Plus ca change you kin beleeve in, plus c'est la frIckin' meme ol' chose, n'est-ce pas?

Senators and Reps by monopolizing the DNC and millions of bucks and all big donors.

he's gonna have zero coattails.

This primary/campaign/shi#house season has spiraled to every higher peaks of hilarity and, much like our bedraggled housing market, will crash on November 4th. I mean, all we can do is laugh, right? I think the posters over at Riverdaughter's Confluence have the right idea, one act plays snarking on this sideshow.

Sadly, I must agree that the Bush campaign, which I thought couldn't be topped, has been.

I love this job!

Could be. I'm not saying that Bush and Obama are the same, not at all, but it's also quite clear that the Village permits candidates to suceed only along a very narrow spectrum, not just in terms of policy, but also in terms of personality and management style.

[ ] Very tepidly voting for Obama [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

Unity is for Republicans.

and Axelrod's Obama campaign. As he wrote in the WSJ.

And, finally, DC Dems, even if just lowly staffers, are beginning to see the similarities? Buyers' remorese? Maybe. But really bad when you worked for someone else and got sold a bill of goods.... I know I've read lots of commenters throughout the primaries who noted Obama's alarming similarities to Bush. Shudder. I wrote some of them.

Rove, however, does not miss using his gloating and preening as a means of attack. He lists several things he sees as similar, but then goes in for the kill:

Instead of consistency, Mr. Obama has followed Richard Nixon's advice, to cater to his party's extreme in the primaries and then move aggressively to the middle for the fall.

In the primary, Mr. Obama supported pulling out of Iraq within 16 months, called the D.C. gun ban constitutional, backed the subjection of telecom companies to expensive lawsuits for cooperating in the terror surveillance program, opposed welfare reform, pledged to renegotiate Nafta, disavowed free trade and was strongly against the death penalty in all cases. But in the past few weeks, Mr. Obama has reversed course on all of these, discarding fringe liberal views for relentlessly centrist positions. He also flip-flopped on accepting public financing and condemning negative ads from third party groups, like unions.

By taking Nixon's advice, Mr. Obama is assuming such dramatic reversals will somehow avoid voter scrutiny. But people are watching closely, and by setting a world indoor record for jettisoning past positions, Mr. Obama may be risking his reputation for truthfulness. A candidate's credibility, once lost, is very hard to restore, regardless of how fine an organization he has built.

The dreaded Nixon comparison!

(Edited to retrieve quote.)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB12156480...

Via Talk Left. As I said in the comments there, I'll be impressed when he lectures his hedge fund donors on responsibility.

This is just making sure all those white voters know that there won't be any big social programs instituted to help poor African Americans* because Obama learned well what the GOP taught him, it's their own damned fault. Fuck those excesses of the 60s and 70s.

So don't worry Wall Street, under an Obama Administration, Fannie and Freddie will still get bailed out without anyone pointing out how irresponsible they are. The Joneses, however, aren't getting shit.

Of all the things Obama does, this may piss me off the most. Without African Americans he wouldn't have the nomination. Yet, he's only too happy to continue the right-wing frames used to demonize them over the past 30 years (lazy, irresponsible). I might understand it if he were using it as cover for policies that were aimed at helping African Americans, but from what I can tell, he's not. He's just lecturing them to score political points, not build support in the broader country for policies or programs.

* Which means there won't be programs to help poor America generally. One of the "accomplishments" of the GOP has been to paint poor America as black and then use racist stereotypes to undermine helping them. Mission Accomplished!

coming up. It's going to be hard, hard to confess to the huge mistake that's been made, and to undertake corrections. But you can do it, but you had best find a nice sauce for all the crow that will be on your menu.

He's their guy and they're stuck with him (absent some scandal, which I doubt comes at all, but probably definitely doesn't come before the convention).

I do not feel sorry for these staffers. Many of their bosses helped nominate this guy. If he doesn't treat them well, it's their own damn fault. Ask nothing for your vote and you'll get nothing doesn't just apply to the little people.

I worry much more about him fucking over the soldiers in Iraq or the millions of uninsured Americans or the Constition than I do about a bunch of Hill staffers.

but it seems to have disappeared.

------------------------------------------------
“Just say NO! to Kool-aid.”

we have no way of knowing if the whole thing wasn't make up. It a game of let's you and him fight. Don't fall for it.

the more likely I am to hold my nose and vote for him. Because I've held my nose and voted for a lot of shitty, center-right Democrats, that I could do. What I would struggle with is supporting the bust-out operation of the Democratic party by a bunch of neo-liberal corporate astroturfers, DINOs, former Republicans and Republican enablers.

But if it turns out he can't raise all that much money, other Dems aren't all that crazy about him, and he's going to limp across the finish line in November, then he's John Kerry with a slightly bigger political wind behind him. He'll still be unqualified and likely to be overwhelmed in office by the problems facing him, but he won't pose the kind of permanent neo-liberal threat to the Democratic Party that has been the case.