• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    CB on The Employment Index
    katiebird on The Employment Index
    abc on The Employment Index
    Sweet Sue on The Employment Index
    Sweet Sue on The Employment Index
    bernard jenkins on The Employment Index
    CL on The Employment Index
    riverdaughter on The Employment Index
    riverdaughter on The Employment Index
    riverdaughter on The Employment Index
    riverdaughter on The Employment Index
    Sweet Sue on The Employment Index
    CB on Gah! Need assistance.…
    Sweet Sue on Gah! Need assistance.…
    bernard jenkins on Gah! Need assistance.…
  • Categories


  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama big pharma Bill Clinton Chris Christie cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos debate Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean Joe Biden John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Keith Olbermann Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • The End of the Rebels in the Ukraine and the Ukraine’s Future
      We’re down to street fighting in Donetsk.  The Russian leaders resigned in the last two weeks.  The rebels appear to be done, at least in terms of their conventional military phase (of course, I could be wrong depending on how much stomach Ukrainian troops have for house to house fighting).  It seems like that would [...]
  • Top Posts

Monday: Praiseworthy Posts

Once again, there’s a time crunch this morning so this will be brief.  I found some pretty good posts around the web that I submit for your approval.  See if you agree.

  • We’re going to hear a lot about The Bloggers on the Bus, Eric Boehlert’s new book that will be released in a couple of weeks.   I am reading an advanced copy.  Eric covers the 2008 campaign and blog battle in detail and makes specific note of the misogynism of some of our former favorite blogs.  (We get mentioned in the book as part of the pro-Clinton contingent) BTD at Talkleft talked about the pervasive sexism of the 2008 in this post yesterday.  BTW, there are comments in the thread that mention The Confluence as a “quasi-racist” blog with “retroactive, resentful feminists”.  I honestly do not know what they are talking about.  The person who made this comment obviously doesn’t read us.  We don’t approve of racism at all and delete racist comments all of the time.  As for retroactive and resentful feminists, they left.
  • Natasha Chart at OpenLeft has an excellent post about political realism titled Congress Does Exactly What It Wants To.  Here’s an excerpt:

I got into an argument (you are shocked, I know) with some international relations folks over the term “realism.”

They insisted that it should be understood to mean a non-ideological position, where the world is taken as it really is. You advance your cause at all costs, screw them before they screw you, always mistrust, always press advantage.

Someone named, I believe, Omar Khoury was quoted to me. He said that, “Realists tend to treat political power as separate from, and predominant over, morality, ideology and other social and economic aspects of life.”

Isn’t that special. But that’s realism.

Anything else, anything besides the pursuit of power above all else and for its own sake is “idealism.”

By international relations standards, the default human view, the unsignified signifier, the wellspring of ideas that is itself above and separate from ideology, is a view that can only be described as a blueprint for being a completely irredeemable bastard.

This is what the Serious People of our political elite call being realistic.

I guess this partially explains the email I got from Jon Corzine’s reelection campaign that crowed about being recognized by ultimate realist, Jack Welch.  Disgusting.  But there aren’t any decent primary challengers and I can’t bear to vote for a Republican for governor.  Corzine’s going to have to renew his lease on Drumthwackit without my help this year.

Go read the rest of Natasha’s post.

  • Basement Angel at Corrente has written Defining Bigotry that explains how the Obama campaign and the media used bigotry as a weapon against Clinton and her supporters.  Here’s an excerpt:

Bigots offer up an exchange for their followers in order to justify pandering to their darker impulses. For the racists, they offered up the notion of patriotism and cultural fidelity. It’s okay to hate black people, or who ever, because they are polluting what we have achieved and you’re standing up for the best of what we are. The exchange for Obama supporters was pretty much identical – they justified the misogynist rhetoric and actions by portraying Clinton’s campaign as an attack on liberal values. Thus, in defiance of her voting record and professional accomplishments, she became a corporatist, a conservative, a Republican in Democratic clothing, or, for those objecting to dynasty, a royalist who believed that she was “entitled” to the office – all utterly at odds with liberal values, So you could engage in rhetoric as offensive as Claytie Williams’ rhetoric against Ann Richards, and still see yourself as liberal because you were supporting the history making candidate. Advancing African American progress justified the misogyny. The netroots took the bait. Without that exchange though, there was no singularly strong reason to vote for Obama, the dramatically less experienced candidate running for office in a most perilous time, over the candidate with a lifetime of relevant (if somewhat non-traditonal) experience and a resume of progressive accomplishment a mile long. What the netroots had to do – and what they did – was obliterate their awareness of Clinton’s accomplishments because Obama, save for his gift of winning elections, has so few accomplishments to his name. Justifying misogyny was the only way for him to win. And that is what he did.

And for the record, I don’t believe Clinton used race baiting against Obama.  It would have been political suicide for her to do that.  In fact, there was only one person who stood to benefit from race baiting in the campaign and that was Obama.  That’s why his campaign and friends were constantly falsely accusing the Clintons of doing it.

Yes, Virginia, he really would do such a thing.  After all, Obama is a realist.

About these ads

98 Responses

  1. Yes, he’s a realist by the definition Natasha Chart talks about. But in the end, it may not be a winning strategy to be completely amoral and lacking in basic principles. There may eventually be some blowback for Obama’s “realistic” strategy of using people and then throwing them under the bus in search of power for its own sake.

    • And you’ve got to wonder why none of these suddenly under the bus type of folks have objected to this/

      • I think that for now they are too isolated from their usual support system. They are in exhile (sound familiar?). Nobody wants them. (do we? NOOOOO). They have been nutralized. For Now… But Rambo and Bambi would better remember that revenge is a dish better eaten cold. This has only be 100+ days yet. 4 years is a long long time and a lot of new movements are bubbling under the surface.

        Totalitarim is not a state of permancy. What people at large have always striven to historically is freedom. That the constant.

  2. I like Basement Angel’s analysis. “What the netroots had to do – and what they did – was obliterate their awareness of Clinton’s accomplishments because Obama, save for his gift of winning elections, has so few accomplishments to his name. Justifying misogyny was the only way for him to win. And that is what he did.”

    I would only quibble on the “only” assertion. It may have been the most effective, but not only. The other selling point glossing over his lack of accomplishments was using the descriptions “new” and “fresh” for Obama.

    Then there was Obama and his “forward” statements. These were beautifully lambasted by one of my least favorite political analysts, David Brooks – “Barack Obama loves the future because that’s where all his accomplishments are. “

  3. Is “The Audacity of Democracy” that Basement Angel refers to the documentary by Brad Mays?

  4. I hope someone who still has an account with TalkLeft responds to this latest comment by BTD.

    I do not visit the Confluence anymore.

    I found the (imo) irrational hatred of Obama quite unappealing and found Jeralyn and myself to be targets of unfair abuse from the front pagers and the commenters so I forgot about The Confluence I imagine they have done the same about us.

    I do believe tolerating such -isms does necessarily lead to that stain dominating your site.

    I am glad to here Riverdaughter reigned it in.

    I guess after last year I should have learned to tolerate dishonest a-holes better, but I am so sick of the baseless smears, innuendos, and ad hominem attacks used as a means to discredit criticism of what went on in last year’s election.

    Btw, BTD, that should have been: “I am glad hear that Riverdaughter reined it in.” I know that you always lose your ability to spell and punctuate when you start frothing incoherently at the keyboard. Perhaps you should take that as a sign to step away for a while.

    • Aren’t homonyms grand? And sadly, spell check passes them as they are not misspelled.

      • Now that you mention it, I guess that I should accuse BTD of engaging in ad homonym attacks. ;^)

    • What’s the use? RD should write her own review of Boehlert’s book. That will be respose enough.

      • As far as I’m concerned BTD lost all credibility when he wrote about sexism and then voted for the chief sexist. BTD’s behavior is equivalent to Obama’s. “Just words.”

        • I am the frontpager that “unfairly attacked” Jeralyn and BTD.

          You’ll notice that once again BTD doesn’t provide any evidence to back up his allegations.

          I told you that BTD was a WATB

          • Considering BTD has poked the bear by calling PUMAs irrelevant I’d say that he should have been prepared to get what he gave.

            There are serious philosophical differences and I think a conversation to be had about abandoning core values for the sake of pragmatism. I am not willing to win at all costs. It’d be a shallow victory. I’d much rather be in the loser column core values intact.

        • I do read Corrente sometimes, but I don’t bother at all with Talk Left.

          As “unfair” as criticism might seem to the person receiving it… Talk Left became a pro-obama echo chamber with mindless attacks on PUMA in between the echos. Why is BTD still whining about the criticism? Sometimes it fits.

      • You’re right, BB. I should have left it alone.

        • Inky,

          I didn’t mean it that way. I’m just discouraged that people who should be working with us to hold Obama’s feet to the fire are busy smearing us instead. It’s so counterproductive to advancing liberal values.

          • They won’t be holding his feet to the fire any time soon….if ever , IMO, because that means they were wrong and that they cannot stand to think about must less admit .

            What is advancing liberal values compared to thier bruised egos? .It’s not even close. But since we are guilty of the sin of being right about Barry, we come in for the smearing .

    • Honestly, I have no idea what he’s talking about. I can’t remember when we attacked BTD or Jeralyn on our frontpage. But I do remember offering BTD a posting spot with us when he was considering going on hiatus because of Jeralyn’s mindless Obamagasm. We always thought her 180 degree about face from Clinton to Obama was exceedingly weird. And we never bought BTD’s argument that the media should get away with picking the candidate. We always thought that was a recipe for disaster. But none of us ever attacked him.
      As for the accusations of racism, we are not nor ever have been tolerant of racism and we take a good deal of effort to expunge it from this site.
      It’s true we don’t like Obama though. Not much we can do about it now but just because he is president doesn’t mean we are going to excuse what he did during the primaries or his stupid handling of the economic crisis. He is what we said he is: a political opportunist and a corrupt politician who wasn’t above cheating and buying his way to the top to the detriment of working americans. He ran a scorched earth primary campaign and that is going to have repercussions on the party for decades to comr There’s no reason why we should feel warm and fuzzy about him.

      • I’m guessing the posts in question were when you called Jeralyn on the carpet over her treatment of Palin and her turn about when Obama was declared the nominee and then chose Biden as his running mate.

        That being said, as I told BTD if Jeralyn is going to use ridicule(which she did) then she should expect similar treatment when it comes to her position.

        • Cwalt:

          That is exactly what BTD is talking about. yet, he gets his facts wrong.
          i myself was banished from posting there because of my defense of PUMA. That was around the time when Taylor Marsh banned me for having CDS.

          I still read them from time to time but I do not comment.

          BTW:
          You did a terrific job in refuting BTD and his version of events. Way to go!

      • Yes, RD, he is everything we said he was. And every negative thing he accused Clinton of being was really reflective of his core self. Once I realized that, he became almost predictable. He, or his team, would make some accusation about Clinton, and then within weeks-or days!- he’d be revealed to be doing just what he criticized. That’s the real “transparency” of B0.

        And, we don’t have to like him. I don’t like liars, or cheaters, and I will never forgive his active roll in yet another stolen American presidency.

    • I responded. I didn’t go into defending The Confluence as much as I made the assertion that I was unwilling to be pragmatic to the point of abandoning principles.

      I consider my eyes more wide open then those who will continue to vote Democrat simply because on paper “they are better than the GOP”. Principles are supposed to be more than something you are willing to jettison for the sake of expediency. If it makes me irrational to expect the Democrats to practice their core values rather than compromise them for political expediency, so be it.

      • I felt like establishing an account to respond there but then thought, what’s the point? BTD seems like a pretty hardheaded person who believes firmly that PUMA is just a bunch of deranged r@cist, sexist, bitter feminists. If he thought anything less than he’d have to admit his own inadequacies and misguided predictions during the election (one being Obama was the next FDR, chuckle). BTD might even be worse than the fauxgressives he likes to call out because at least they don’t pretend that they aren’t part of the Village. BTD is part of the Village he despises but the only difference is that he doesn’t have a larger platform other than TalkLeft to spew his nonsense.

      • That was a beautiful response. Thank you for that.

      • Wow! CWaltz, you did a terrific job of arguing with BTD. He finally admitted he may even have our site mixed up with another one. Then why was he calling us racist without the slightest evidence, and now admittedly not even knowing if he was referring to something that happened at TC.

        You are a great debater!

        • I flamed Jeralyn from Klownhaus after she banned me, but I didn’t post it here.

          Should I call them a Waah-mbulance?

        • BTD is a decent fellow. I’ve had exchanges with him and have mainly found him to be a reasonable sort. I actually think he would fit in here because he can disagree without being disagreeable(which doesn’t mean he can’t be feisty). When he goes overboard, he is usually the first to admit it.

        • BB said:” …Then why was he calling us racist without the slightest evidence….”

          Maybe he got a lot of practice doing this during the election?

    • I find it amusing that as a Columbia educated lawyer, BTD has makes really weak and hypocritical arguments against PUMAs and The Confluence. Considering his own site targeted PUMAs and he sat back and allowed Jeralyn to attack Palin not on the issues but on pure sexism and derangement, everything he currently says in this post are lies only to cover up his site’s own -isms and ineptness that he so apparently despises. He calls out Obama on his B.S. occasionally in order to appear different from the progressive hypocrites in the Washington beltway. But he fails to realize how he is much more like him than he wants to admit. He will never admit that TL did any wrongdoing during the election. He’ll never call out Jeralyn and he will never admit to being wrong about Obama. You can’t change people with huge egos. We’ve admitted to mistakes that certain people in PUMA have done. We’re still waiting for the fauxgressives to admit to their even larger stupidity. But they’ll just continue to make excuses and attack us whenever their guy stabs them in the back.

      • I’m the one who engaged BTD over in the comment thread.

        My sense is that BTD feels a great deal of personal loyalty toward Jeralyn, and that his animus against TC is payback for what he views as “vicious criticism” of her. I think he views it as defending a friend.

        Take that for what it’s worth. I agree he could have taken a more principled stand when Jeralyn started up with her silly, sexist Palin posts by more vocally bashing them, or by leaving the site. Though, I also think that to the extent he felt he could given the personally loyalty he felt toward her, he made it clear that she did not speak for him in those posts.

        I disagree with BTD on several important things. First, I think I’m generally more liberal than he is on a number of issues (e.g. health care). Second, I believe there was more than a “dimes worth” of difference between Hillary and Obama on the issues in the primary. And thirdly, I don’t think that the integrity and character of politicians is wholly irrelevant.

        That said, I still don’t feel conflicted by saying that Riverdaughter and BTD are two of my favorite political bloggers. I don’t feel like I have to choose one or the other (of course that doesn’t mean I always agree with either of them, particulary in the case of BTD concerning what I wrote in the paragraph above). Both do a good job attacking Obama and the fauxgressives on many issues.

        • But he is allowing his comment thread to label us rac&sts…unacceptable. The lowest form of Bot mentality. The same dismissive attitude applies to charges of “resentful retro-feminists.” In other words, if we aggressively object to the virulent sexism we witness, we are old, hysterics. Discredit the source & eliminate all detailed debate–how very Obama of you.

          • He’s down to calling the site irrational in it’s hatred of Obama.

            I do get the impression that he doesn’t come here because of Jeralyn and some of the comments made towards her during the primary.

            I’m trying to get examples to see what he felt crossed the line because I don’t remember anything being that horrendous.

          • I’ve seen dk before…I don’t believe him/her to be an “Obot” and there are many people here who choose to visit TalkLeft which is why it remains in our blogroll. dk is correct in that BTD has called out the hypocrisy on the left and he chose not to engage in Jeralyn’s Palin derangement. Sadly, that is the best I’ve seen from anyone who voted for Obama in the primaries. However, I also agree that most of us here are probably to the left of BTD. Also, BTD harbors his own biases and ignorance which he chooses to ignore. His own reasons for supporting Obama over Clinton (media darling) were simply idiotic and a lot of his predictions are now coming to bite him in the ass. He calls out Obama and the fauxgressives while conveniently choosing to ignore that he voted for the guy for reasons largely based on the sexism of the media and the Left.

          • Well, I agree with you, and that’s why I pushed him on it and feel like I got him to clarify his thoughts that his problem with TC was purely personal (he feels he is defending a friend).

            (Note: I am not saying I agree with the idea that Jeralyn was “viciously attacked” here, or that if she was attacked that those attacks weren’t undeserved, but I am willing to believe that BTD felt that way and that his opinions of this website are based largely on those feelings).

          • DV: That was not directed at dk. I was talking about the impulse to generalize and dismiss critics based on accusations of rac*sm and old, bitter dead-enders without specific evidence or references in an attempt to dimish anyone with a strong viewpoint that is not aligned with group think.

        • The very large difference between your two favorite bloggers is that Riverdaughter never smeared another site with lies about racism or whatever kind of -ism he is referring to.

          BTD is very good writer, but after reading his work for more than 5 years, I can say with confidence that he is not always a rational person. He is very prone to losing his temper and behaving in ways that are embarrassing and offensive. He tends to make snap judgments based on no evidence except his emotions.

          • My thinking is that if you’re gonna make an accusation of racism you should back it up with evidence.

          • bostonboomer,

            I agree that BTD’s response to the commenter making those accusations was wrong, and bad, and that is why I pushed him on it. I think his subsequent comments shows that his real beef with TC has to do with his perceptions of how Jeralyn was treated, and that he simply disagrees that integrity and personal character matter in a politician (which I stated above is a position I don’t align myself with BTD on).

            To me, that shows he has an emotional reaction against TC based on his feelings of personal loyalty. So, in that I agree with you too. His problems with TC are largely irrational.

          • “He is very prone to losing his temper and behaving in ways that are embarrassing and offensive.”

            I agree bb, … and ridiculous and childish!

          • I think BTD like most Democrats can’t get over the fact that we didn’t vote for Obama and many made a protest vote by voting McCain/Palin. They just can’t wrap their head around the fact that there are liberals who don’t worship Obama. I’ve had friendships end with good (but sometimes ignorant) people over this so I don’t think any of us are always rational human beings when emotions and politics are involved. I think BTD along with most of the progressive movement will never forgive us for giving Obama a hard time and nearly costing him the election if the economy hadn’t gone down the crapper.

          • dk,

            I don’t know if followed BTD when he was Armando at Daily Kos, but if you did you should know that his irrationality is not limited to reactions to TC or his loyalty to fellow bloggers. It is part of his basic personality, IMHO. I say that as someone who has often enjoyed reading his work.

    • I guess I’m in the minority here, when it comes to BTD, but I always regarded him as a pompous dramaqueen. Never understood the adoration of him – but what I really don’t understand is, how he

      “… found the (imo) irrational hatred of Obama quite unappealing.” and

      “… find The Confluence irrational about Obama.”

      Didn’t he preach all through the primaries, how important it was to hold Obama’s feet to the fire? And isn’t that exactly what TC is doing?

      He repeats his “Pols are pols and do what they do”, but isn’t that the same as giving them a free pass?

      I hope TC will never get to that point!

      • Here is BTD “holding Obama’s feet to the fire”:

        I watched just the tail end of President Obama’s press conference last night but have read the full transcript this morning and want to start by saying that, on paper, Obama’s performance was brilliant.

        http://www.talkleft.com/story/2009/4/30/82958/4643

      • And didn’t he also say that he hasn’t read the Confluence in ages and he isn’t even sure it’s the blog he was thinking of? Talk about irrationality and willingness to smear fellow liberals! Oh I forgot, BTD isn’t a liberal. He’s a centrist.

      • Hey Pips!

        You may be in the minority, but you are certainly not alone in your accessment. At one time, many years ago, I admired BTD for his passion, but that was before I too came to see him as a self-important drama queen. Also, the reason he never really had a problem with BO is that BTD is a libertarian on most economic issues, particularly those involving trade. BTD was positively delighted that BO repeatedly lied to working-class voters about NAFTA because, as far a BTD is concerned, there’s no such thing as a bad FTA. QED it is good to lie to those benighted voters who feel differently.

    • Why is hatred of Obama irrational? I hated Bush and I hate Obama for very much the same reasons…except with Obama you can throw in race baiting, sexism and general sneakiness tha makes dubya look like an elementary student in the practice of sneakiness.

      but then Obama called me a racist, so I guess that explains me…forget the black man I lived with for two years.

      I do thank my fellow liberals for getting rid of all my lingering idiotic liberal guilt.

      Now, to be fair, I am glad to hear what Obama says about the stock market playing a smaller role in the economy. That is an idea I have held important for a decade or more. However I think any democrat would do the same… and Hillary would have done it months ago, along with having long ago helped mortgage holders, something we know Obama is opposed to.

      • When someone says “irrational hatred” they are assuming we:

        1) Hate, rather than oppose Obama

        2) Have no rational basis for our hate

        I don’t hate Obama, I opposed him during the election and I continue to resent the way he “won” the election.

        • maybe hate is too strong a word, but to me it is simply another synonym I could use.

        • That’s pretty spot on for how I feel. I see my anger and disgust as very justifiable, not in the least irrational. Irrational would mean that there was no reason for my anger. There is more than one reason from where I am sitting.

          • Ya know, when you think about it, since much of our anger towards Obama is based on the sexist campaign he ran to call us irrational is to say sexism is not a rational basis to oppose Obama.

            IOW – BTD’s dismissive attitude towards sexism is sexist.

  5. Hi RD & Co. Congrats on that book mention. That realist thing?
    Is pretty unreal. To this country.
    That’s why those of us who grew up in MLK’s shadow couldn’t figure it out, no?
    Any of it.

  6. Inky, on May 4th, 2009 at 9:30 am Said: ……I guess after last year I should have learned to tolerate dishonest a-holes better, but I am so sick of the baseless smears, innuendos, and ad hominem attacks used as a means to discredit criticism of what went on in last year’s election.

    It was shocking to learn the egg head losers I voted for for forty years as a Dem, actually hate the Dem base and always have . In fact the only group they ever show thier fangs to ARE the Dems base ….and it was also shocking to see supposed Dems embrace what I was was taught were GOP dirty tricks with sexual abandon.

    Who’s ever running this show, knows people and how to play them like harps.

  7. I just went back to the Talk Left thread, Pat Johnson and Dancing Opossum had some very favorable comments for the Confluence.

  8. I will never forget the lessons I learned from this primary. You cannot trust anyone. the Dems behaved as badly as the Repugs. And so many bloggers became what they used to hate during the Bush years. John Aravosis, Markos, Arianna and Josh Marshall make my stomach turn and have lost ALL credibility with me. It is my belief that they were paid by the Obama people which would make them blogger whores. They sold their integrity and their soul for some money. They are DISGUSTING!!!

    • Don’t you kind of *hope* they were paid? At least they would have gotten something… otherwise it was all hate all the time for nothing!

    • Has anyone done a post on the recent story about the lawyer working on the Chrysler deal–he has gone public with the accusation that one of his (hedge-fund) clients was threatened by the O Administration for offering to buy Chrysler’s debt? Someone in the administration (probably Rahmbo) told the businessman that they would destroy his reputation via THE WHITE HOUSE PRESS CORPS if he did not back out of the deal. Of course, they are denying it now, but this lawyer has contributed to the Dem party and most likely voted for BO–what is his motive for lying? He did back out.

      The point being: the White House press corps is now openly working for the administration as enforcers. Nice to know it’s official.

  9. Khoury’s description of a reality he describes as “realism” is not new to human kind on this earth.
    He like others before him dating back to the first so called philosophers in the West and forward to now is describing that which has been recycled and renamed for several thousand years of historical record.
    It is the philosopy of The Self..i.e. What I or you want should and will be pursued without boundries of any kind in relation to any other Self..including groups of selves who may align around various desired poistions or ends.

    In more recent history it is the approach of Machiavelli and now full blown that of Alynsky in a more radical and substantive kind.

    And it is that practice that got Obama and his political
    followers where they are right now.

    It is that practice which humankind by way of philosophy..theology..and all the other liberal arts has sought to mitigate..qualifiy…defeat…(use whatever word suits you) for several thousand years.

    Neither Khoury nor Natasha assert anyting really new here. in the history of humankind.

  10. I’m in moderation… Ooh – it’s scary in here!

  11. I read basement ange lon corrente last night. I read and reread it. I’m printing it out and giving it to the one friend who is actually curios about why I feel as I do about Obama. (the others insult me by flippantly asking if I’d rather have McCain.)
    That post is the most concise and profound description of the filth that was the primary.

  12. He calls out Obama and the fauxgressives while conveniently choosing to ignore that he voted for the guy for reasons largely based on the sexism of the media and the Left.

    He likes his bread buttered on both sides.


  13. Well, I agree with you, and that’s why I pushed him on it and feel like I got him to clarify his thoughts that his problem with TC was purely personal (he feels he is defending a friend).

    (Note: I am not saying I agree with the idea that Jeralyn was “viciously attacked” here, or that if she was attacked that those attacks weren’t undeserved, but I am willing to believe that BTD felt that way and that his opinions of this website are based largely on those feelings).

    First of all, if you want to be a big bad blogger you need to develop a thick skin. Secondly, if you ban people from your site (as Jeralyn banned me) then don’t whine when they criticize and/or mock you from their site.

    Lastly, if people use your own words against you that isn’t an unfair attack.

    BTD and Jeralyn have been viciously attacked by John Cole and the commenters at Balloon Juice, but BTD engaged them professionally instead of throwing a snit fit.

    Balloon Juice appears on the TalkLeft blogroll under “blogs we like.” The Confluence doesn’t, nor has it ever. Until now TalkLeft has studiously ignored our existence.

    • I don’t disagree with you.

      This is how I see it. Jeralyn was never really much of a political blogger. To her credit, she noticed that Obama was the weakest candidate in the Democratic primary, but otherwise she just strikes me, as far as politics go, as the go along get along type who will vote for whomever the Democratic party throws her way. And when the going got tough, she folded. Her real passion seems to be restricted to crime-related issues.

      As far as the blogroll is concerned, I could be wrong but my bet is that Jeralyn controls it, not BTD. I mean, BTD in his comment thread said he has absolutely no respect for John Avriosis, yet it is on the blogroll. So, I don’t think that being on the TalkLeft blogroll means that BTD is a fan.

      And as far as BTD goes, it wasn’t my intention to be some major champion for all of BTD’s actions. But I give him credit for calling Obama and the Democratic leadership out on certain issues, and on calling out fauxgressive sexism. The more people who do that, the better, IMO.

      • I’ve said repeatedly that Jeralyn does a very good job blogging about criminal law and other legal issues.

        On political issues I often agree with BTD

        I was registered at TalkLeft and was a regular commenter there until suddenly commenters had to support Obama or else.

        I didn’t violate any of their commenting rules and yet I was banned anyway.

      • Yes, she wasn’t really a political blogger.

        I think there were two important issues she had following the Primaries. One was Biden and Anita Hill. The second was the appointment of Democratic judges, all down the line. The second won.

  14. I was very fascinated by some of the more obscure reasons for backing Obama, and BTD had an interesting angle. His premise was that all politicians are basically amoral, slimy pieces of rotted fecal matter (OK, that’s my language, but I thought it was funny, so there you have it), and so you have to pick one that might hold some positions you like and most importantly will win. That’s a pretty sad, cynical position to have. But most importantly it misses the most important element of politics, what’s likely to get done.

    The person they chose wasn’t based on experience obviously. And it wasn’t policy, at least I hope not. For example Obama promised during the campaign that he’d reduce women’s reproductive rights if elected. In this case it was a D that was most likely to get elected because of the media darling machine. That is, the same people that selected Bush and selected the Iraq war wanted to select Obama, so BTD in this case decided that we should blindly for for the person the media machine wanted to select.

    The real issue and problem we have is that we should have a problem with the media machine selecting such things. Their choices in my humble opinion kind of suck. And aside from that issue, real demonstrable policy experience should be the main reason we choose candidates. When it isn’t, it’s just american idol. And when you make decisions based on the media favorite, the american idol, or whatever other bizarre reason, then you have no room to complain after they win. What, you don’t like his policy. Well, he’s still the media darling isn’t he. Then shut up and like it. :-)

    • Yikes, with weapons like sarcasm, irony, and pointing out hypocrisy, no wonder you’re disliked over there. Is there no limit to your viciousness Myiq? :-)

  15. I came to TC via a hobby blog. It’s embarrassing but true that I got kicked off a non-political blog for being anti-Obama. (Two years of comments completely scrubbed!) So I had no idea who BTD and Jeralyn were. And, honestly, I don’t care except that they are, apparently, stalwart little cogs in the misinformation machine that is Obamaganda.

    The only r@cism that I’ve seen on TC is obots accusing us of r@cism. Obamaganda bigotry: Hate you can believe in (and get away with because you voted for the bir@cial guy).

    • The idea of any criticism of BO has become automatically conflated with rac*sm, so that is what she is imagining. We don’t bow to him = rac*sm.

      • p.s. After all, that’s exactly what they did to Bill, Hillary, et. al. They dared to question his false rhetoric vs. his actual record and actions. They questioned his policy ideas. Ipso facto = rac*st.

  16. “The only r@cism that I’ve seen on TC is obots accusing us of r@cism.”

    Although I realize he is no longer here, I do think GaryChapelHill’s post and comments at times were fair game for accusations of r@cism.

    • Examples? Please be specific.

      • His numerous posts on African Americans and the Prop 8 vote was over the top numerous and went beyond correct criticism of the amendment and bordered on being r@cist.

        • “Bordered on being racist” is by definition “not racist”

          GCH stopped blogging here for a couple months immediately after the election and I don’t recall him ever blogging here on African Americans and the Prop 8 vote.

          But the fact is that AA’s supported Obama AND Prop 8.

          Deal with it.

          • I remember them. My only “challenge” to the comments was asking about other groups that in the majority also opposed Prop 8 i.e. males, conservative Christians, Asians, etc. It was focusing primarily on African Americans that I found offensive.

            ” Who voted for Prop 8?

            The Public Policy Institute of California released a poll in December 2008 to shed some light on who voted for Prop 8, especially in light of widespread claims that relatively heavy support among black voters is what pushed Prop 8 to victory. 2,003 voters were polled from November 5–16.[116],[117]

            * On a stand-alone question, 47% were in favor of same-sex marriage, 48% were opposed and 5% were unsure.
            * 85% of voters identifying themselves as vangelical or born-again Christians voted “yes”.
            * Of non-evangelical Christians polled, 42% voted yes.
            * 77% of Republicans in the poll voted yes.
            * 65% of Democrats voted no.
            * 85% of John McCain supporters voted yes.
            * 30% of Barack Obama voters voted yes.
            * 61% of Latinos voted yes.
            * 57% of Latinos, Asians, and blacks combined voted yes.
            * 62% of those without a college degree voted yes.
            * 74% of those who voted yes on Prop 8 considered the outcome of the vote to be “very important”, while 59% of those who voted no attached the same level of importance to the outcome.”

            http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=California_Proposition_8_(2008)

        • well I do not remember his posts on the topic specifically. but to me what is racist is treating AAmericans like hot house flowers who can not be critcized or their group behaviors (from a socilological standpoint) examined. At dkos during the primaries there was a really rank Obot astroturfer who kept insisting that being homophobic was just a black thing and we should accept it because AAmericans were so loyal to the democratic party and there for their homphobia was perfectly okay…after all, aren’t they just more religious than the rest of us.
          I found her particularly stupid and offensive to me as a religious white democrat and to African Americans because she seemed to think they would all aprove of homophobia or at least were not capable of learning to be more tolerant.

          • oh lord, I used the R word and ended up in moderation. Isn’t it about time to get rid of that? How many people come here and acuse the members of racism anymore?

          • One or two a day

            (on a slow day)

        • Brian, upon reflection, I don’t think that the comments were an expression of r@cism as much as a frustration that the person who had the potential to lead on this issue and could possibly sway African Americans as a group was nearly silent. Barack Obama in only the quietest way was opposed to Prop 8. It was the lack of leadership that irritated many people IMO.

        • Brian,

          I searched through all Confluence posts and I could find only two by Garychapelhill that referred to prop 8. One of them was about a marriage between two elderly lesbians who had long fought for gay rights. The other was about the need to see gay rights as civil rights. There was no mention of African American voters in either of these posts.

          If you have complaints about posts on Gary’s personal blog, please contact him there. You are mistaken in your evaluation of Gary’s posts at The Confluence, and I would be shocked if you can find any racism in his posts at any other blog. Gary is passionate in his belief in civil rights for all.

    • Just because Gary no longer blogs here doesn’t mean we’ll let you slander him

  17. DisenfranchisedVoter, on May 4th, 2009 at 1:58 pm Said:
    I think BTD like most Democrats can’t get over the fact that we didn’t vote for Obama and many made a protest vote by voting McCain/Palin…I think BTD along with most of the progressive movement will never forgive us for giving Obama a hard time and nearly costing him the election if the economy hadn’t gone down the crapper.

    Then they should understand that we can’t forgive Obama for undermining the essence of our democracy, using reverse rac*ism, misogyny, and voter suppression and manipulation to win, and has now proven our worst expectations by paying off his biggest bank/investor/union contributors at the expense of taxpayers, waffling on Choice, and gay rights etc. etc. HOW is that irrational? What is irrational is worshiping a personality at the expense of fact–blindly following him because he “talks purty” instead of listening to what he actually says and evaluationg his actions. THAT is irrational.

    • ITA.

      This weekend I was complaining about the lack of liberals in the Democratic Party which pulled my mother and I into an Obama discussion. She is one of those loyal Democrats who isn’t really paying attention and she insisted that she liked him and what he is doing. So I asked her exactly what he’d done that she was pleased with: The economy? The war in Iraq? The Freedom of Choice Act? And she couldn’t name ONE THING.

      It was like the Obamagasm I got stuck in the middle of last Friday with people gushing that he never says “uh” or “um” when speaking. WTF??? Talk about irrational… They’re like pod people!

    • funny, did they ever forgive Bush for the 2000 election theft? Why is is any more acceptable in a democratic primary to buy/steal/cheat/bully and intimidate your way to a political win?

  18. TL was a good legal blog, with an excellent group of quick witted commenters. For a while it was a joy to read.

    It just seemed out of its depth and floundering following the primaries. It lost its political direction.

    BTD made an endless point out of wanting Hillary as VP-something, which following the RFK remarks, could never have happened. (She would have been accused of wanting to poison the POTUS-not at all feasible for the Clintons).
    Jeralyn went plain wierd and wanted to ban people who didn’t toe the Party line, as if they were racists or something.

    • TalkLeft is still a good legal blog.

    • FIt’s been said that, Jeralyn flipped right after attending the Convention and partying with the big dogs. The signs were there before that as she, just like Marsh, was laying the groundwork for their flip just before the convention.

      She got all weird after that and would not tolerate anyone dissing Obma or the party after that. Her attacks on Palin were vicious.
      I understand her not agreeing with Palin’s Republican bonafides but her attacks were aimed at Palin as a woman as well.
      She went out of her way to demonize all PUMA’s just as Taylor Marsh did. look what happened to Marsh as a result. She has a fraction of the traffic she once did. Was it worth it?
      Must have been something in the Champaign cocktails they were drinking…sigh.

    • It’s been said that, Jeralyn flipped right after attending the Convention and partying with the big dogs. The signs were there before that as she, just like Marsh, was laying the groundwork for their flip just before the convention.

      She got all weird after that and would not tolerate anyone dissing Obma or the party after that. Her attacks on Palin were vicious.
      I understand her not agreeing with Palin’s Republican bonafides but her attacks were aimed at Palin as a woman as well.
      She went out of her way to demonize all PUMA’s just as Taylor Marsh did. look what happened to Marsh as a result. She has a fraction of the traffic she once did. Was it worth it?
      Must have been something in the Champaign cocktails they were drinking…sigh.

      • She flipped before the convention, but IMHO, her quick switch probably had something to do with wanting to be accepted by Obama supporters like Arianna and Jane Hamsher

  19. lol…I know that voice…

  20. Testing 1, 2, 3

  21. It sounds like it could be an interesting read. I find most blogs to be too small to really tolerate much flexibility. I’m sure that’s probably a personal issue, since the owners invest too much personal energy into them. Of the major liberal blogs, all quickly dissolve into personal animosity on a fairly regular basis.

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 450 other followers

%d bloggers like this: