• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    riverdaughter on Oh yes Republicans would like…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Oh yes Republicans would like…
    campskunk on Oh yes Republicans would like…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Memorial Day
    eurobrat on One Tiny Mistake…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Evil people want to shove a so…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Evil people want to shove a so…
    riverdaughter on Evil people want to shove a so…
    campskunk on Evil people want to shove a so…
    eurobrat on D E F A U L T
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Tina Turner (1939-2023)
    jmac on D E F A U L T
    jmac on Does Game Theory Even Help Us…
    William on Does Game Theory Even Help Us…
    William on Does Game Theory Even Help Us…
  • Categories

  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump 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 John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove 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 research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    January 2010
    S M T W T F S
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

  • Top Posts

Jane’s amazing powers of prophecy

I was directed to Jane Hamsher’s comment thread by Wonk the Vote who spotted this clairvoyant Monday morning quarterbacking from Jane Hamsher:
In response to okanogen @ 107

The idea that Hillary would’ve done anything different about health care or anything else is pretty phantasmagorical I believe, but since we don’t know for sure people are free to make their own assumptions.

It was assumed that Rahm would be key in the administration regardless of who won, and the “strike a deal with PhRMA” logic was generated by veterans of the Clinton White House in response to their 1994 health care experience. It’s at the heart of Bill Clinton’s “let’s find a few things we can agree on and pass that, and not worry about this divisive stuff” exhortations in the past few months.

“Shanking off the hangover of the primary” cuts both ways, and I don’t think one side is going to find that any easier than the other.

Ok, let me see if I can pick out the flaw in this comment for Jane.  We will never know for sure what Hillary would or wouldn’t have done because she was never given the chance to demonstrate this to us.  However, using the evidence we had on hand at the time, *Obama’s* behavior was entirely predictable.  In fact, we predicted it.  Over and over again before the election.  Yesterday, Stateofdisbelief suggested that we collect our predictions for an Epiphany Day post, so look for it on or around January 6 where we will present the collected predictions from the 2008 primary and immediate aftermath of the election where we laid it all out about just what kind of president Obama was going to be.
But Jane’s problem goes deeper than just a lack of prophetic power.  She really doesn’t get why people are still mad about the primaries.  Take this comment, for example:
In response to Phoenix Woman @ 5

I had a woman call up and scream at me when I was on CSPAN the other day for all the horrible things Markos and I had done to Hillary Clinton during the primaries, telling me that I had destroyed the Democratic party.

And I’m like, seriously? I know some people you should meet, you guys would have an interesting fight.

Jane, I will tell you why this woman and some of the rest of us are so angry.  It’s because YOU and Markos and Booman and your naive friends who thought you knew what would happen if Hillary was elected decided not to protest all of the slimy machinations of the DNC during primary season.  You heard Donna Brazile divide us into the New Coalition and the Old Coalition and didn’t call her on it.  You listened to the misogyny but didn’t do enough to stop it.  You accepted the results of some pretty rigged committee hearings and some of you cheered for the winning side.  You watched as delegates from Clinton states were forced to vote for a candidate they didn’t represent and you looked the other way.

That last thing just floors me about you, Jane. You went along with the idea that a woman who was a mere 17 delegates behind her opponent, and 17 seriously questionable delegates at that, wasn’t entitled to a genuine roll call and floor vote at the convention. The old Jane Hamsher would have never tolerated such a violation of fair reflection. But the new Obama supporting Jane Hamsher was perfectly OK with it.

And you did this because Obama was your guy.  You wanted him.  And because you wanted him so badly without really listening closely at what he was dogwhistling to the other side, you substituted YOUR judgement for OURS. You supported Obama because you felt you knew what was best for the rest of us.  We waited eight long years to get rid of George Bush and desperately wanted someone we felt was competent to run the country and you and your friends joined in the effort to nullify our votes.  Now, as a result of the decision that you made for the rest of us, we are stuck with Obama.  We got bankers holding on to our money, a health care reform bill that locks us into the insurance industry’s monopoly power, endless war, skyrocketing unemployment and people losing their houses with minimal government interference.  Instead of Clinton III, we got Bush III.  Tell me, Jane, which one would have been worse?

People like me are pretty steamed at you and your buddies.  You took away our choice.  We didn’t get a fair primary season.  We didn’t even get a floor fight.  There was no unity, Jane.  It was all an illusion.  Your guy was forced on many, many Democratic voters because YOU decided that Obama was best for us.  And many people swallowed that because they were convinced that Republicans were worse.  So they voted for a Democrat and they got a Republican anyway.

Jane, how many times do we have to tell you that it wasn’t about Hillary after May 31, 2008?  It was about choice.  Remember Choice, Jane?  The right to self-determination?  The ability to choose your own destiny?  If someone else took that choice away from you, you’d be on their doorstep with a bullhorn and wouldn’t let up.  But because it was YOUR guy who won, it was OK?  What about the choice of the rest of us, Jane? What about CA, NJ, NY, MA, OH, PA, TX, IN, NH, WV, TN, FL, MI and so on and so on? Those big, Democratic states did not vote for Barack Obama in the primaries, Jane. They deserved to cast their votes for the candidate they *did* vote for. I was one of those voters, Jane and I am not letting the Democratic party off the hook for its outrageous behavior towards me and the others. With a primary this close and disputed, the nullification of my vote was unforgivable.

That is why the primary of 2008 isn’t going to go away and why you are going to continue to get angry callers who blame you and your friends for the state of the country under Obama.  You took our choice away.  Your incredibly high handed and self-righteous decision to support Obama and shut down the rest of the party for the supposed good of that party has lead us to this point.

Your predictions about Hillary are irrelevant.

Addendum: This is how a true blue Democrat handles the issue of Choice, Jane.

It’s worth watching the whole thing because Chris Smith really lays out the anti-reproductive services/anti-abortion argument in all its glory and she still makes mincemeat of him without even raising her voice.

Where was Barack Obama when Bart Stupak proposed his amendment? Why wasn’t he all up in Ben Nelson’s face fighting for those young Obot women who voted for him out of fear that Sarah Palin was going to take away their right to abortion? Barack Obama is no Hillary Clinton who can stare down the most obnoxious Congressional anti-abortion foes around. He doesn’t hold a candle to her and her convictions.

Don’t you feel stupid now, Jane? So much for Jane Hamsher, Issues Maven.

410 Responses

  1. Well said.

    • Very well said, RD,

      The last sentence made my day: “So much for Jane Hamsher, Issues Maven.”

      LOLOL ….
      I had a good laugh too when I read “issues” Jane explain her website …. LOL

  2. My hair’s on fire! Phew!

  3. Jane’s much smarter than this.

    • I’ve despised the MF, Rahm Emmanuel, for years. That was the biggest tip-off of all that the BO administration would be a nightmare. If BO fires his ass, I’ll re-evaluate.

    • They are just making it up as they go along. Narrative change by the day or week.

    • Like many others (including Hillary and Biden) he was HATED by the Obots until the day he was picked to be part of O’s administration – then suddenly he was okie-dokie.

    • From where I was sitting, no one at Big Satan that I knew felt they had anything to fear from Obama. They seemed plenty worried about Hillary though.

    • I kinda agree with RD though. Whether Rahm would have been in the administration or not is entirely irrelevant from where I am sitting. What matters to me is that the DNC told half the party to sit the heck down and shut the heck up and the other half of the party helped them do so by smear and jeer. I may be able to come to forgive them but I will never ever forget how I was treated.

      • It’s almost frightening.

        • Somebody in an earlier thread linked to a post by Tbogg – in the comments the head Blogstalker said he wouldn’t vote for Hillary if she was the nominee.

          The head PUMA-hater is an Obot PUMA

          • Yes, I believe that was me that posted the link. And I had the same reaction as you (which is why I posted it)—he is a exactly the same thing that he made fun of and railed against. Their BS is breathtaking, but psychologically interesting.

          • Are you kidding? They were saying that since Nov. ’04. “I’ll happily vote for McCain, I’ll never, ever, ever vote for her.” no reason except they hate her. Which is fine, I’m not telling anyone who to vote for and frankly she wouldn’t have needed their votes anyway, but their hypocrisy is pretty breathtaking.

        • The problem with the revisions is it makes me less likely to trust her as far as I am concerned. Those that don’t know history are doomed to repeat it. That’s one journey I’d rather not take.

      • Re: the Rahm argument. Obama listens to Rahm and Axelrod and does what they say. Does anyone really think Hillary would have been taking orders from him, instead of giving the orders? Pfft.

        • she had him demoted in the Clinton white house. Does anyone seriously think she would have chosen him to serve or that he would have accepted. And we all know damned well she wouldn’t have hired my “girls can’t do math”.

    • I seriously doubt that Emanuel would have been in Hillary’s administration after he supported Obama for the nomination.

      Unfortunately Jane has to find ways to rationalize her poor choices last year. It’s probably an unconscious defense mechanism. People usually sound ridiculous when they are defensive.

      • I think these women and frankly some of us, really have to face to what extent we are the woman’s auxiliary of the democratic party. Jane and all the women who supported Obama over Hillary to keep their blogs active and make money, buy influence and access etc… have to realize they are no more than the woman’s auxiliary of the democratic bloggers.

        It is pitiful.

    • Baseline Scenario has a very interesting post comparing the actions of various key players in the Clinton administration with their actions now on the economic FAIL.

      It seems that Summers, Geithner and Lipton advocated totally different ways to address the economy under Clinton (efforts which were successful) than they are today (efforts that are an ongoing disaster).

      The difference between the two timer periods? Well one doesn’t have a Clinton as president.

      Presumably, this time around, the Summers-Geithner-Lipton group will argue there was no way to restore financial market confidence other than through the kind of unconditional and implicit bailout guarantees they opposed in the 1990s.

      If true, this has a terrible implication. The structure of our financial system has not changed in any way that will reduce reckless risk-taking by banks that are large enough to cause massive damage when they threaten to fail. The logic and 1990s experience of Summers and his colleagues suggest serious problems lie in our future.

      I’m sick to death of this particular brand of revisionist fairy-tale spinning. The stated policies of Obama and Clinton may not have been much different (since Obama’s entire policy portfolio consisted of “me too”), but we DO know from her 30+ years in public service that Clinton would have carried through on what she said, while Obama has reneged on every fantastical promise he made.

      WHEN are Jane and ilk going to wake the frak up and start telling the truth instead of propagating falsehoods?

  4. nahgonnahappen.

    • Hillary won California by 10 points. Guess how many delegate votes she got from us at the convention?

      • Same story here in New York. Plus we had the indignity of seeing our Senators and convention delegation hustle her onto the floor where she could willingly and joyfully (/snark) unify the convention by handing our votes over.

        • That looked like a hostage crisis to me. It was the most sickening thing I ever saw the Democrats do to one of their own. Why didn’t they just gang rape her while they were at it? Why stop the humiliation and brutality early?
          I swear, the party was taken over by Enron in 2008. Beyond disgusting.

          • To me it looked like Pelosi had her boot on Hillary’s neck making her proclaim unanimous support for The Plastic One’s nomination.

            Am still working on forgiving and forgetting. In the meantime Pelosi can go to hell.

          • I was watching it from my computer in my office and wept when I saw Hilary being dragged out. I’ll never forget the look on Pelosi’s face (or that horrible outfit). She was totally waiting for it.

        • Horrible, horrible moment. Makes me sick even now to remember it.

        • Gang rape!

          • Yes, it looked like she was having to force herself to breathe before she spoke….I wasn’t breathing either.

      • You guys didn’t even vote, IIRC, Wasn’t there a state law that forbid going against voter’s wishes on the first ballot? We don’t have anything like that in NJ.

        • Lots of states didn’t “vote.”

          They put hostage-Hillary out there to request Obama be nominated by acclimation.

          • Don’t forget West Virginia where Hillary won the
            primary resoundingly, only to have Senator Byrd join
            Rockefeller, and then the 2 House dems in endorsing

            WV went for McCain in the general; I think Hillary
            would have carried it. For good reason, people
            are grateful to the Clintons there.

          • Hillary won WV by 41 points.

        • We have a law that the first ballot has to follow the results of the primary. That didn’t stop our Governor and our two Senators from forcing most of the delegation to go for Obama. At least there were a few resistors.

          • Pish tosh. Violating voting law is perfectly fine if done for the “right” reasons, like ushering in Hopenchange. Isn’t that the new rulz?

            That’s the thing we cannot get through their their heads. If the Party did it to us, they can and will do it to YOU. Votes matter. The process MATTERS.

            Whether they know it or acknowledge it or not, we have been fighting FOR THEM. For the simple right to have your vote counted. Because standing by and allowing that precedent to be set is going to come back and bite them in the ass. That’s not about Hillary per se, it’s about whether the process is fair and reflective.

        • California wasn’t called when it was its turn as it would have put Hillary on top in the count – and as Donna explained beforehand, the roll call had to be “choreographed” in such a way as to avoid that.

      • Turned this lifelong D into Decline to State. We must change the mindset
        that a 3rd party isn’t possible. We need a party that is not devoted to special interests over the good of the collective people.

  5. Saying over and over that Hillary would have done the same thing as 0bama is merely Jane’s foolish opinion. It ain’t fact. She was duped by “the One” and she has to believe she didn’t make a mistake. Hence she has to believe Hillary and 0bama are the same, and would do the same. Well, did she think they were the same when she luved 0bama so much? No, she thought he was god. So if she were that wrong then, does it ever enter her mind that she was even more wrong now? I wasn’t wrong about 0bama or Hillary. He sucked and she didn’t.

    • And another thing, Jane, the BIG difference between BO and HRC is that HRC doesn’t give a flying f*ck what anyone thinks of her at this point, whereas with BO it’s all about being Mr. Nice Guy. Night and day, Jane. Hillary’s a barracuda; Obama’s a minnow. Got it?

      • Hillary wasn’t perfect by any standard but at least when I pulled that lever for her I voted for a REAL person.

        • A…f*cking…men!

        • I’m pretty sure that 99% of her delegates went to convention with the excitement they would be voting for the first female candidate to have such a great chance to win the nomination (and the presidency).

          I wish they had walked out of convention hall in protest.

      • Or paraphrasing a gem from WMCB over at Taylor Marsh during the primaries: we didn’t need no sparkle pony, we need a hard-working mule to pull us out of the fecking ditch.

      • I’ll confess, I was first moved by Edwards. I lost my home in Katrina. I was impressed by his announcement in NOLA…by the 2 Americas theme. When he pulled out…saw it with my own unbelieving eyes…I dithered a long time. Spent much time over at Political Animal talking it over. Did much research, much reading. Every time…and I do mean every time…I tried to weigh HRC’s record in even the most timid positive way, I’d get gang-raped by the thugs over there. That was a big clue somthing very wrong was going on. Kept waiting for Barry to say something…anything. But I still was undecided. Finally got tired of the abuse and found Taylor Marsh’s site where the conversation was at least civil. That’s when I read WMCB’s brilliant comment paraphrased above. I was literally blinded by the light. Of course, that’s it! That’s what we need. Someone mean, tough and smart who scares the shit out of rightwing bullies. Someone who’s been duking it out with them for years and hasn’t hit the mat yet. Someone who ain’t afraid of nobody. Who’s made all the enemies there are to be made and still gets respect.

        • When Edwards did that “Barack and I are change and Hillary is an old crone” routine, his true colors showed.

          • I wonder if John E. has figured out who ratted him out for cheating on Elizabeth?

            Too bad that AG deal fell thru, poor baby.

          • Agree completely. Even before he pulled out, I was starting to see the smarmy side. Did you notice how he compulsively flicks his tongue back and forth? A tell if there ever was one. Snake! Admired Elizabeth…still do.

          • I admire Elizabeth Edwards, too. She’s smart and she knows how to kick GOP ass. I always thought the best part about John’s presidential campaigns was getting to hear Elizabeth speak. At the same time, I can understand why some take issue with her choices in 2008. She learned the hard way.

          • Yep, Wonk. The hard way is how all learning comes. That’s Barry’s problem. Been too easy. Handed to him on a silver platter by the media, blogger boyz, and DNC. He’s as much a puppet as W.

          • when Edwards was first elected to senate he started to run for president. In 2004 he was Mr War hawk and convinced Kerry to put on a similar false face. Then he was the opposite in 2008. He apologized for his war hyping vote on the IWR by saying “we were all fooled” and that was supposed to make it all better. In fact if you listen to Hillary’s speech on the floor of the senate hers was the only position that made sense. She was voting to slow down bush in an effort to stop him. she knew he didn’t need permission but that he might be shamed out of going if they had enough time and the inspectors got back in.

            Never like Mrs Edwards. She lied for a man she KNEW to be cheating on her and had the nerve to make the sexist statements she did about Hillary. Karma is a real bitch.

  6. Seems the American people are smarter than the access bloggers.

    Obama’s fall among Independents continues Economist/YouGov Poll

    Barack Obama’s approval rating at the end of 2009 marks an all-time low for him in the Economist/YouGov poll, and it is the first time more Americans disapprove than approve of the way he is handling his job. Mr Obama began his term with a 61% approval rating, while only 17% of Americans disapproved. As 2009 ends, only 45% approve of the way Mr Obama is handling his job, while 47% now disapprove.

  7. I’m not steamed, they were wrong and can’t admit that they harmed our country. I too would not wish the party poodle label but alas it is theirs the left’s failed fringe.

    • That’s exactly why they won’t admit they were wrong. They know the harm they did to the country, the party and the future of all. That’s a pretty heavy load to carry if they admit it’s theirs.

    • I’m plenty steamed. Steam’s coming out of every orifice…especially when RD publishes such a crisp reminder. Need to cool it before my arteries explode. LOL.

  8. brilliant, RD, aboslutely positively brilliant!

  9. I think the A-listers who are turning on Obama at this juncture want to project themselves as the legit critics of Obama, against the backdrop of those illegitimate bitter knitters, much the way the Obama campaign sold Obama as some kind of pure apolitical messiah against the backdrop of all those mean scheming politicians. But, Obama isn’t an apolitical anything. He is very much a politician. And, virtually all of the prominent bloggers on the left who rallied behind him, whether they did that at the beginning of the primaries or at the end, very much got wrapped up in the “coolth of Obama.”

    If they were cynical pragmatists, it wasn’t about the issues, it was about their access to sitting at the cool kids table.

    We’ll never know what Clinton would have done for sure, but I have a pretty good idea. I think she is the most viable WYSIWYG presidential candidate on the left that we’ve seen in years. And, I am damn sure that she wouldn’t be accepting any Nobel Peace Prize while she’s escalating troops in Afghanistan. And, that in itself speaks volumes. The oligarchy has diffused legitimate dissent from the left. 11 dimensional chess indeed.

    • Yeah, we were only right about Obama by accident – only a racist would have opposed him before the election.


    • You hit the nail squarely, Wonk. A-listers get no respect from this old broad. You blew it big time you assholes. The election wasn’t about choosind the home coming king. What on earth were you thinking?

    • He could have refused the Peace prize and let someone more needy get the money.

    • Yeah !

      Now that’s a riverdaughter !

    • “…the most viable WYSIWYG presidential candidate on the left…”

      Brilliant, Wonk. Made my day! Happy new year to you too.

  10. Wow – this is an absolutely fantastic post. I’m so glad you wrote it! Thank you and the best to you in 2010!

  11. amen and extremely well said!!!! Thank you for mirroring my thoughts exactly!!!

  12. the “strike a deal with PhRMA” logic was generated by veterans of the Clinton White House

    Maybe so, but who said to make the behind-closed-doors sweetheart deal Obama made?

    (answer – Obama)

  13. So what is the gameplan for the progressive agenda – spiting Emanuel and Obama by letting the GOP take the house in 2010, rather than fighting?

    If you do that, you’ll be betraying low-income families, gays and past and future victims of torture.

    They are fighting for a waterboarding president and an anti-gay caste system.

    This whole “They are all republicans anyways!” spiel is aiding and abetting the GOP – *it doesn’t serve a purpose, it doesn’t further any good agenda and it will not improve the democratic party no matter how apathetic you become*.

    What you get if you step away from the entire fight, and punish the DNC with your apathy, is that more independents and weakly blue democrats decide which democrats get into congress – it’s usually the corporate “centrists”.

    What I am saying is stop your f**king whining. You’ll have to continue working hard, you’ll have to continue sticking by Obama and the reform plan (what can you do to improve it in conference? Have you thought about that or have you been to busy screaming about how Clinton would have been better?) and you need to accept the fact that you won’t reap the fruits of your work until much later. You can’t sulk the gays into the military.

    • Fuck off, moron!

    • They are fighting for a waterboarding president and an anti-gay caste system.

      I assume the “they” you are speaking of is the current administration – because that’s what they are doing as well. But we are supposed to “support” them anyway, on the off chance some crumbs might drop our way somehow. How’s that been working out?

      Wouldn’t it be great if the Democratic party were scared shitless to piss off the Left like GOP is scared to piss off the right? Do you know know how you get there? You withhold votes and support unless they earn them. That is the one and only reason the GOP is leveraged by the far right, and it will be the one and only reason the Dems will ever give a crap about we on the left.

      There is a roadmap for how to do this – it’s already been done to the GOP. And it ain’t going to be done by “sticking by Obama” as you suggest. That’s the roadmap to failure and irrelevance.

      • My personal hero, WMCB! Been jonesing for you.

      • “Do you know know how you get there? You withhold votes and support unless they earn them.”

        Then they’ll just turn to the independents or the lobbyists and try to sustain themselves on them instead.

        Basically, rather than going “The entire party MSUT BE PONUISHED”, you get people excited for more progressive candidates and spurn the more ambiguous ones.

        But incompetent is always better than evil. I am concerned that you don’t know how to whip your party into shape without helping the other side, the way the rightists do. Much fervor, lots of bluster, very little gameplan or concrete strategies.

        Obama is a good liberal constricted by weaklings and a very bloodthirsty opposition.

        • Obama is a good liberal constricted by weaklings and a very bloodthirsty opposition.

          Oh for Jeebus’ sake put down the Kool-aid and step away from the punchbowl. Even Obama denies he is a liberal.

          Did you eat paint chips as a kid?

          • Then work harder and get better democrats into congress.

            What I am seeing here are people thinking the DNC will necessarily become more progressive if you punish it bluntly in the midterms. That’s the same kind of nebulous hope you accuse Obama supporters of.

          • The first step is getting rid of the incumbent Democrats.

        • An evil person realizes that there are mutual consequences to destroying everything; the incompetent one just hits the button without knowing wtf they’re doing.

        • Who exactly do you think the Independants are?

          Uh they are us. Those of us that had problems with pandering to the McClurkins from the get go.

          The Dems either earn my vote or they can jump off a cliff as far as I’m concerned.

        • ROTFLMAO! Obama is a good liberal? Please. No, honey, he’s not. He never was.

          And you can’t argue with results, Axel. I watched how the far right took over their party. Guess what? They did NOT do it by “voting for the one with the “R” anyway. They voted their principles, and if that “helped the other side” then too freaking bad. Yes, they primaried, and tried to support candidates more to their liking, and no one here has said we should not do that. But they did not vote for people that did not reflect their values, PERIOD.

          The result of that was that the R’s lost some elections. But lo and behold, after a few of those losses, when the nutbag wingnuts said “Jump”, the GOP started asking “How high?”

          But whether you agree with me or not doesn’t really matter – nor does whether or not you think my voting strategy will have the results I desire. If there is one thing I have learned it is that I OWN MY VOTE. Got that? It’s mine. Mine mine mine. I do not owe it to anyone. Not a godddamned living soul has any claim on it whatsoever. It’s MINE. And I’ll wield it how I damn well please.

          The guilt trip doesn’t work on us anymore, Axel. The Democratic Party burned that bridge for me already. I don’t OWE them a thing. Please let me stress that. I don’t OWE them or you a goddamned thing. There is nothing here you or your friends can get that guilt-hook into, Axel. The rules have changed, sweetie.


          “Progressive” doesn’t stand for/mean anything.

          I’m a real and proud LIBERAL. Always have been always will be. As for your comment that Obama is a “good liberal” – you need to go back to grade school.

          • What she said…

          • Further…call me a contrarian…the moment the goons turned “liberal” into a dirty word was the moment of blinding self-realization that I am…gasp…a liberal. Hadn’t even actually known that about myself before. So, let’s take that word back for our team! You know, that glorious word whose root is liberty. Shout it, Sisters! Shout it, Brothers!

          • These are not progressives.

            These are Regressives.

            No Progressive would have allowed women’r rights as human beings to be set back by 40 years in just two short years, much less PARTICIPATE in the destruction.

            I’m done with this party. If they want my vote they will have to show me what they have done, not make their bullshit promises. They have held women hostage for decades, holding the same damned threats over our heads, and pretending they would “protect” the rights that we already own by virtue of simply being born as a human being in the USA. As I watch them further denigrate women and further strip away their rights, even unto trashing the right to have mammograms before it’s too late, my respect level for these Regressives is in negative territory and won’t be moving in the plus column for a long time–if ever.

            The only difference between the Repubicans and the ‘New” Democratic Party is the Republicans don’t pretend they care about women or their rights. This so-called New Democratic party has shown what I suspected for a long time– when their misogyny skeletens fell out of the closet in the form of Barack Obama and his sycophants — who were all to happy to join in on the destruction of the far more competent candidate. When you attack one woman, you attack us all.

            From now on, I am going to ask every single candidate to publically state what his or her plans are for the ERA. One stutter and my vote is lost. Incidentally, that legislation has been sitting on Nancy’s Committee desk since July. I guess she’s too busy making sure she’s the only powerful woman in America. There is nothing worse than a woman who kicks the ladder out from under herself. Nancy just hasn’t experienced her “turn” yet. But it’s coming.

            Like I said, and it bears repeating, I’m done with this party. I would vote for Dracula before I would vote for one of them again unless and until they SHOW me that they represent me instead of Wall Street, Health Insurers, Big Pharma and any other corporation that sends the whores their campaign money. Till then, they can pound salt for all I care.

            Furthermore, just for spite, when everything else is equal, I will from now on vote for any woman who is running against a dick, whether I think she’s more competent or not. I have watched for too long how a mediocre man gets away with trashing a superior woman in campaigns and I am sick of it.

            I’ve saw my last straw in 2008.

            Oh, and Happy New Year, Riverdaughter and co-writers.

          • you rock Uppity! I have voted Democratic ever since I was 18 ywears old. but no more. I am through with them. From now on alternative party candidates & only alternative candidates. I’d vote for Jack the Ripper before I’d vote for any of those DINOs ( they are no longer true democrats) but Dracula has my vote too!

        • “Obama is a good liberal constricted by weaklings and a very bloodthirsty opposition.”

          Mil gracias, pendejo. Do you know how hard it is to get pozole con queso off the goddam computer screen?

          Still, the laugh was worth it. Too bad teh Precious makes you work on New Year’s, though.

        • Obama is a good liberal constricted by weaklings and a very bloodthirsty opposition.

          OMG–that hilarious! Good liberal BASED ON WHAT? Get your head out of your ass please. If he is “constricted by weaklings,” here’s a news flash: that means HE IS THE WEAKLING. Never poor Bambi’s fault. Always defend Bambi. You are really pathetic.

          • Exactly, FIF, how exactly is are the strong ever constrained by weaklings?

          • It’s exactly the point Jon Stewart keeps making about putting people like Barbra Streisand on the list of 100 People Who Will Destroy America. It goes right over their heads when he suggests you put people who actually have….POWER…on that list. Such stupidity!

          • No! Obama is Harrison Bergeron and Hillary is Diana Moon-Glampers!

        • Obama is a good liberal constricted by weaklings and a very bloodthirsty opposition.

          The opposition isn’t even trying. (they’re laughing up their sleeves).

          • You want a bloodthirsty opposition, you need to go back to the Clinton years. Barry soaking in milk and honey.

          • Why should the “opposition” try, since Obama is doing exactly what the GOP would want him to do …. calling him a socialist etc. etc. is just good old rightwing politics.

            Btw. Anyone noticed how quiet it is around Bush these days? I read he is being invited to give $ 200.000 speeches. Thats about it. I Bet W and his friends enjoy the big joke and the good laugh: Obama, who seems to admire W and follows happily in his footsteps.

            What was wrong under Prez Bush is wrong under Prez Obama. That is why it is quiet around Bush. ObamaDems are in constant denial.

        • Logic translated:

          A) The room was dark
          B) When the light switch got flipped, the bulb was dead
          C) Changing the light bulb requires you to flip the light switch back to the off position momentarily
          D) Better to sit in the dark

    • What I am saying is stop your f**king whining. You’ll have to continue working hard, you’ll have to continue sticking by Obama and the reform plan (what can you do to improve it in conference?

      Just subsitute Hillary Clinton’s name for Obama’s. It’s not very persuasive.

    • My Mom used to say that ignorance is no excuse, and the more people like you who are ill informed spout nonsensical party palp, the more I believe her. Ignorance is no excuse.
      You have the ability to google, obviously. Use it, for once, or is that pay cheque from the administration just too attractive to avoid educating yourself?

    • Blah, blah, blah. Heard it all before. Doesn’t work over here.

    • You can’t sulk the gays into the military.


    • You Democrats (I resigned June 1, 2008) already have the House, the Senate, and the Presidency and you aren’t doing shit with all that now. I’m supposed to believe that if you only had 112% of the Legislature things would all be magically different and the ponies would finally arrive from back-order?

      Are we out of Iraq? Afghanistan? Is Gitmo closed? How about the Bagram detention center? How’s that economy doing? Unemployment? Foreclosures? DOMA been revoked yet? Closed down the faith-based money-wasting crap? FOCA passed? No?

      Instead, what we’ve got from you people is a massive giveaway to Goldman-Sachs, expanding the wars (next stop – Yemen! or is it Pakistan? I forget), and a so-called health care bill that amounts to no more than another massive giveaway, this time to insurance companies, with the added jab of screwing over me and other women yet again.

      But I should stop whining. Because Presidenting is such a hard job and the Senators and Reps can’t be expected to write legislation to benefit actual people instead of lobbyists and really they’re all trying so hard and how can I be such a bitch? So so sorry.

    • Yo, Ax, whine this!

      Gods forgive for saying this, but as a gay man I hope you and the rest of the GLBT community that supported this fool BURN for what you did in 2008.

      With every issue that affects us from DADT to the so-called “marriage issue”, I actually enjoy watching him screw you guys without lube because YOU TOTALLY ASKED FOR IT!

      The AA community (yeah, I’m black too) I may not excuse but at least can understand. But you? You jackholes should have known better. So why don’t you play on Americablog with the rest of the twinks. This spot is for the thinking adults

    • Oh yea, that’s what we are–apathetic. That’s why we stood our ground on principle when so many joined the group think hokey-pokey. You are exactly the reason we are in this situation: you are preaching the same tired, false “party unity” crap. You have also woefully underestimated our resolve.

    • Well that was entertaining. The “progressive agenda” – what the fuck is that. Trojan republicans. Come back when you can pronounce the word “liberal.”

    • Yes, my top priority getting gay men in the military.

      Your Mommy is calling, you need a diaper change.

  14. Everybody wave to the Blogstalkers! (They’re live-blogging us today)

    ‹^› ‹(•¿•)› ‹^›

  15. that a woman who was a mere 17 delegates behind her opponent, and 17 seriously questionable delegates at that, wasn’t entitled to a genuine roll call and floor vote at the convention. -RD

    Yup, and she earned her right as a candidate via our votes a ROLL CALL VOTE FOR VP TOO! They threw us voters out the door and took our Voting Rights away when they did that.

    • And Hillary’s primary votes from mostly largely populated states were 3000 times those of O in the tiny caucus states. Even old Joe would look out at Iowa gatherings and scream “Hello, Chicago!” Caucus states easy to game, esp since the DNC refused requests for IDs.

  16. Rd, Ms. Dowd had an interesting piece up as an opinion. Hmmm.
    Yeah. Hmmmmm… caught it yesterday.


    Well. once again Happy New Year. I don’t really think there is a Democratic party as we knew it — so?
    Pretty sad. The way the times are though? And her points?

    (last sentence).

    Pretty interesting to read this kind of thing after all that other stuff a while back.

    hugs, RD.


    I hope 2010 is going to be a good year and some decent honest politicians start emerging. Hope so. Personally? My faith in the politicians in this country is no more. Not when they go against everything we thought the Dems stood for?

    It is beyond the “we told you so” — because you should see it out here? I’m serious. And if CA leads the way, well, you don’t want to know.

    It is 1930 redux.

    You can feel it. People are flooding here from other states, and natives are looking to leave.

    • Even a broken clock is right twice a day…

      • MoDo never liked Obambi. She only props him up so she can bring him down.

      • Bite my tongue, but Dowd piece was good. However my eye caught this re Barry “surrounding himself with Clintonites”. Sooooo flipping tiresome. Duh, fools, if Payton Manning surrounds himself with Green Bay Packers, that doesn’t make the team Colts. Get it?

        • Most Democrats with administration experience are “Clintonites.”

          The “Carterites” are mostly dead or retired.

        • MoDo is so frozen in the past, she can’t even see the present.

        • MODO has an incurable case of CDS–she always has to slip it in there somewhere.

          • MoDo’s so jealous of Hillary, her eyes are green. She wants to be the Queen Bee. Same with Nancy. And that’s the name of that tune…the some time ugly underbelly of feminism. Wish it weren’t so, but there you have it.

  17. I wasn’t even aware there was poo-flinging contest with Hamsher, but I gotta say – I’m LOVIN’ this poo-war of 2010.

    It keeps everyone who remembers the primary debacle from forgetting what was done to us and our party, and educates those that ignored/missed the wrongdoing an opportunity to understand how we were ALL had.

    This is the only narrative that may force change in this party (this party I no longer belong to)… it’s like we’re the Democratic Resistance, and the only way we’re going to survive and strengthen is to get others who become engaged to view the history of how we got here.

    No one teaches history anymore…. so, THANK YOU for that… you’re schoolin’ Hamsher pretty good.

    • “I never give them hell. I just tell the truth and they think it’s hell.” -Harry S Truman

    • Jeff, “the Democratic Resistance”. Me like. I’m so with you. I’d like nothing better than for Barry et al to have a come-to-Jesus moment and grow a spine and get some principles. I’d support them 100% even if I didn’t agree with them 100%. But it ain’t gonna happen if we permit them to keep making excuses for their piss-poor decisions and performance. They would all benefit from some tough love.

      • I don’t care if they grow a spine or not (although I could at least applaud the policies). They shut me down…. threw me away… I will NEVER forget.

        I want the Democrats who blindly pledged allegiance to the One, and walked right over me, to have HISTORY be reminded to them until they admit they were wrong about their Messiah. I want all those Democrats who just ‘voted to go along’ and did not pay close enough attention to the primary to be TAUGHT the HISTORY of what happened to us so that they finally open their eyes and understand what we have in Obama – that the past really does predict the future…. that the country is exactly where ALL OF US (TC’rs) expected we would be right now.

        I don’t want them demanding his spine – I want them demanding his head.

      • I like “Democratic Resistance,” too. I also like “Free Democrats,” as in “Free French.”

  18. The Economist:

    Barack Obama’s approval rating at the end of 2009 marks an all-time low for him in the Economist/YouGov poll, and it is the first time more Americans disapprove than approve of the way he is handling his job. Mr Obama began his term with a 61% approval rating, while only 17% of Americans disapproved. As 2009 ends, only 45% approve of the way Mr Obama is handling his job, while 47% now disapprove.

  19. It must be a crime to vote and expect your VOTE TO BE COUNTED IN THE US by Donna Brazile’s New Democratic Party.

  20. Yet another tired NYT piece:

    “No-Commoner Obama” Matt Bai

    By the definition of the word as it came to be used in the early part of the 20th century, Obama is indisputably in the progressive tradition. Like both Roosevelts and Woodrow Wilson, he has pursued financial regulation — radical by the standards of the last two presidents — that would seek to temper the power of the markets without controlling them. His recalibration of campaign fund-raising, achieved through the triumph of small-dollar donations over the influence of lobbyists and corporations, would have delighted progressives like Robert La Follete, who fought in their day for women’s suffrage and the direct election of senators. And Obama’s relentless pursuit of health care reform, even at the expense of provisions that liberals held sacred, may well place him alongside F.D.R. and Lyndon Johnson in the pantheon of progressive presidents who were able to substantially amend the nation’s social contract.

    What Obama is not, at least not by temperament, is a populist.


    • Unbelieveable.

    • Not too many populists are the wholly-owned property of Wall Street.

    • Uh, no. You need to read Kokol’s seminal work The Triumph of Conservatism. TR was no progressive. Nor was Wilson. That turn of the century so-called progressivism was a triumph for the oligarchs.

    • ““in legislation no bread is often better than half a loaf.”

      “Half a loaf, as a rule, dulls the appetite and destroys the keenness of interest in attaining the full loaf. A halfway measure never fairly tests the principle and may utterly discredit it. It is certain to weaken, disappoint, and dissipate public interest. Concession and compromise are almost always necessary in legislation, but they call for the most thorough and complete mastery of the principles involved, in order to fix the limit beyond which not one hair’s breadth can be yielded.”

      –Robert M. La Follette

    • His recalibration of campaign fund-raising, achieved through the triumph of small-dollar donations over the influence of lobbyists and corporations, would have delighted progressives like Robert La Follete, who fought in their day for women’s suffrage and the direct election of senators.

      That is just plain wrong. Do some damn research Matt, before you open your mouth and reveal your ignorance. The numbers are all out there–the majority of his money came from Wall St. Geez.

    • Carter faced a challenge from his left, in the person of Ted Kennedy, during his 1980 re-election bid, and Clinton’s legacy of “triangulation” haunted his wife’s candidacy last year.

      Yup, hurt her so much she got more votes than Obama…. lots more.

      That statement is like saying Gore lost in 2000 because more people wanted to have a beer with Bush. No logic

  21. HRC would not have let the Congress come up with a Healthcare Bill. She would have handed them hers.

    HRC would not have let Pelosi write the Stimulus Bill. She would have handed Congress hers.

    HRC would not have Geithner and Summers running Treasury.

    HRC would not have had Rick Warren leading prayer at the Inauguration.

    HRC would have had a cabinet that looked like America.

    If she could have gotten Obama off her back, she would have had a Vice President who is knowledgeable, articulate and a worker.

    HRC would never have appointed an anti-choice male to run the DNC.

    While I can be accused of “personality” politics, I believe that Hillary’s experience and qualifications are unique, and outstanding, even if she hadn’t been in a field of pipsqueaks.

    Thank you for these posts, RD.

  22. Here’s the thing Jane, Hillary is a real Democrat. She has demonstrated principles for her entire life evidenced by her struggle moving from her early family Republican roots to become a Democrat. She was then and has always been very thoughtful about those issues and principles. And she continues to demonstrate loyalty to her party and to fighting through a pseudo Republican White House to get some good things done even today.

    To think for a minute that she would be a pseudo Republican, completely corrupt and craven and owned by Goldman-Sachs and the insurance industry like Obama is frankly insane and counter to all the facts and evidence in front of us.

    But like everyone keeps saying, this isn’t even about Hillary per se. It’s the fact that the “New Democratic” party abandoned democracy, abandoned it’s constituency, threw the voters out and told them they’re irrelevant, and is now flaunting its new status as part of the bonus class. This was obvious from the Primaries that the Obama side was rooted in this corruption and would go in the direction it has. The lack of principles and even the slightest concern for ordinary American citizens was obvious to anyone who was watching. The joking in SF about people in PA being backwards and clinging to their religion and guns was not an anomaly or a mistake, it was at the core of who Obama is. Many people, Hillary included, would never think of their fellow citizens that way.

    Jane (and others), that’s the side you picked. That says something about who you are. I understand why you need to delude yourself now and rationalize it away by imagining Hillary would be the same. But that’s insane.

    • Dandy — this is worth repeating because it’s exactly the problem with the New Dem Party and also EXACTLY what Jane is working to obscure with the revisionist Clinton’s no better pablum:

      It’s the fact that the “New Democratic” party abandoned democracy, abandoned it’s constituency, threw the voters out and told them they’re irrelevant, and is now flaunting its new status as part of the bonus class.

    • The joking in SF about people in PA being backwards and clinging to their religion and guns was not an anomaly or a mistake, it was at the core of who Obama is.


  23. “I assume the “they” you are speaking of is the current administration – because that’s what they are doing as well.”

    Yes. The Obama administration is supporting the idea of waterboarding.

    Listen, do you want the GOP to make gains or not. At this point, your grip on reality is so weak it seems like a good question to ask.

    This is basically the 2nd Indochina War – the communists have one singular objective and work for it tirelessly, while South Korea and the US can’t stop bickering, mistrusting one another and setting up like 22 objectives.

    I’m not saying you should just let the “centrists” and the villagers run the DNC, because they know best.

    I am saying that the best way to ensure a future DNC is ruled by them is to tell the base to become apathetic.

    Obama doesn’t think reform is better without the PO, he doesn’t want to keep gays as secondary citizens and he doesn’t want to pretend carbon emissions must be limited. But he is surrounded by scum and now you people are telling the base they might as well stay home in the midterms. Well guess what, that will only make the DNC more purple and make things harder for Obama.

    It’s a vicious circle, and the GOP definitely approves of this kind of nonsense.

    • Listen, do you want the GOP to make gains or not.

      It ain’t up to us. But why should we support the DINO party?

      • Because they don’t walk in lockstep with Palin and Cheney.

        Incompetent is always preferable to evil.

        Show that progressive candidates can make it into congress. Rally hard against the ambiguous ones and destroy the careers of the manchurians.

        But don’t act as if just sitting on your hands in the midterms is going to school the DNC proper. That’s like screaming at your dog and expecting him to understand what you want, rather than firmly and consistently rewarding his obeisance and punishing his breaches until his behavior is decent.

        You change the DNC by being unambiguous but also specific. Throwing your hands up and saying that they are all rotten just helps the Bachmann party.

        I know all of you here are more engaged and knowledgeable than I, but apathy and general anger is wrong. Locate the tumor, then cut. Don’t smash the body with a hammer and think that’s going to do the trick.

        • Because they don’t walk in lockstep with Palin and Cheney.


        • you really are delusional if you think that the DINO party can totally ignore it’s base, delete their votes, then come back and win because they are better than the other party. That’s some Koolaid. I like the throwing around of names – Bachmann, Palin, Cheney. How about Obama, Nelson, Pelosi, Reid et al.
          One type of evil is more evil than another?

        • Change the DNC – the machine that Obama installed once he moved it to Chicago?… please, stop.

          It will need to be burned completely to the ground before I come back… Then, and only then, will I come back to help replant (as Lambert says).

          You keep thinking the Repubs are worse then the Dems… come on, look at the FRAUD the Dems thrust upon us. We made it through 8 years of GWB – we’ll be lucky to make it through 4 years of BO… but we will get through it no doubt. You want to support this fraud – go ahead – but those of us who saw this coming and cannot believe we have to live with this now know a lot of the DNC was handsomely rewarded ($$) to commit this fraud, and I will educate as many people as I can about this fraud so they will stay away from the DNC until they are reformed (TRULY reformed).

          As stated above by others, this party will never take us seriously until we withhold our vote – it is the ONLY power we have.

          • frankly I’m disgusted with with whole Democratic Party for wasting our time with this clown (apologies to myiq) especially when they had such good candidates- plural, not just Hillary- running in the 2008 primaries. I’ll never vote for these DINOs again

        • Obama and his supporters are the tumor.

    • The GOP is not the center of my universe.

    • ” and he doesn’t want to pretend carbon emissions must be limited.”

      Bah, that should be “carbon emissions must *NOT* be limited”.

      I am a flaming lefty by American standards, so I’m working towards the same goals as anyone here. I’m just saying that the best way to fix the DNC is with a scalpel and a game plan, not just emotionally engaged bashings with a mallet.

      • Then get busy. You’ve got a lot of fixing ahead.

        Oh and fuck the DNC!

      • Dude. Every solution to climate issues are not equal. Now run along.

      • Bit late now to have a scalpel and a game plan.

        The Dems have a majority in both houses, and a President-or did you happen to miss that tiny fact while you’re still musing on the Republicans.

      • You say scalpel and game plan, and I say gasoline and torch.

        It can still be rebuilt, but the perpetrators of the fraud must be gone before any rebuilding can take place.

        You don’t build a wooden house opon a termite nest.

      • The best way to fix the DNC and the entire Demcratic party is to destroy it. It is dead and it is time to get the cadaver out of the living room.

      • The DNC is a donkey that’s drunk on big money. You can’t solve addiction with a scalpel.

        Clean house and then rebuild.

      • Please stop with the sanctimonious preaching. There are more of us here who have been politically active for decades than you can count. We don’t need your advice, thank you.

    • You are a pathetic shill. Please fuck off now.

    • We took back the White House, the House of Representatives and the Senate. So where is single-payer?

      • You didn’t have 60 single-payer-supporting democrats in the senate. Obama isn’t a miracle worker. Suck it up.

        • Moving the goalposts I see..

          You do realize that Obama took single-payer off the table before discussions began?

          • Actually it was Pelosi, although I suspect they are the same animal.

            I just figure that Mr. you should support the Democratic Party should realize that Obama ain’t the only Dem the lot of us have problems with.

            then again, the “tell” that they could give to gfigs about the “average” voterwas when they basically told half of us to go to hell during the primaries. Don’t expect me to weep because the second half that applauded us getting the finger are now getting theirs.

            As I said, either the Dems in charge do something to earn our votes or they can go bye-bye. Either or as far as I’m concerned.

          • If Obama wanted it on the table it would have been on the table.

        • And that Axelrod did none of his media magic on either single payer or public option?

        • Oh where is Jon Stewart when we need him?

        • So this was Barry’s strategy: lie back and spread your legs but beg them not to make you suck their dicks.

        • Obama isn’t a miracle worker.

          Oh but he IS! Or, he was supposed to be. Unlike any other. Transcendent. Entirely new. Now, he’s just at the mercy of the same lobbyists and special interests? Go figure. You are the sucker, not us.

          And when, exactly, did he fight fiercely for single payer? I must have missed that part.

    • “Obama doesn’t think reform is better without the PO, he doesn’t want to keep gays as secondary citizens and he doesn’t want to pretend carbon emissions must be limited. But he is surrounded by scum and now you people are telling the base they might as well stay home in the midterms. Well guess what, that will only make the DNC more purple and make things harder for Obama”

      Um, are you a mind reader? How do you know what Obama thinks or believes? If you believe his words, then you are sucker. His actions belie his words at every turn and crossing. He lies, lies, and lies. Only believe actions, not words.

      As far as being surrounded by scum, well, Obama picked them. What does that say about him and his supposedly “good judgement” and ability to effect “change?” Get the kool-aid out of your veins.

    • WRONG.

      You just do not support WRONG.

      Who cares if the Republicans get more control if all we have is built on lies and fraud.

      You seem to think we don’t care about our former party – on the contrary we care more than you’ll ever know (still) – because we care about the party’s (former) principles – it’s not about the party, it’s bigger than that.

      You cannot defraud members with proportional votes, count some front-loaded primaries but not others, award votes that were NEVER made to a candidate that WAS NOT ON THE BALLOT and expect some people to just ‘go with the flow’ – sometimes you have to take a stand against that type of FRAUD.

      If your party cares so little about you that they throw you (and your vote) away – are you really a member of that party anyway/anymore?

      So why are you asking me to support that party? – they don’t want me – they made that perfectly clear.

      You are where you are because you supported that fraud.

      • As long as the GOP in its current form exists, I don’t give a toss about your feelings. They are scum and it is our duty to antagonize them, even if we have to lose our chance to punish the party over a fait accompli.

        I guess you don’t hate homophobia and torture enough to swallow your pride and punish the party selectively rather than bluntly.

        I want to punish the DNC too for it’s flimsiness. I’m just not going to do it in a *stupid fucking manner*

        • I guess you’ve done enough trolling for today.


        • Exactly what part of stupid fucking manner are you opting out of? Your manner is all stupid, all fucking, all the time.

        • So where exactly does Fraud fit on the hierarchy of sins that includes homophobia and torture?

          Because from where I sit, Obama was making out with McClurkin during the primaries and hasn’t closed Bagram or ended rendition – so those two are perfectly alive and well right now (something else I get to thank you for – since you supported the fraud).

          I’m not punishing the DNC, I don’t exist to the DNC…. and neither does my time, support or money…. anymore.

        • He keeps missing the part about Obama supporting torture and homophobia too…how convenient.

        • honey bear, Obama is a homophobe (:please do not let me take any pictures with Gavin Newsome…..”) and we are still sending assumed terrorists to places where they can be tortured. And frankly, torturing terrorists is not my top priority. My top priority is the right or women not to live with taxation without representation and the right to have our votes counted.

          • He’s only pretending to be a homophobe! Deep down he’s a liberal champion! I can see it in his eyes! And sure, maybe rationally, if you keep voting for a homophobe in the name of defeating homophobia, he has every reason to despise you as a damn fool and throw you under the bus knowing you’ll vote for him anyway–but if this were a Disney movie, he’d totally develop a conscience and change his ways, instead! Just like Beauty and the Beast or The Princess Diaries!

          • LOL

            Axel: playing the part of Meg with Obama as Hercules.


    • The problem with Kool Aid addiction is that its sufferers think they are special. But their not, they are just like any other addicts.

      The GOP argument is just typical begging of non-addicts for enablement. It’s the same emotional blackmail used by addicts to suck the life, money, and resources out of others to keep their addiction going.

      If the Democrats lose seats to the GOP in 2010, or the WH in 2012, it will be because they lost our votes in 2008 and did nothing to win them back. I’m not responsible for their failures, and I’m certainly not responsible for enabling your political fantasies about Obama.

      • Funny how if seats get lost it is always framed as our fault for not “supporting” their weak corporate asses, instead of being framed as THEIR FAULT for not striving for our votes by doing what’s right.

        • If they want my vote they’ll have to do a lot better than “The Republicans are worse.”

        • And you know something, WMCB, the thing that worries me least in the world is their telling me it’s my fault. Once you free yourself from an abuser, that crap totally loses it’s mojo.

          • Yep. It’s really funny when they try the tried-and-true guilt trip, and then sit back and wait expectantly for your reflexive grovel……. and you DON’T!

            LOL! No mojo in it anymore.

          • Yeah, Baby. Jump! I’ll soak my feet in your blood, Vampires!

          • Yea, then they immediately go to insults. Poor little troll doesn’t realize we have seen it all before, and if we didn’t cave then, it’s never going to happen.

      • Valhalla: I’m certainly not responsible for enabling your political fantasies about Obama. Exactly.

    • We’re liberals. This is a liberal site. We’re for liberal policies and principles, not for a particular party, precisely because there is no party that supports liberal principles. If you supported Obama before or do now, it’s either because you’re not liberal, or because you’re an idiot. No exceptions.

      I will not go along with any of this crap from the new democratic party because there is no where else to go. I will not support these new efforts to enslave women. I will not support torture. I will not support the raping of american and handing everything over to the bonus class. I will not support a party that fought against democracy and their own members.

      There is somewhere else to go. I can vote for individuals that seem rational and share my principles. I can vote for other parties. I can be part of forming another party. But I don’t have to vote for a turd because he’s in a party that used to be one I belonged to.

      The GOP is not my problem. I will not ever be blackmailed into voting against my principles because the likely other winner would be worse. If that’s your path, then how have you done any better than the GOP. What’s the difference. They’re branches of the same corporatist party. Wake up.

      • Dandy Tiger for President!

      • Yeah baby! This song has been my anthem ever since May 31, 2008. They threw me away. I don’t owe them $hit.

        • Oh bluelyon you are right, this song is perfect for my response to the democratic party’s pleas for my support. I think Axel is young. I remember when I was younger, I thought I could effect change from within and occasionally had some success. If the democratic party had let the peoples votes elect our president in this last election, I guess I might still think there was a chance to change the party from within. But when they completely disregarded the wishes of more than half of the voters and broke so many of their own rules to install their own favored candidate, that was it for me. Democrat or Republican they’re all so corrupt now that until we have choices apart from these 2 parties, I will be voting for women candidates regardless of party affiliation. Maybe when we finally have at least gender parity in political offices, things will start to REALLY CHANGE. So, unlike Axel, I have outgrown the need to work with the system and will continue to try and disrupt business as usual. Good stuff all! Thanks!

          • voting for women… why is it so hard for people to see that is the solution. Get half women in power and the country is not both more populist and more left. It is a no brainer. But also… women deserved to have 51 percent of the power. And in the democratic party we have for years done most of the heavy lifting during election time. Not a single democrat would have been elected in the last 40 years if not for the fact that women vote in the majority for democrats.

    • So you’re saying the President is just too weak to accomplish anything good, not that he’s actively evil. And you imagine telling me this will make me want to support Obama an the Democrats.

      That Kool-Aid must be some really good shit, that’s all I can say.

    • I am saying that the best way to ensure a future DNC is ruled by them is to tell the base to become apathetic.

      You keep repeating this nonsense. No one is advocating apathy. Quite the contrary–apathy created the climate that allowed millions of Dems to buy the Axelrod marketing campaign in spite of ample evidence in Obama’s history that revealed him to be a callow politician with no principled convictions.

      & please stop embarrassing yourself with the Obama is true-blue but surrounded by “scum.” Who do you think hired these “scum?” And if he had real convictions and strength, he would be making the decisions–and we think he is. That’s why we’ve ended up with this mess. You are still sadly deluded and think he is something he clearly is not. Splash some cold water on your face.

      • p.s. Have you ever heard of civil disobedience? It is anything but apathy and requires principles and courage.

    • the GOP did make gains, they out their guy in the White house.

  24. Happy New

  25. Year 2010

  26. I’m glad to see so many men comment here. It takes more balls than a Christmas tree what with how many pissed off women are over here.

  27. O, hell, I’ll say it: Jane, Naomi, Donna, Caroline, Oprah, Taylor, Obama girl, Ms. magazine, Claire, Nancy, Arrianna, Susan (Sarandon), and others,

  28. I hereby disclose that I was one of the people dissing Hillary Clinton as hard as I could during the primaries. Yes, I was completely possessed by my own projections onto Obama, who I thought was God’s gift to America. In the mirror of his smoothness, I actually thought I saw someone operating at a higher level of consciousness. I even thought Hillary was the one who represented the worst of all the old politics. Needless to say, I am horribly mortified by everything that’s transpired since and have totally withdrawn my support from all things related to the Democratic Party after 43 years of voting for nothing else.

    I’m not stupid. I care about this country. The health care issue was the only one I was really intense about, because fixing our broken system would have done the most good for the most Americans, myself included. The reason I say this is because Jane Hamsher is human, too, and makes mistakes. Sometimes BIG ones like I made.

    I’m not asking anyone to tread lightly here. I understand your anger. But at least Jane has seen the light on Obama, as I have. Enjoy the “I told you so’s,” you’ve earned the privilege. I’m not even going to add a “but…”

    • With an attitude like that, her mea culpas are useless to fixing the problems she helped create.

    • We’re not pissed because Jane and others have finally seen the light. We’re pissed because they still aren’t willing to admit we were right all along, and because they are trying to rewrite history.

      • imho, it’s not even that they have to admit we were right or admit that they were wrong. But, what the Janes (bloggers who are now trying to be the “voice of the progressive opposition”) are doing is to keep pointing to Hillary’s holdouts as illegitimate as if this somehow elevates their criticism of Obama now. It does not.

        Obama is treating the base exactly the way the base taught Obama to treat them. I don’t think the WH is worried about the Janes (or the Ariannas for that matter) turning up the criticism right now anymore than he was worried about the sweeties who were told to get over the primaries.

    • I actually like what Jane is doing now and wish her only the best. It would behoove her to not rewrite history though since it’s unnecessary for any health care goals.

      • Ralph, she is still saying there is no difference between HRC & Obama. That is patently false, as their records will attest.

        • I know and that’s what pisses me off. There is no reason to do that or try to rewrite any history. Whayt Jane does now is not altogether dependent on the past.

        • plus she is just making shit up to defend herself like the nonsense about everyone expecting Rahm to be in either a Clinton or Obama white house… bullshit

    • I’m tired of saying told you so, but I don’t like the rewriting of history either.

    • We support what Jane is doing. We just think those of us who saw through Obama early on should be included in the efforts to fight for liberal policies.

      • Add FDL to the list of places I’ve been banned from.

        • damn. i thought it was just me. i got banned back fairly early in the primaries and i don’t even know what for – all my inquiries were ignored. jane just didn’t want to deal with it – it was easier to whack the hillary supporters.

          so forgive me if i don’t feel sorry for her now.

          • I blame all of them who were not investigating Obama while selling him like the media sold Bush2 and the Iraq War. Can someone cite one thing O did in his political career to help anyone who couldn’t grease his palm?

            “Obama was in a position to do good, but he did not.” Southside native high up in the Dem party before O leveled Alice Palmer or had the sealed divorce records of his D and R opponents revealed so he could become a US Senator. His record was that of hardworking State Senators forced by Emil Jones, Jr. to give their accomplishments to O.

            P.S. What happened to Rezko?

        • Is there a place you haven’t been banned from?

          You have this bad habit of not letting any bullshit stand. Why should anyone keep you around when there’s so much of it?

        • recently?

    • Look, I’m passed needing any kind of apology frankly although I may be alone in the sentiment. I just am tired of the new excuses like Hillary would’ve done nothing differently when we’ve seen in the past that she’s done things differently. (Like work actively as a senator against the encroachment of religious fanatics on both gay and women’s rights. He worked actively in the senate to get elected president and that was it.) Her short tenure in the State department has shown she intends to support policies that Obama has merely given lip service. He cavorts with some of the worst homophobes and misogynists on the planet and lets them get away with watering down solid progressive legislature. That doesn’t even begin to deal with the corportatist interests he serves.

      What I am have an issue with is the active suppression of progressive legislation like the public option, allowing gays to serve openly in the military, and job creating economic policies by this White House and the perpetual apologies and revisionism of said policies by progressive factions in this country. I don’t want every one just to realize the disconnect between what you thought Obama was and what he is, but I want you to act like it as well and quit these revisionistic tales about no one could’ve known and Hillary or Kucinich or whoever would’ve been no different. It’s BS! People KNEW. The folks at the Black Agenda Report KNEW. Most of the folks in Chicago KNEW. We knew. Just stop the fairy tales about no one knew and stop denying you had any culpability in what is now looking to be a minimal change in direction from the Dubya/Cheney years. Stop hoping its going to be any different.

      I was at Jane’s site during the early primary season. I was attacked continually. I left because of it and after I wrote Jane about her responsibility to tell folks to tone down the personal attacks. I was fine with her seeing the light until this revisionistic piece of bull crap came out. How can you go forward if you’re going to rewrite the past so you don’t come off as duped as you were? She’s nuts if she thinks FDL was above it all, because I was there and it wasn’t. She just didn’t stop the massacre. I’m supposed to appreciate some one THAT delusional? Fine, I can work with her and she’s an excellent writer and journalist. But I’m not going to buy this I was above it all line and my blog stuck to the issues and substance because it just didn’t happen. Admit your culpability and then we can move on the things we care about that are taking a beating day in and day out now.

      • Nicely said.

        • thank you, it’s like those addiction cures, you have to admit you were addicted first … THEN we can progress. None of this, it wasn’t me or mine bs. Save your apologies. I want mea culpas from those responsible. I want admissions of error. Apologies are worthless.

      • Great rant, Dak! I couldn’t care less about apologies. I wouldn’t accept them if they were offered. The damage is done. But I’m also sick of the historical revisionism. What a crock!

      • I don’t want an apology, either. I want a confession.

      • Exactly! I don’t care about an apology. But all this is about is shifting blame. They refuse to admit how badly they f——- up, and as a result they’re forced to rewrite history and lay the blame on us, or Clinton, or somebody, anybody else. Even Obama. Just look in the mirror and take some responsibility for your own actions, for once. Until they do, this game will never end, because there’s no other way to explain why we’re in this mess despite their incredible, prescient good judgement and unfailingly flawless instincts and intentions without a scapegoat of some sort.

    • I for one do not want ‘apologies’ and ‘I told you so’s’… exactly… although that’s not a terrible place to start.

      I want them gone. Reid, Pelosi, Dean, Brazil in particular – but other big O supporters are on my list as well.

      They brought this on. They were so afraid of another Clinton in the White House (and in Pelosi’s case that another woman might have more power than her) that they helped line up the corporate donors and a game plan to exploit the proportional ballots and caucuses.

      Now look what we have. All of them are siphoning gazillions to lord knows who and lord knows where.

      I just want to educate as many people as I can to the way this was constructed in order to get Obama elected…. because this was not just dumb luck, it was a plan.

      If the Dems lose the house or even come close, you can bet Pelosi will be on the hot seat if not tossed out altogether.

      Reid looks likely to not even with his Senate seat back – and if he does, but the majority is reduced, look for a run at him for the leadership role.

      Dean looks gone already…

      The only way any of this happens is if we withhold our votes, vote for another party or god forbid – vote republican in protest (because then they have to make up two votes!)… either way, this is how I intend to use my vote until they are gone/stripped of power/Newtralized shall we say.

      I cannot seem to figure out how Donna Brazille gets her serving of humble pie yet – but I believe everyone gets theirs in the end – so Karma will likely play a cruel turn on her in the future. But I can always hope for a tremendous letter writing campaign from those who feel victimized by her culpability in this fraud that gets her kicked off of her TV gigs… it’s a long shot – but a boy is still allowed to dream in this country.

    • I am not enjoying our “I told you sos”

      I’d much rather have had a dialogue to begin with but we can’t have dialogue until people like Jane start admitting there WERE differences between the two candidates and then apologize to those of us who took a principled stand against Obama for calling us ‘bitter” or “racist” or “uneducated” or any other number of things for attempting to have the dialogue beforehand.

      She doesn’t get to revise history. Until you learn from it you can be doomed to repeat it. And some of us weren’t happy to go through it a first time let alone anxious for seconds.

      As for Jane, I wish her luck and no ill will.

    • Welcome home, John.

    • Taos John, actually you’ve made me cry and given me such hope.

    • I admire Jane for her fearless and relentless fight for Health Care Reform, a Public Option, and the Medicare Buy In 50 (yup 50 not 55) to 64 and for a TRUE access (getting rid of the pre-existing condition clauses).

      The BRANDING/Marketing and Obama Girl type sell was sicking to me.

      I hear ya…

      • A fearless fighter for health care reform would not have been afraid to include single-payer as part of the discussion, would have worked with single-payer advocates instead of categorizing them as lazy cultists who are the reason single-payer isn’t viable, and would have sent HCAN shill Jason Rosenbaum packing from her blog.

        A fearless fighter for health care reform would not conveniently claim, almost a year into the effort, that she was “always” a single payer supporter, when she hosted a fundraiser for Tasini for Senate, and then insult and deride the single payer supporters in the comments, and go so far as to refund a contribution one of those commenters made.

        A fearless fighter for reform and an alleged single-payer supporter would not have gone dead silent on the subject after the Tasini fundraiser bombed.

        A fearless fighter for health care reform would not have settled on a bumper sticker – “the” public option – that had no real form or definition.

        I don’t doubt that health care matters to Jane; she has had enough of her own health problems to be intimately familiar with the system. But by not starting with single-payer, which has well-defined elements, and by not defining what this public option should look like, she allowed the Dems to concoct something only Rube Goldberg or Timothy Leary could be proud of, tag it with the “public option” label and delude millions of people into thinking there was actually something worthwhile on the table.

        The sad truth is that Jane’s public option initiative, which raised thousands of dollars from her community, failed, and it failed big. Now, she’s scrambling to prevent the current legislation from surviving – and I hope she succeeds, as it’s a travesty.

        Worse, it’s a template for every other issue that matters to those of us who proudly call ourselves liberals.

        I don’t need Jane to apologize for accepting what the Democratic party did to so many of its formerly loyal members; she knows she was wrong about Obama, and wrong about the best strategy on health care, and that’s why she’s furiously re-writing history. Seems to me that’s energy and focus wasted in an effort to shore up her own ego and protect the FDL brand – and I find nothing fearless about that, either.

    • Good for you John, for having the guts to speak up. Unfortunately, people like Jane are not coming clean like you are. She is still revising history and making excuses. We will not cut anyone slack until they see clearly–otherwise, it will happen all over again.

    • Didn’t enjoy my “I told you so”s during Bush either…I’d rather foresee good things and have them come true.
      It’s a good thing when people like Jane or Glen Greenwald tell the truth, even partially. It would be even better if they were able to admit they were sucked in back then and acted unprincipled for what they thought was a good cause.
      I still support their recent actions – and decry when they are scapegoated by the tools.
      However, until some responsibility is assumed (the way you did in your comment), I reserve the right to mistrust the motives of their new position.

  29. I was just tuning in to wish my peeps here at TC a very happy and marvelous 2010.

    Why do I get served such a gigantic platter of horseshit?

    Is Jane Hamsher out of her fucking mind? This is beyond the usual “Hillary would have been just as bad”. In her world, Obama is screwing up BECAUSE of the Clintons?

    This stuff is so infuriating, I don’t even know where to start.

    I hope we don’t have to put up with this kind of dog droppings in 2010.


  30. Taos, I’m not as sure as you are that Jane has seen the light for, like Taylor Marsh, she has a stake in the Democratic Party and will support whomever is nominated and it doesn’t matter how they ran their campaign or whether or not they cheated the other dem candidate to win. Both didn’t seem to care as long as they maintained some clout with dems and their blog hits didn’t decrease. (TM lost nearly her entire readership after the primary and she has lost in her credibility.

    • I don’t trust all these recent converts to do the right thing in the future.

      Especially if they are unwilling to be completely honest about the past.

      • Once someone betrays you and demonstrates a complete lack of principles, how do you ever trust them again?

        • Not if you are smart and have an ounce of self preservation instinct. They want your vote – they are getting concerned, cause after all, they expected you to have no place else to go.

        • especially if they’re still in denial about it

    • Jane Hamsher has said the following in the comments of her Dec. 31,’09 post:

      “The idea that Hillary would’ve done anything different about health care or anything else is pretty phantasmagorical, I believe, but since we don’t know for sure people are free to make their own assumptions.” There’s no reason to hope that she’ll turn around and say ya’ll were right. Formerly I gave her blog little attention, except for the issue agreements and my support, and now that I’m disgusted with her, I’ll give no attention to her. She’s lost to dem-party loyalty and her importance as an issues’ shaper.

      She also said that, since the dem candidates agreed on most issues, the primary was just choosing a spokesperson.

      One commenter fears/wonders about whether (sneaky?) Hillary will resign her cabinet position and run in 2012. He was a Hill fan, but turned against her on her Iraqi war vote. Another person said of the 2 dem candidates, one was experienced and the other one acted as though she was a “successor.” And there were huge differences between the 2. Huge.

      • She also said that, since the dem candidates agreed on most issues, the primary was just choosing a spokesperson.

        I just threw up a little in my mouth. Yea, that was the only difference between them. How IGNORANT are people?! So they are basically saying they voted for him because he talks pretty. And as far as I’m concerned, that is debatable too–I’ve never found his acclaimed oratory inspiring, but instead, derivative and hollow.

  31. More Changes For the Democratic Party?

    Claire is busy blaming Hillary Clinton for the Party not honoring the Votes of the Voters. 😯

    • From the link:

      Uh huh. Sure, it was ALL Clinton wanting superdelegates to “suborn” the will of the people. That would explain Massachusetts, for example. Oh, no, wait – she WON Massachusetts by a good bit, and BOTH Kennedy and Kerry went for, who,e xactly? That’s right – OBAMA. How about West Virginia? Yep, she won it in a LANDSLIDE, and for whom did Byrd and Rockefeller go? Was it the one with the overwhelming win? No, they went to OBAMA, who tanked in WVA. And there would be California, another state Clinton won. One of her superdelegates switched to Obama after she won the state. And how about Speaker Pelosi – who did she favor? Clearly, Obama, even though Californians went for Clinton. Can’t forget New Jersey, a state Clinton won, and the list goes on and on.

      Don’t even get me started on what happened at the Democratic National Convention and how the pledged delegates voted.

      No doubt, the will of the people was “suborned” alright, but it sure as hell wasn’t by Hillary Clinton. I think it is obvious who DID suborn the will of the people, though.

      My DINO-GOP Representative switched his endorsement to Obama too, even though Hillary won this district.

  32. “Incompetent is always preferable to evil.” (You used it in two posts so you must really really think it is profound.)


    The two are not mutually exclusive. In fact, incompetence often is the means by which enormous evil is accomplished. I’m thinking of stuff, you know, like what was done by incompetents in New Orleans at the time of Katrina and at every stage of the debacle of our invasion of Iraq.

    Moreover, in the primary, Democratic voters had the choice between competence and incompetence. Unless you thought Hillary was/is evil? Surely you would have told us in your mea culpa if you had thought that?

    Run along now. Someone with a name like Axel should not try to mix it up with folks who have an ax to grind. (Ax, to Grind: an exercise useful for sharpening one’s thinking.)

  33. The sad part is that Obama could have been historic had he pushed for real Health Care Reform and then could have settled for a Healthy Public Option, and a Medicare Buy In for 50- 62. He didn’t and we got a give away for the insurance companies.

    So, really if they want to blame people they need to look at all his broken promises.

    • Don’t you realize though that Hillary Clinton AND Obama both were against universal health care (even pointing out that mandating the care would force the poor to choose between rent and health care) and they both ran Harry and Louise ads and had no record to stand on regarding a universal healthcare system?

      Oh wait……….That was only Obama….;..but I thought they were basically the same.

      Yeah basically the same in the way Nelson is the equivalent of Sanders. Not.

    • Obama was historic. Next.

  34. CNN’s Rick Sanchez Hammers Sen. Ensign on Sex and Lobbying Scandal

  35. Just stopping by, and now I’m furious all over again!

    I haven’t read the comment thread yet, but do NOT forget the preponderance of evidence regarding obvious caucus fraud which led to further disenfranchisement and voter manipulation.

    Also, the disgusting harassment of all Clinton supporters and the distortions and attacks against the Clintons, including the heinous charge of rac*sm to divide them from a beloved AA community.

    Blech–the revisionist history to excuse themselves from their responsibility for saddling the country with this sorry pseudo-leader is distasteful in the extreme.

  36. What these people obviously fail to understand is the human instinct to seek procedural fairness.

  37. Ralph Malph:

    Those long-hoping, long-enduring members of the liberal intelligentsia are starting to break away from the least-worst mindset that muted their criticisms of Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential campaign.

    They still believe that the President is far better than his Republican counterpart would have been. Some still believe that sometime, somewhere, Obama will show his liberal stripes. But they no longer believe they should stay loyally silent in the face of the escalating war in Afghanistan, the near collapse of key provisions in the health insurance legislation, the likely anemic financial regulation bill, or the obeisance to the bailed out Wall Street gamblers. Remember this Administration more easily embraces bonuses for fat cats than adequate investment in public jobs.

    Of all the loyalists, among the first to stray was Bob Herbert, columnist for The New York Times. He wondered about his friends telling him that Obama treats their causes and them “as if they have nowhere to go.” Then there was the stalwart Obamaist, the brainy Gary Wills, who broke with Obama over Afghanistan in a stern essay of admonition.

    If you read the biweekly compilation of progressive and liberal columnists and pundits in the Progressive Populist, one of my favorite publications, the velvet verbal gloves are coming off.

    Jim Hightower writes that “Obama is sinking us into ‘Absurdistan.’” He bewails: “Ihad hoped Obama might be a more forceful leader who would reject the same old interventionist mindset of those who profit from permanent war. But his newly announced Afghan policy shows he is not that leader.”

    Wonder where good ol’ Jim got that impression—certainly not from anything Obama said or did not say in 2008. But hope dims the memory of the awful truth which is that Obama signed on to the Wall Street and military-industrial complex from the get-go. He got their message and is going after their campaign contributions and advisors big time!

    • Jim got that impression from the completely fabricated story of Obama as the “anti-war candidate.” They were desperate to come up with a narrative to distinguish him from Hillary, because his experience was so sorely lacking. That’s where the “fairy tale” came from, and when Bill pointed it out, accurately, they contorted that into a rac*al slur and used that to sever their exceptionally close relationship to the AA community (based on years of consistent advocacy and loyalty).

    • This is where I get confused. Obama didn’t break any promises or change directions from his past with those issues. He said he was against not only universal health care, but against any government involvement. He said he was for escalating Afghanistan. He said he was for increasing our dependence and use of Blackwater. He said he was for further limiting women’s right to abortions. And his close connections and backing by wall street was clear. So I just don’t get the problem these people have.

  38. That clip is f*ing awesome and completely damning as to how they were both basically the “same”. One voted present on women’s rights for politcal cover and one had a history for supporting women’s reproductive rights. Yet there was no possible way to see that one of the two might be willing to throw women under the bus for political purposes? The women’s rights groups and Jane ought to be ashamed attempting to sell this as “they were both basically the same”

  39. And another thing: Hillary has a looong history (for anyone that bothered to actually research her career instead of just regurgitating right wing talking points) of walking the talk, taking politically courageous positions and fighting for them. That was one of her main arguments during the primaries: I’ve BEEN there, I know what it takes, and I will stand strong for women, children, vets, the elderly, and middle & lower class Americans. Do they seriously think she would have sold out women’s rights for health care? LOOK AT HER RECORD. Do they think she would have caved when facing the big boy bankers instead of dealing with the mortgage crisis up front?

    Bottom line: she did not misrepresent her positions, and people like Jane crucified her for it–instead, eagerly gobbing up the free pony fantasy Obama sold them–though HIS record did not back up his promises. *&$@*! Fif’s getting angry again!

    • Yup. Hillary never promised the moon, and got castigated for not promising it. But she has a history of delivering on what she does promise, or at least fighting to the mat for it.

      In the real world, that’s a HUGE difference.

    • but but but Hope, change, hopity change…..isn’t the same thing as a RECORD?


  40. And this argument that it is Clinton III conveniently ignores that Bill was dealing with a Republican Congress. It’s comparing apples and oranges.

  41. I love this post and the comments on this thread. You’ve made my day and it’s voices like all of you that keep me invigorated for the many battles ahead!

  42. Just to let you all know, I actually WATCHED the C-Span morning show Jane was on. When “that woman” called in and supposedly attacked her for “destroying the Democratic Party,” Jane didn’t say a damm thing about the 2 candidates being the same.

    What Jane Hamsher did was look arrogantly at the camera, down her nose like Obama does, and reply that many of the Clinton supporters just couldn’t support a Black man for president. And then she ignored the caller completely.

    Trust me…..I was stunned, watching it. I saw it and heard it MYSELF. I don’t give a damm what she says she said. I heard what she said.

    I’ll never read Jane Hamsher again.

    Look it up on C-Span.

    • Nope…done. See ya Jane.

      • OMG. Someone find the clip and do an updated post. That takes it to an entirely different level. If it’s true, she has completely blown her credibility. That’s not only dishonest, it’s pure cowardice at this point.

        • Was posted in the other thread
          at 25:50 mark
          She also says her blog didn’t take sides in the primaries and we are all Republicans having voted for McCain “do not share our values”
          Funny thing – B0bots are painting her now as a racist – which I find suddenly poetic justice.

          • Thanks for the link, mishpuha. I loved watching Jane’s faux shock face when the caller called her out on the primary atrocities.

          • I saw those DUmp comments about Jane. She is under the bus for many bots. te he.

      • She refers to the RBC meeting and immediately connects it to Harriet Christian’s inadequate black man remark.

        Then she mentions in the same breath, Clinton supporters who voted for Mac- who was so obviously the “anti-choice, pro-war” candidate.

        Her site OTOH was neutral. She even had Hillary Clinton on it….

        • Neutral? About the only site that I remember being neutral during the primaries was Shakesville, and Shakesville is the type of blog that goes out of its way to be PC and a safe place for all the progressive strands amongst their readership when it comes to EVERYTHING, even gratingly so at times–I’m not knocking Shakesville with that statement, I’m saying that it was/is the exception rather than the rule in left blogistan.

    • Then she’s a narrow minded condescending bigot.

    • Do you know what day?

    • Lanny played the race card on Jane, now Jane pushing it back on Clinton supporters.

      They are actively burying what’s left of the Democratic brand.

    • If true the Jane is a piece of shit. Not worthy of our attention. We might as well have a discussion of the pros and cons of Rush. They each have the same effect on the world: negative.

    • WOAH. Really? Someone needs to put the clip on youtube and post it up thread. I want to see it for myself!

  43. Kicking off the New Year with a fiesty post RD. And we’re off…

  44. Happy New Year everyone.

    Methinks my last post landed in moderation.

  45. Incredible post!! Thank you

    IMO, the most prominent difference between Hillary and dipstick is that she is a fighter and he–not so much.

  46. Fabulous, RD! I haven’t crossed FDL’s door since the primaries.
    You bet we’re still pissed.
    How many of us here dropped out of the Democrat Party and went Indie??? (or returned to Indie status)

    We did it on principle, unlike the jerks who sold out because they wanted Obama in so badly.

  47. […] on dangerous mood …cwaltz on dangerous mood …Wonk the Vote on Jane’s amazing powers of…cwaltz on dangerous mood …myiq2xu on dangerous mood …myiq2xu on dangerous […]

  48. Bravo and screw Jane and the rest of the O lovers who now need to find a way to appease 1/2 of the Democratic base. I have a very long memory and I will never forget what the party did to elect an empty suit.

  49. Late to the party, but AMEN, sister!

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: