—Dennis Miller