• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    Beata on Explaining Trump’s criming in…
    jmac on Explaining Trump’s criming in…
    William on Explaining Trump’s criming in…
    Beata on Explaining Trump’s criming in…
    William on Explaining Trump’s criming in…
    William on Explaining Trump’s criming in…
    riverdaughter on Explaining Trump’s criming in…
    riverdaughter on Explaining Trump’s criming in…
    Beata on Explaining Trump’s criming in…
    William on Explaining Trump’s criming in…
    riverdaughter on A note of caution on those…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Welease the documents!
    jmac on Welease the documents!
    Propertius on A note of caution on those…
    riverdaughter on A note of caution on those…
  • 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

    October 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

    • Open Thread
      Use the comments to discuss topics unrelated to recent posts. Facebook Twitter WhatsApp LinkedIn
  • Top Posts


This is what a Democrat looks like

Scary-smart Anglachel:

Which leads me to that last little snark of Mr. Marshall’s. Since I’ve got at least ten years on the guy and my background is political science (specifically, political theory – the study of systems, idea and ideologies), I figure I have both experience and subject matter knowledge on him, though I’m smart enough not to try to make a living analyzing politics. My memory is long and my knowledge of political events a hell of a lot clearer than WKJM, who has been part of the myth machine for several years now. What I recall about the1994 mid-terms was that Bill and Hillary had been put through the meat grinder over their whole-hearted but losing attempt to enact health care reform, they were reviled by the press (those hicks who trashed our lovely little place!), the Democratic party was in the last throws of losing the southern Dixiecrats, and Reaganism was still the norm. He enjoyed none of the advantages that Obama enjoys in terms of party and media support, and had much more respected opponents. The Democrats themselves were dealing with scandals in the House, and Newt was rolling out the Contract With America.

WKJ’s quote “Clinton was considered toxic politically in broad swathes of the country” begs the question of just who thought he was toxic. The majority of voters didn’t, but they weren’t voting for Bill. They were voting for their Congress Critters, just as they are today. The media certainly wasted no effort to inform me how horrible Clinton was as a president, which is how it earned the moniker the “so-called Liberal media”. Stevensonian cultural elites sat on their hands and refused to aggressively counter the Right-wing Noise Machine, all of which is documented in Somerby’s Incomparable Archives. In short, those of us who actually were, you know, there at the time and not invested in CDS understand the very different environments and opportunities. Not agreeing with Clinton or thinking that health care was handled badly is very different than thinking he was “toxic”.


Yes, Obama came in to office with a hellacious mess on his hands – and a majority in both houses and an electorate screaming for change. He had the political opportunity of a lifetime to transform the fundamental terms of political engagement, just as both FDR and Reagan did. He could have taken on the banks. He could have charged ahead for substantive health care reform. He could have pounded the shit out the failed policies of the Reagan Revolution and pinned the blame for everything on them, and the country would have lapped it up exactly the way they responded to FDR. But he didn’t and now he will play (at best) catch up for the remaining two years.

WKJM is not the only one who is trying to avoid talking about the reasons for party discontent by presenting a half-assed and historically inaccurate picture of the 1994 mid-term election. What he doesn’t seem to get is that because the majority of the nation doesn’t hold the Clintons in contempt the way he and the other Purchased Fellows do, every time he (and others of his ilk) make this comparison, he keeps reminding us about the way Bill never quit, never gave up, never stopped articulating his vision of what the party should be and how he was going to work to achieve that end. And that resulted in retaining the White House in 1996, and gaining back House seats in the next three elections – 1996, 1998, 2000.

There’s a bunch more.

Maybe it’s just a coincidence but lately there seems to be a whole new movement of people dedicated to the revisionist-history version of bashing Bill Clinton. Some of the faces are new but some, like WKJM, are well known shills for the Democratic establishment.

They all seem to have a laundry list of reasons to hate the Big Dawg, and they throw around statistics like beads in NOLA but they have no personal anecdotes. It’s like they’re all just reciting stuff from a book. They claim that the prosperity of the Clinton years was all an illusion (the “dot-com bubble”) and blame him for our current economic mess.

I remember the Nineties, as well as the decade before and the one after. These Bill-Bashers describe a period very different from the one I lived through. They also describe a dark, evil and malign president, which is nothing like the Bill Clinton I watched in the news every day.

For one thing, he didn’t “betray” any of his constituents. He openly supported NAFTA and welfare reform when he was running. After he was elected, he still supported them. Don’t we WANT politicians to keep their promises?

The Bill-Bashers hate him for the promises he kept and ther hate him for the promises he tried but failed to keep. He gets all of the blame and none of the credit. They even hate him for the genocide in Rwanda, as if he could have single-handedly ended the crisis.

Most or all of the newer faces (and a few of the old ones) claim they don’t support Obama, but they really don’t seem to hate him. Not like they hate the Big Dawg, anyway. It’s like they would rather bash Bill than talk about the current situation.

I’m seeing a pattern, and wondering what is behind it. We know Obama is afraid of Hillary and for good reason. If she ran against him in 2012 she would beat him in a fair fight, and maybe even one that was supposed to be fixed. They can’t attack her as long as she is Secretary of State, so are they attacking Bill in an attempt to cast a stain on her?

Three years ago I would have just thought I was being too paranoid. That was before I saw Left Blogistan get covered in astroturf. Now I wonder if I’m not being paranoid enough.

108 Responses

  1. Revisionist-history nah, slurs and slander grudge and grievance it’s the Obama Party vs the Democratic Party. And today I believe the gloves just came off of the, what were you thinking crowd of the former Democratic Party Base and the fight appears to be on.

    Obots, really, just shove it, we endorse Bill and Hill!

  2. The chants of “DLC” keep getting louder, that’s for sure.

    It was never about “hope and change”, it was about getting rid of the Clintons. By any means necessary.

    Why? Who knows.

    Obama and co played “the left” like a fiddle, that’s for sure.

  3. I never remember in 2008 much hatred against W, the Rs – at least not until Palin came on the scene. The primaries from the O campaign were directed with R hands. Quite literally – if we know some of the so called lefty bloggers (Avrosis, Sullivan, Huffington, Markos), or incidents like the African photo of Obama (started by a R strategist from Tennessee with the help of Drudge). I was on DU at the time and I remember Lewinski threads, even Juanita Broderick threads – some getting hundreds of votes and being pushed in the “best of” list.
    The creative class simply followed the R talking points like those children the pied piper. So here we are.

    • There wasn’t much visceral hate against GW in 2008, I think, largely because we knew he was done, over, gone.

      In 2006 the hate was definitely there towards GWB, and vehement. In 2008 they switched over to hating on Bill and Hillary without breaking a sweat. They were nicer to McCain than they were the Clintons. Because the Clintons were the biggest threat to the status quo.

  4. BTW, since when did Anglachael have that tag line?

    You say I’m a bitch as if that were a bad thing…

    I am pretty sure it wasn’t there in 2008

  5. The more apparent Obama’s failures become, the more Obama loyalists will try to nudge out more ways to hate the Clintons and use them to make Obama look good.

    It will be a lifelong chronic disease so don’t be fooled if they go into remission now and then.

  6. No doubt others received it, so I’m sure there were comments over the weekend, but I just have to get it out of my system.

    Take your email and shove it hard where the sun don’t shine, Donna Brazille.

  7. If you look at everything Obama and his professional left lapdogs are doing now from the point of view that it’s not really about 2010, then it makes sense.

    His campaign appearances in places that make no sense as far as helping the 2010 candidates, make PERFECT sense when you realize he is not campaigning to help win 2010, but for himself for 2012.

    The hit pieces on Bill are part of that strategy. It’s a pre-emptive strike against the portion of the party that might want to ask him to step aside in 2012.

    • Spot on!

    • Exactamento!

      I love your phrase “professional left lapdogs”. That class includes Rachel and Ed on teebee as well. They criticize teh Precious just enough to cover it up, but when push comes to shove they lead the chickens back to the Obama roost….scary Repubs, don’t cha’ know.

      Recall when Clinton ran he was a minority president—that’s right. Just enough Perot voters continued to hang with Ross, even after dirty tricks led him to drop out, to combine with voters for Bush the Greater to give Clinton a vote total in the 40’s. Add to that the end of the Dem brand in the South, which Clinton tried to counter with his centrist ways, and you end up with a real history of what Big Dawg faced instead of the fevered imaginings of Thom Hartman, Randi Rhodes, and Norm Goldman on lefty talk radio.

      Some othese lapdogs are old enough to know better. The rest are either ignorant or pimping for O.

  8. Clinton to appear in National Geographic special on Nov. 8

    A news release states, “The State Department’s role on the world stage has never been more important and the stakes have never been higher. Its leader is arguably the most famous woman in the world, with a traveling staff providing 24/7 support. Now, the National Geographic Channel goes Inside the State Department to open a window into the efforts of the men and women representing critical U.S. interests abroad.”

    And to remind the Democrats why voters dumped them on November 2, a special about the candidate they stabbed in the back.

    • Long overdue in my view…

      “(Now) he’s coming into Rhode Island treating us like an ATM machine,”

      RI just say NO! Don’t give any money to the DCCC or DNC give directly to Democratic Party candidates only.

    • Politico: Pelosi setting the stage for her retirement

      Democratic sources tell us that if they lose the House, Pelosi may not only be out of a leadership job but also could start setting the stage for her retirement from Congress in 2011. If that happens, look for her to follow the Dennis Hastert model: Step down from leadership, quietly help with the transition of power and leave Congress in a way that causes minimal disruption for her caucus and her safe Democratic seat back home.

      More than Obama, the problem lies in the heart of the Democratic leadership. Obama would not be where he is without the leadership pushing him.

    • So far this is the only lefty reaction to the Caprio story listed at Memeorandum:


      Sweetheart of the Week, Frank Caprio

      His farts smell like floating pink love clouds….

      ‘Cause really, just how bad a candidate do you have to be if the President of the United States who is in your party decides not to endorse you when you run for Governor?

      Also, the non-endorsement is basically a way of saying thanks to Lincoln Chafee, who crossed party lines to endorse Obama and is now running as an independent. Mind you, Obama did not endorse Chafee either, but…

      Now that Caprio has told the media that the President can “take his endorsement and shove it” that should help Obama change his mind. Stay classy, Rhode Island!

  9. What I see is a longer term churning, like the washing machine we were talking about the other day.

    If Republicans take control of either house in January, they’ll have investigations going on 24/7, with impeachment as the goal, and a generation of Obama haters, many of them Democrats, will be born.

    Just as happened to Bill Clinton. It’s deja vu all over again.

    And Democrats still think they’re playing beanbag, instead of being at war with Republicans.

    Carolyn Kay

    • come on Carolyn, playing bean bag is the favorite thing to do among the young Obot crowd. you can see them blocking the sidewalks playing it at any college campus near you.

  10. CDS is alive and well in the world. I certainly remember the 90s and those 8 years look amazingly good from here.

    Strangely, I was talking to a friend this morning, who happens to be a member of The Constitution Party. He’s “very” conservative but even he said Bill Clinton was one of the smartest POTUS’s we’ve ever had and really doesn’t receive enough credit.for the 8 years of prosperity and relative peace we enjoyed. On both sides of the aisle.

    I nearly fainted.

    But I think when people are honest and not into this deafening partisan-speak, it’s pretty hard not to admit that most of us would take the 90s in a heartbeat. You have that and Bill Clinton’s style, his ability to reach out and engage. Too bad that talent can’t be bottled.

    The noise from the Obamacrats? What can I say. They’re thinskinned and grudge-prone, just like their hero.

  11. I realize this wikipedia for Caprio was probably tweaked to be ready for the public interest after his “shove it” remark, but this is interesting:

    “On November 7, 2006, Caprio, the endorsed candidate of the Democratic Party, was elected General Treasurer of Rhode Island, receiving 73% of the vote. He won by a larger margin than any candidate for a contested statewide office on the Rhode Island ballot in 2006.”

    I hope this guy wins.

    • White House Deputy Press Secretary Bill Burton says that Obama decided to stay neutral in the race “out of respect for his friend Lincoln Chaffee.”

      There are no words..

      • that’s basically an endorsement of Chafee.

        • Angry Black Guy:

          Obama didn’t endorse Caprio’s opponent. He simply refused to endorse anyone. That’s what I’d do if one of my good friends from another party was running. Class thing to do.

          Caprio, on the other hand, is getting a lot of blowback for his comments, as well he should.

          I don’t know what “blowback” he’s talking about.

          • Lol Hey, you know what? If you can’t bring yourself to endorse your own candidate if “one of your good friends from another party was running”? Party leader may not be the job for you. Hey! Hillary and McCain are tight! I guess someone owes her a big apology for acting like she had some kind of moral responsibility to not only endorse but break her back for O.

          • It is beyond funny (and hypocritical but that goes without saying) that ABG says not supporting the Democratic candidate is the “Class thing to do” if Obama does it. But feminists are “bitter, older white women” when we do it. LOL! Someone at Obama Central should check that ‘bots spam before he posts it.

          • There is no argument in support of Teh Precious so absurd that he won’t make it.

          • Obama didn’t endorse Caprio’s opponent. He simply refused to endorse anyone. That’s what I’d do if one of my good friends from another party was running. Class thing to do.

            Yeah real classy, wonder how classy Angry would have thought it was if Hillary had not endorsed Obama because John McCain was a friend.

          • It seems like Obama could completely pull the rug out from under this if he’d just endorse Caprio now. Caprio would be completely burned and left flailing, Not to mention, he’d be saddled with O then. Obama would look forgiving and like an actual leader who gives a damn about his party.

          • Yeah real classy, wonder how classy Angry would have thought it was if Hillary had not endorsed Obama because John McCain was a friend.

            Ooooouch! Damn, but the truth hurts. Right on, WTV!

        • The Dems should’ve played 11th dimensional chess here. Trick all the Repubs into calling O and inviting him out for golf, and once they’re friends, he’ll refuse to campaign for any Dems, thus vastly increasing their electoral chances. If they buy him lunch, he’ll actually campaign for his Repub buddies, thus achieving the impossible and destroying their party once and for all.

      • There are no words..

        I can think of a couple.

    • Caprio stands by telling Obama to shove it, says he “didn’t seek the President’s endorsement.”


    • The Politico story says that Chafee and Obama haven’t spoken since the election — two years ago. Some friends.

      • The “Me and Chafee are best buds” line was just a quick excuse cooked up so that he doesn’t have to admit to the REAL reason he won’t endorse Caprio – because Caprio was a big Clintonite in the primaries.

  12. What I admired most about Bill Clinton was his optimism. He was a great cheerleader, always pushing us forward to be better. I’d bet Hillary would have been the same.

  13. The Hill:

    Conservative Democratic Rep. Gene Taylor (Miss.) said over the weekend that voted against his own party when he went to the ballot box to vote for president in 2008.

    Taylor told the Sun Herald of South Mississippi that he chose Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) for president over then-Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.)

    Reporter Maria Recio told The Hill that when Taylor was asked if he voted for the Democratic nominee in 2008, he said, “I did not vote for Obama. I voted for Sen. McCain. Better the devil you know.”

    It’s okay, Taylor and McCain are probably good friends.

  14. No doubt that Anglachel is intelligent, but “Scary smart” (Lambert’s permanent prefix)? No way! And I for one do not forget her unfounded, and for me at least, totally inexcuseable attack on The Confluence – and one splendid poster in particular. If she apologized I never noticed. So it feels a bit … weird, to see her cited and even praised here. Guess I’m just more unforgiving than others.

    • honk!

    • Honk! Honk!

      Plus, I found her humorless and thin skinned. No evidence I ever saw tsuggested she is more intelligent than the average poster here. Her area of expertise is what it is….and that’s knowledge, not intelligence per se.

      • Meh. I don’t understand the “omg, she is so brilliant!” stuff about anglachel. She strikes me as yes, extremely educated. Which is not the same thing as smart. She doesn’t seem particularly smart at all. Color me unimpressed.

        • Me too … and neither. I do think she is a good writer, but I also see her as an intellectual – the kind of intellectual who doesn’t understand, care about, or wants to engage with people she considers of lesser intellect than herself. And to me that isn’t a sign of being smart.

      • oops, I mean to nest this under the “scary smart”…not under “her heart’s in the right place” comment

        my carelessness.

    • Anglachel wasn’t immune to peer pressure in ’08… but I do like her construct of the Stevensonian vs. Jacksonian/Truman wings of the D party.

      • I’ve been a long time fan of Anglachel. I think she is one of the best liberal bloggers outside of The Confluence. Yes, she smeared The Confluence before the general election because many people here were open about their plans to vote for McCain in protest. I personally don’t understand why voting for another party in protest makes some people want to automatically assume that person is no longer a liberal or that their isn’t any rational reasoning behind their decision. A protest vote might be one of the last things Democrats can do to save their party. Everyone makes mistakes and Anglachel’s superb writing and understanding of the Obamabots and the deterioration of the Democratic Party outweighs her moment of bad judgment on The Confluence in 2008. I am willing to move on because her writing is too important to ignore.

        • I don’t remember it being about McCain, I thought A declared this a rac ist site post-election because someone who she specifically targeted with these spurious accusations had quoted someone on one topic, and A believed the person being quoted had, completely unbeknownst to the quoter, said something A considered rac ist in a completely different context on a completely different topic?

          • it was about the housing crisis, iirc. What everybody now says about it was taken to be “racist” back then.

          • Yeah, I remembered it was about the housing crisis, but wasn’t what really set them (A wasn’t the only one jumping on this nonsense as I recall) off something really convoluted about how that person and the site were rac ist because the guy they briefly quoted wrote an obscure paper in Like 1972 that said something really baaaaad about mortgage lending policy, or something? And therefor unknowingly quoting the guy saying something that was in no way related to what he said in ’72 became the worst. Thing. Ever, never to be forgiven or forgotten? And wasn’t mandos involved (which says it all).

          • I was about the problems with and reeking corruption around Fannie and Freddie, and dakinikat had the gall to include a picture of Franklin Raines in her post on the matter.

            Back then, including a picture of the corrupt guy who made millions while bankrupting F&F was raycist. Because she OBVIOUSLY didn’t include that pic because he was the head of the agency, and was the guy who actually did bad stuff. No, she did it because he is black. That had to be her motive. Had to be. If a white guy bilked millions, she’d NEVER have put HIS photo up.


          • I personally think it was an excuse to drop a PUMA associated site from her blogroll. The same thing was going on at Corrente.

          • ITA Disenfrachised Voter. I was just about to post a similar comment–I think mandos et al. were just looking for a way to distinguish themselves from Teh Raycist bitter knitters.

        • The attack/smear I was referring to wasn’t about voting for McCain though.

          Anglachel on October 01, 2008:

          Anatomy of a Dog Whistle
          Recently, The Confluence has begun serving up the same ugly mix, which is why I have dropped it from my blog roll and will have nothing to do with PUMA. The current set of posts (no, I will not link to them) serves up a toxic brew ostensibly about the current financial market and Obama’s connections to it, but is actually little more than regurgitation of the Republican racist assault on equal opportunity lending. Anti-Obama sentiment opens up the flood gates to connect him, ACORN, and Franklin Raines to Fannie Mae, subprime loans and government involvement in lending generally. The argument (and the post) relies heavily on images of African American politicians, administrators and executives to make visually the claim that cannot be made verbally, recalling Lee Atwater’s infamous remarks about not being able to say racial slurs which inspires a new level of creativity to convey the message: those people are ripping you off again, taking what is yours for themselves.

          She then goes on to praise Mandos – with a ‘but after all boys will be boys’ kind of tsk-tsk excuse “just ignore his moronic bout of CDS …”

          I encourage people to read Mandos’ post, “Subprime lending and minorities,” on Corrente. Ignore his moronic bout of CDS in the last paragraph (and the pathetic excuse he offers to try to claim it’s not really CDS) and concentrate on the meat of the post itself where he offers a well-reasoned rebuttal to the claims of the Confluence post.

          Sure sounds “smart”, doesn’t she now!

          • We knew which post you were talking about. I read it right after she posted it.

            She was talking about us, not you. Smart people make mistakes too, and some grudges aren’t worth carrying.

          • My reply was to DisenfranchisedVoter who obviously didn’t know. And no she wasn’t talking about me! So … I can’t express my opinion?

        • Duplicate comment

          • Anglachel made an error in giving in to peer pressure to disown and separate herself from the bitter knitter class of Hillary Clinton supporter.

            It’s been 2 years. Anglachel has not gone back on her scrutiny of Obama or written off Hillary’s holdouts in her analysis.

            I won’t forget, but I have long since forgiven Anglachel.

          • I guess I just see that there was a lot going on then too and it wasn’t so simple. There WAS a weird co-optation going on with the PUMA movement. I left PUMA and became an independent in November of 2008, because PUMAs started accusing me of being pro-Obama or not anti-Obama enough or whatever. Anglachel’s mistake was to go along with what the Mandos crowd was saying and pin the weird strands of PUMA on Dakinikat, when really Kat was just ahead of the curve in reporting on the Fannie and Freddie stuff and saying things that are now taken as par for the course but back then was twisted into “racist.”

          • Hey Wonk! I understand that. And as I said up above I’m probably just a more unforgiving kind. But my affinity and admiration for Kat is such, and the vile and unfair hits she must take are such, that I will never forgive those that have ever attacked her! To me she is the only person in the blogosphere about whom I with conviction can say that her heart is in the right place.

            And Wonk, thanks for rescuing my comment. Could you erase the excess, please? Pretty please!

          • About the PUMA ‘movement’ I remember the birth! Happy days amidst all the misery! Not counting myself as a ‘member’, but yet wanting to show my sympathy, I even for a while had a drawing of a kitty with big blue eyes as avatar. 🙂

            When several PUMA-sites went out of their way to show their contempt for a certain religion I stopped sympathizing.

          • Yeah and the birther stuff. I tried to tell them the birth certificate was a phony issue but people wouldn’t listen.

    • Sarahcuda responds:

      I have never seen a candidate stoop as low as was seen last night in Alaska’s senatorial debate…

      The sitting Senator also came out against Arizona’s right to protect its borders. She calls for us to “enforce the laws that are currently on the books,” but doesn’t seem to understand that that is precisely what Arizona is trying to do to protect itself because the federal government refuses to enforce our laws. Perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised by her lackadaisical attitude to border security when we consider that she has repeatedly voted against funding a border fence and voted in favor of amnesty.

      But perhaps the most shocking part of all in this debate was when the incumbent Senator used Joe Miller’s distinguished military service as a means to attack him. Joe Miller graduated from West Point, fought in Desert Storm, and was awarded the Bronze Star for his service to our country. I find it astonishing that a sitting U.S. Senator from Alaska would challenge the honor of a decorated combat veteran. Is it any wonder the audience later booed her when she again challenged Joe Miller’s honor?

      It’s on like Donkey Kong

      {{munches popcorn}}

      • *munches cheetos*

        • *spits some sunflower seed shells*

          I think I’ll pop a beer and settle in to watch the night of Nov 2nd. What I actually hope happens is that there are shocking surprises all around, and the American people vote out lots of incumbents and vote in a lot of “EFF YOU DC!” candidates, whichever party they are from. And some of those are Democrats as well.

          • unfortunately where I live the choice for Representative is between the incumbent, who is tight with the GOP establishment, and a Democratic LaRouchie. No good outcome there.

      • I guess they don’t remember the swiftboat ads.

  15. I think what it is about is they no longer need him to help sitting Dems keep their seats…they are looking pass the mid terms …..and so it’s back to our regularly scheduled program of Bill bashing .

    They HAVE to bash Bill. He was too successful and their whole thing now , both left and right, is ” government doesn’t work” and we the people are “ungovernable” Someone who made government work and work for people so well has to be bashed . That’s been true since he and Hill got to 1600 PA Ave.

    It’s harder to dismantled something that’s is working. Well they fixed that ….today government doesn’t work so great…. Now they feel the need to erase all memory when it was working.

  16. This is just blowback because Big Dawg is being received so much more enthusiastically than O’Precious on the hustings. Ya’d think they’d notice that in spite of all the hatred spewed at the Clinton’s during the 90’s, Bill left office an extremely popular president. Joe Q. Public recognizes cognitive dissonance when s/he sees it.

  17. From Uppity – Yogurt is the official food of women:

  18. While Bill gets bashed:

    Every 34th wage earner in America in 2008 went all of 2009 without earning a single dollar, new data from the Social Security Administration show. Total wages, median wages, and average wages all declined, but at the very top, salaries grew more than fivefold…

    …The number of Americans making $50 million or more, the top income category in the data, fell from 131 in 2008 to 74 last year. But that’s only part of the story.

    The average wage in this top category increased from $91.2 million in 2008 to an astonishing $518.8 million in 2009. That’s nearly $10 million in weekly pay!

    You read that right. In the Great Recession year of 2009 (officially just the first half of the year), the average pay of the very highest-income Americans was more than five times their average wages and bonuses in 2008. And even though their numbers shrank by 43 percent, this group’s total compensation was 3.2 times larger in 2009 than in 2008, accounting for 0.6 percent of all pay. These 74 people made as much as the 19 million lowest-paid people in America, who constitute one in every eight workers.

  19. Discovery, STS-133, is scheduled to lift off on Nov. 1st. Not too late to stuff it full of some of these politicians. Just saying. 🙂

    • It’s coming back though, isn’t it?

      Can we get them a one-way ticket?

      • It’s the last schedule flight of Discovery, so I think it would be reasonable for them to have a big party up there and let all the passengers out for a long walk. And then forget they were out there.

  20. I always felt that the 1994 elections were not a mandate for the Contract America jingle but were a fury against the dems for not supporting clinton’s health care and spinning it with all their own egocentric ideas about what it should be. They couldn’t cooperate with him to get the job done so they were kicked out. And so they wil again but for supporting a weak, insipid pres with a pretty smile.

  21. The formula is simple. When Obama is having a bad week, bash a Clinton…

    They tried to light it off this week with “Bill Clinton lost the nuclear football”, but it didn’t take…

    I guess they were trying to distract from all the stupid DADT stuff.

  22. This is just weird:

    Sarah Palin Gets Gift of Pink Underwear from Sheriff Arpaio

    Add this to list of bizarre and unusual campaign trail antics: at last week’s Tea Party Express rally in Phoenix, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio welcomed Sarah Palin with a pair of pink underwear.

    “I just got done welcoming Sarah Palin to our County. Had a nice chat and gave her a pair of pink underwear,” Arpaio posted onTwitter, along with a photo of him with the former Alaska governor.

    Why pink underwear? The hard-line lawman has gained national attention for his controversial methods, such as requiring prisoners to wear all pink, underwear included.

  23. Republicans Remain in Control of Race for House

    PRINCETON, NJ — Republicans remain in position to win control of the House of Representatives in next week’s midterm elections, although Democrats are doing slightly better now than they were early in October. Gallup’s latest two-week average on its generic ballot for Congress shows Republicans retaining a 48% to 44% margin among all registered voters, a 52% to 43% margin among likely voters in a high-turnout scenario, and a 55% to 41% margin in a low-turnout scenario. These likely voter advantages for the Republicans are slightly smaller than in previous weeks, reflecting in particular increased Democratic strength over the most recent days of interviewing.

    Karma dear Ds.

  24. This is the most stagnant election I can remember. There hasn’t been any real change in the dynamics for months and months. A horrid economy and pissed off voters who won’t “get over it” are in the driver’s seat. Hope and Change is done!

  25. Yes, I totally agree that Bill bashing is a distraction and setting up Obama for 2012 in one fell swoop. Frankly, I have a problem with anyone who can’t use personal examples to back up their generic claims as these Obots are doing about “toxic Clinton”.

    I posted this at Anglachel:
    Great post! Especially this…

    “He could have pounded the shit out the failed policies of the Reagan Revolution and pinned the blame for everything on them, and the country would have lapped it up exactly the way they responded to FDR. ”

    But WHY would Obama do that since he admitted his admiration for Reagan the most?

    I too remember a different history under Bill Clinton. Having meekly stepped into politics when I reached the age to vote, it was Bill Clinton (and Hillary) who inspired me the most! This man could talk circles around anyone and he used language to speak to you, not “down” at you. Even when Congress went Republican, he never spoke down or ill of the voters. This is key. He always said it was due to circumstances, etc. that led to the Republican take-over.

    What I remember about the ’94 republican tidal wave was that the Clintons used HMOs as a model for health care reform. Bad move since countless stories began pouring out about the egregious abuses by them (i.e., not paying for life-saving procedures, etc.) and the bad diagnoses by mediocre docs (not experts). These examples were thrust into the spotlight making Americans take a second look at national healthcare. Then we had those Harry and Louise ads (which Obama used himself against Hillary). And the Clintons were endlessly dragged into lawsuits and on many different fronts involving both the POTUS and the FLOTUS. Then the whole question of having a proud Feminist as VP was ratcheted up to such a degree it obscured the policies of that infamous Contract of Newts.

    Those circumstances cannot even begin to compare to the vast opportunity Obama had and blew. And most of this distraction is fabricated nonsense on behalf of Obama’s legal team. Just show the damn official birth certificate already (not the COLB).

    BTW, after emerging from a family on welfare under Reagan, my family as a whole saw economic progress under Clinton. Even during the first few years, there was tangible progress, which gave Americans real hope.

    • The economic progress of my family saw as a whole, was not seen dependent upon which political party they sided with either. As I’m the only Democrat in my family of origin. BTW, some of my Reagan-repubs were some of the biggest Obots. So I was in a position of debating why they shouldn’t support Obama while they were defending why I should (except for my small business owner eldest sister who is a Hillary die-hard). Go figure!

  26. Okay, I have a crazy dream. I want to see Big Dawg go campaign his sweet ass off for “shove it” Caprio in RI.

    LOL! Probably won’t happen, but that would be so sweeeeet.

    Do it, Bill! Pleeease!

  27. […] Bill Bashing For one thing, he didn’t “betray” any of his constituents. He openly supported NAFTA and welfare reform when he was running. After he was elected, he still supported them. Don’t we WANT politicians to keep their promises? […]

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: