I’ll take Matt Stoller seriously when…

So, Matt is one of the latest Democrats to leave the party because, well, Obama let Wall Street run the country in the past four years and drones.  All very good reasons.  Suppressing the votes of fellow Democrats in 2008?  Not that important.

So, I’ll take Matt seriously as a new Democrat in Exile when he finally acknowledges that those of us who preceded him out of the party four years ago had extremely good reasons for doing so and that it didn’t matter who was running against Obama.  Suppressing the vote of any state and nullifying those votes and letting the party get away with it was the first step on the slippery slope that lead to this point and that it should never happen again even if, and I want to make this absolutely clear, even if the opposing candidate is not to Matt’s liking for whatever irrational reason he can come up with to disguise his latent sexist tendencies. What Matt and his fellow former Obama contingent liked wasn’t important.  What is important is counting all of the votes equally and protecting the legitimacy and fairness of the electoral process.  If you don’t have that, you haven’t got anything and the person you let get away with murder will assume you don’t have a problem with anything he does.

So, Matt, you’re late to the party but if you’re serious about the long, hard process of reconstituting the left, you need to embrace us and tell all your friends to stop being snooty, snobby fucktards.  Screw us and pretend we don’t exist and you’ll have a hard time getting our cooperation in the future.  We’ll know if you really mean it or not.  It shouldn’t take long.  Otherwise, we’ll just assume you still don’t get it.

We would send out your white sheets and hormone replacement therapy starter packs but we’ve had a lot of new members recently and supplies are low.

 

About these ads

14 Responses

  1. It wish the blogs and sites I was reading at or before 2008 would have discussed this basic aspect of cheating and stealing to hijack the nomination, both during the process and especially during the runup. I don’t remember Salon discussing it. I don’t remember Digby discussing it. I remember Digby discussing the tactical and strategic misogynism against Clinton, but I don’t remember Digby ever once mentioning the nomination fraud engineering underway meanwhile. If I would have known about sources like this (and shame on the others if this was the ONLY place discussing the fraud engineering) I might have understood it even then. It certainly is easy to see in hindsight when laid out in a schematic step-by-step way. People whose personal identity is invested in not seeing it will continue to not see it to avoid the risk of psychomental identity destabilization or crisis.

    (I just got here and haven’t looked at Colonel Lang’s blog yet. I strongly suspect that he has addressed Candidate Romney’s speech
    to Virginia Military Institute. I suspect Lang will condemn Romney and his candidacy in the strongest terms which dignity permits, and will
    try endorsing Obama in the strongest terms that subtlety allows. I imagine that Lang and his commenters are approaching a state of depressive despair. If I have guessed wrong, I will come right back here to say how wrong I was.)

    • Well, I was more wrong than right. Colonel Lang noted that Romney “will be speaking”. The commenters discussed the speech after given and so far I see more disdain and disgust than despair.

  2. Yawn. 2008 for godsakes.

    “So, Matt, you’re late to the party but if you’re serious about the long, hard process of reconstituting the left, you need to embrace us and tell all your friends to stop being snooty, snobby fucktards. ”

    High school. Btw anybody here enjoy classical music?

    • Then please don’t let us stop you from leaving, and don’t let the door hit you on the ass on the way out.

    • It’s a matter of trust, asshole. We’ll never be able to trust them as long as they continue to not acknowledge the legitimacy of other Democrats’ votes. The next time the have an infatuation with a con artist, they may screw us again. Is really that simple. They need to get a clue that they’re not the smartest people in the world the way they thought and all those Clintonistas weren’t the electoral equivalent of Roseanne Barr. We knew a heartache when we saw him.
      I think it’s beyond time for the people who were embarrassingly wrong about Obama to stop bogarting the megaphone. We have well thought out opinions too that need to be heard.

      So, what of you think of Schmeltzer? Are you into baroque violin?

  3. oh the irony :)

  4. A hazy semi-theory occurs to me arising from the question: what was the average age of the visible front-line foot soldiers for the Obama campaign? Were an awful lot of them between 17 and 23 years old?

  5. “Yawn. 2008 for godsakes”

    How odd. If the incredible rule changing, and delegate give aways had happened to prevent Obama from winning, I’m quite sure it would be acceptable to talk about it as long as Bush/Gore was talked about at the very least. Though it is 2012 now, I see it is still acceptable to pretend Obama’s campaign and the DNC didn’t cheat, stack the deck and change the rules to gift him the nomination. In a way voter rights were trampled much more than Bush/Gore. No one says “Yawn” when that one is talked about. It’s acceptable to still resent it and worry deeply about voter rights and the legitimacy of elections. Yet if Obama does it or it’s done for him against 18 million voters somehow there’s a time frame applied. Odd too because this has never really been aired in the open where it would truly come to light. No one has been held accountable. Very troubling. I can imagine the outcry had these things been done to Obama’s voters after all his nomination was “historical” Hers was too, very much so. Yet after all it was only about wimminz voters so it’s okay to take the attitude many have over this. I learned misogyny is fine and dandy with the DNC, so is vote manipulation and apparently it is fine and dandy with many of the Obama voters as well as the press. Frighting really. Quite a terrible line was crossed there. I’m sure they will do it again. Some can expect a big “yawn” in reply when it does.

    • That’s why I hope that Riverdaughter and/or Ladybird and/or others with the skill and patience can do a whole history writeup of every step of those events complete with charts, diagrams, videos, photos, atrocity stories from caucus goers and primary voters and convention delegates,etc. to post as a special permalink feature which can be referred to and spread around.

    • I notice that willie schmuck doesn’t have the nerve or the manners to address you personally.

  6. Well, I don’t think Stoller was a big time supporter of Obama back in 2008 IIRC but he did “fall in line” so to speak sometime before Obama was elected.

    • Stoller may have thought, as did many Obama voters at the time, that a Democrat was the (marginally) better option. I did. But Obama is not a Democrat and we all know how the ensuing action went.

      Obama does not deserve a second term and Romney does not deserve a first. I’m voting Stein or write-in, haven’t decided, yet. The major parties are gangrenous.

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 433 other followers

%d bloggers like this: