• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    lililam on Chernobylesque
    Ann Brown on Decisions, Decisions.
    jmac on Decisions, Decisions.
    Ga6thDem on Decisions, Decisions.
    HerstoryRepeating on Decisions, Decisions.
    William on Decisions, Decisions.
    Pat Johnson on Decisions, Decisions.
    tamens on Decisions, Decisions.
    Catscatscats on Chernobylesque
    Propertius on Chernobylesque
    Catscatscats on Chernobylesque
    William on Chernobylesque
    William on Chernobylesque
    William on Chernobylesque
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Chernobylesque
  • 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

    December 2010
    S M T W T F S
    « Nov   Jan »
     1234
    567891011
    12131415161718
    19202122232425
    262728293031  
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • And They Made A Desert: 80 to 90% Drop In Nutrients In Food
      Stumbled across this lovely chart the other day. The core fact most people, including the folks in the “best every world” Panglossian movement (like Pinker) don’t seem to understand, is that even if they were right (questionable), the prosperity we have is based on burning down our house. “Sure is hot! Hottest it’s every been!” […]
  • Top Posts

  • Advertisements

Monday: The Awakening is Very Rude

I lived with my grandmother for some short stretches of time when I was a kid.  I had a tiny little bedroom tucked under the eaves with a window that overlooked the woods adjacent to the house.  Every night, my gran would turn down my bed and send me comfortably off to sleep.  And then, some eight hours later, there would be a sharp THWAPP!, the shade on that window would fly up and flap, flap, flap and my gran, definitely a morning person, would sing in a loud voice:

“Lazy Mary, will you get up, will you get up, will you get up
Lazy Mary, will you get up, so early in the Morn-ning!”

Irritating?  You betcha.  But very effective.

Last night’s Virtually Speaking featured two bloggers who sounded like they got the Lazy Mary treatment.  After a week of outrages, the left blogosphere is waking up to the very real scenario that they picked the worng guy.  Very wrong.  Marcy Wheeler (aka emptywheel) and Stuart Zechman are finally outraged.  They have reached the stage of outrage and righteous indignation that we felt in 2008 when Obama and the DNC decided that votes for Hillary Clinton from the big states did not count (or if you were living in MI or FL, counted for half a person).  Doesn’t feel so good, does it guys?  And he doesn’t have to listen to you.  Nope.

What’s more disturbing is the number of somewhat reasonable bloggers who started to doubt Obama some time ago who are railing against Hillary now.  It’s like bombing Iraq for something Al Qaeda in Afghanistan did.  Some have even suggested that Hillary is some nefarious anti free speech authoritarian Josephine Stalin, chasing down Julian Assange, disconnecting Wikileaks from the Tubez and personally ending the free internet as we know it.  They overlook the fact that the long awaited State Department cables were released and circulated for days before any action was taken by Amazon to stop hosting Wikileaks.  They forget that Hillary has handled this crisis in a cool, level headed fashion with steely resolve and that this may have a stabilizing effect on diplomacy.  But what really seems to be incensing them is that the rest of the world isn’t incensed with that brazen hussy.  Give it a rest guys.  And I do mean guys.  Your pathology is showing.

What it it about Hillary that drives guys straight into crazyland anyway?  Do they secretly regret not voting for her now that she’s shown herself to be the real deal and Obama’s, um, not?  Now they must punish her for being who we always said she was?  Does she make them feel impotent that they can’t validate all of the crazy ass shit they threw at her?  That’s she’s not that bad, seems to know what she’s doing and that the cables haven’t uncovered any smoking guns against her, or at least nothing the general public isn’t perfectly willing to live with?

It’s not our problem if they made a monumentally huge mistake in 2008. They’re the ones who chose to overlook the fact that the party, with Obama’s blessing, trashed the fair reflection of 18,000,000 Democratic primary voters.  Yep, denied them a voice, stole their votes, stole whole states of delegates at the convention and these blogger activists raised nary a peep.  It’s a little ironic now to be accusing Hillary Clinton of authoritarianism after the fraudulent sham primary elections of 2008 where the rest of us were shut out of the democratic process and were told to surrender our votes to the Lightbringer.  You didn’t really think that you were exceptions to the rule and that Obama was going to give you a seat at the table and treat your concerns seriously after you just stabbed half of your party in the back for him?  Did you?

But the constant harping on Hillary, blaming her for everything they don’t like about the Obama administration is starting to verge on self parody.  Get over it, guys.  If you wanted less of a unified executive, less torture and no wars, you shouldn’t have voted for a man who was too greedy for power to wait his turn and too inexperienced a politician to deliver those things for you.  And in case you aren’t aware, acting on the things you care about is not Secretary of State’s job.  She doesn’t get to make those decisions.  Hillary Clinton is not the president.  Remember?  You had a hand in that.  Therefore, you can’t hang the albatrosses of this administration’s failures around her neck.  Obama is the guy who is perpetuating wars and torture.  Obama is screwing over the unemployed.  Obama is the guy who appointed the catfood commission.  Obama is the guy who is negotiating to give away whatever is left in the safe to the uber wealthy.  Obama is the guy who appointed the FCC regulators overseeing the Comcast dispute with Level Three.  Obama is the guy who is blowing you off.

Hillary is only the secretary of state who is diligently doing her job, which is limited to diplomacy.

I think we know how the next couple of days will go.  The Marcys and the Stuarts will continue to fume indignantly about how Obama betrayed them but the CDS trolls will infiltrate their blog comment threads and the trigger words will come out, “NAFTA”, “Welfare Reform”, “triangulation”, will be repeated ad nauseum to the vulnerable to get them back in line.  Nothing is scarier than the prospect of having another Clinton in the White House.  Let’s not even go there.

Well, if that’s what they want.  I guess they’re stuck with Obama then, because the other proposed candidates for primarying Obama are non-starters. They are still living in crazytown if they think that they can appoint the next candidate to run for president and that the other uncouth, dirty working class side of the party is just going to go along with it.  The rest of the party doesn’t much care for their way of getting presidents.  Denying people a real choice is a sure fired way to reduce the size of your party.

So, they can continue to knock themselves unconscious bashing themselves on Hillary Clinton’s image, a lot of pointless sound and fury, signifying nothing.  If they want to complain about Obama and make an impact, beating up on his secretary of state whipping boy is about as ineffective a strategy as they’re going to get.  Direct your ire at the man in charge or continue to be rudely awakened.

For the record, here’s Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on internet freedom, about as close as she’s going to get to influencing domestic policy on the issue:

Advertisements

153 Responses

  1. Amen, RD. Seriously, what is their problem with Hillary? Why can’t they get over themselves? Number one, she is not her husband. In fact, she is better than him and he admits it. Proudly. He probably even stops random people on the street to tell them his wife is, in the Lightbringer’s words, “generally smarter, better looking and all around more efficient” then him.

    So why do they throw triangulation and welfare reform around? Hillary has her own accomplishments and besides, Bill never stopped being who he was and his dreaded “Welfare Reform” lifted God knows how many people out of poverty. I mean, geez, they are like obsessed with her or something. It’s like she said about Rush Limbaugh, “He’s always had a crush on me.”

  2. The greatest printing disaster in the history of the world. I can’t say more, without doing a spoiler on a delicious story, but anybody who’s ever bought printing or done production management will love this. It’s just colossal.

    • A metaphor for lots of things in the US now.

    • Too funny. Our government F@#4%up again. We are becoming as effective as the old Soviet Union.

    • The best part is in the comment section wherein someone points out the unlikelihood of the entire run being screwed in this particular way, and another possibility for what might be wrong and why they might not want that bandied about.

  3. RD, I’ve been very busy with deadlines, so I haven’t been able to write much here. But I have been reading, especially your Fairness Dignity Respect post yesterday. Something has to be done – and quickly. (I think the rest of the world is well aware the US of A is crumbling fast and is already, with delight, taking advantage of that fact.)

    Somehow, if we are actually going to create a new direction (or recreate an old direction), we need to combine forces with the people who once adored Obama (or followed the kewl kids against their better judgment), as they begin to allow intelligence and common sense to seep back into to their lovelorn brains. I personally think a complete mea culpa, a profound apology, and a promise never to inflict a know-it-all attitude on anything ever again (including clinging to the abominable CDS) would be the wisest route to assuage my rage.

    However, I would prefer uniting against Obama than nothing at all. That means me swallowing my anger and accepting a detente. Even with those who have left this site. In terms of Obama, at a minimum, we are all on the same side.

    Perhaps we could have peace negotiations – with reps from all groups, former Obama lovers and us steely eyed realists who sometimes don’t get along with each other.

    I wouldn’t beat up on the Obama lovers for their stupidity and blindness, but they would have to check their egos at the door. And they would have to agree to listen to those of us who saw the obvious. And then actually listen to those of us who proved we were smarter.

    We need to save the worker – and, to me, that means every single one of us minus the 1% who never had to work. That’s the unity. To varying degrees, every single one of us is in the same boat (or under the same bus).

  4. Your wit and vivacity, untempered as it must be by any misplaced respect for the Obama lovers, is more than acceptable, it’s turning into my daily LOLZ.

    It’s nice to know Jane’s phrases run through other people’s minds the way they do through mine!

  5. At some level CDS reflects fear. These guys know that she would not put up with their irresponsible behavior. Would expect something of them. Would not defer to them.

    Another “good” reason to blame Hilary is to avoid taking responsibility for their own mistakes and inaction. Woman blaming is the oldest cop out.

    • See below, my post about fear.

    • See the Garden of Eden.

    • Thank you, just when did they listen to women and their politics?

    • “Woman blaming is the oldest cop out.”

      Yes, it’s called misogyny. It has always been BO and his blogger boyz’s & girlz’s default mode. Their whole campaign — the primary and GE — was based on it. Once Hillary dropped out, BO was lost — that is until Palin came into the picture. Recall, he actually campaigned against Palin, rather than McCain, throughout the GE. This is why BO would love to see her run again; he’s got his misogynist script down pat, and BO’s internet and media minions are salivating at the chance to attack the woman again.

  6. I would remind you that a least two of your gender had a hand in the theft of May. Donna Brazil and Nancy Pelosi. In fact it was a guy who stood up for Hillary, Harold Ickes.

  7. I guess they’re stuck with Obama then, because the other proposed candidates for primarying Obama are non-starters.

    They’ll run some lefty gadfly who has never accomplished anything politically except maybe getting himself elected to office in some 80% liberal district like a college town in a red state.

    Then they’ll lose.

    Then they’ll say that since the primary challenge failed they have to vote for Obama because the Republicans are worse.

    That’s lefty activism in the new millennium.

  8. riverdaughter:

    Let me try to understand you.

    When you write “The Marcys and the Stuarts will continue to fume indignantly about how Obama betrayed them,” are you aware that we’re indignant precisely because Obama lied, dissembled and misled ordinary people about his affiliation with the Third Way center, and its wing of the party (the New Democrats)?

    Do you not know that we’re less than thrilled to find out that Bill Clinton was correct in saying “It’s a fairy tale,” but that this lack of enthusiasm comes from Clinton’s accurate assessment of Obama as being indistinct in policy terms from the DLC?

    The problem with Obama is that he held out a choice between Third Way centrism to movement liberals like us during the Democratic primaries that turns out to have been a perverse lie. Did you know that this cynical manipulation is where that sense of betrayal originates?

    Movement liberals, of course, understand that many New Democrats are extreme ideologues with respect to Third Way centrism. To the extent that Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama moderate that extremism, and compromise with liberal policy proponents for the good of the country, that will determine left support for either of these politicians. To the extent that either of the two continue the radical, knee-jerk, Third Way rejection of the reality-based community and its analysis, movement liberals will continue to look elsewhere for political leadership.

    Did you not understand that this was the point of the discussion yesterday?

    Or are you simply not aware that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are both New Democrats?

    • So much for my call for unity.

      Obama and Clinton are NOT the same. For starters, she’s competent and not a liar as to where she stands. She has a history of good works. She uses her brain and works hard.

      You’ve taken the first step. You admit you made a mistake about Obama. You were tricked, conned. Now, why not contemplate the second (since you have less than a stellar track record)? You also made a mistake about Clinton.

      I say this not as an ardent Clinton fan (I made the initial abominable choice of Edwards). I say this as a person who values honesty. Do you honestly believe that Clinton would have thrown women, children, workers, the elderly, the LGBT community, the sick – that is, the Dem base – under the bus?

    • Apparently you are not aware how much of the Barack Obama myth you made up from the thin air of your own pathetic aspirations.

    • You saw significant policy differences between them in the primaries. It wasn’t about relative competence, experience or maturity. It wasn’t about gender or race. You thought he would stand with homeowners and not the banks as Hillary tried to do during the fall 08 crash. Who’s being disingenuous.

      • Remember the “Clinton-Bush years” that 0 and co. yapped about all the time. As if there was such a thing!

        Now they want us to believe that Hillary and 0 are equivalents. Well, we know they are not, and we knew it in 2008. Time and events have only secured that knowledge.

        So, all you who foisted this man on our country: please don’t waste our time pretending she is at all like him. She’s a leader with integrity; he’s a liar. It’s really that simple.

        We have better things to do. If you want to save this country, start with getting real about 0 and your role in his ascension and then get real about who might actually be able to unseat him and run this country for the good of the nation and all its citizens.

        I’ll give you a clue: her huevos are bigger than his cojones.

    • Yes, I understand. I understand that you and your friends use the words “third way” as if it has some meaning in this political environment.
      We’re not stupid. We’ve listened to you guys fume over Clinton for years now. Clinton was nothing like Obama, who was handed the most favorable environment for a liberal on a silver platter.
      You make a big deal out of triangulation; we see it as negotiation during a point in time when Bill Clinton was dealing with a hostile congress.
      You make a federal case out of the DLC when we didn’t see the DLC as being that influential during the Clinton years.
      You guys go off on NAFTA when you should have been worried about Asia.
      You think welfare reform was a bad thing. We know people on welfare and what they really want is a good job, not some measly check.
      In short, you are living in the past.
      You would have been better off with Hillary, who is NOT her husband. She has consistently demonstrated all of the things you say you want. All politicians have to come to terms with how much they are willing to compromise. But Obama has shown time and again that there are no limits for him. In the aftermath of the last two years when the presidency has gone south and the Democrats are in disarray because if the actions of the small but vocal contingent screaming their heads off about the da Vinci code “third way”, the only part of the administration that seems to be working is the State Department.
      Do we have to draw you a map?
      There’s nothing wrong with doing business with business as long as everyone understands the rules and they are enforced. We’re not blind to Bill Clinton’s flaws. We were there. We were adults when he was in office. We saw the good and the bad. But you are cheating yourself and us of the truth. Bill Clinton came into office as a liberal, appointed the most liberal justices to the supreme court in decades, hiked taxes on the rich and presided over a suplus.
      Nobody outside your rarefied atmosphere gives a fuck about your fascination with the third way. They just want their jobs back. They want a cool, experienced, level headed leader in the white house.
      We got Obama instead.
      BTW, don’t condescend or I will sic the Klown on you.

      • Honk Honk Honk !!

      • Brava!!!

        The Obamacrats who so arrogantly pushed their way through the 2008 election, forced their candidate down the throats of so many FDR Dems will not rewrite history for their own comfort. We were there. We saw it. We heard it. We will not forget. Nor will we swallow the swill of Hillary bashing now.

        Obamacrats were taken for a ride or allowed themselves to be snookered or were not as brilliant as they took themselves to be. And now we have Obama flailing in the WH, giving away the store, bending over to Republican demands because that’s what he’s good at and because he told everyone in public, on national TV without a hiccup or hesitation that Ronald Reagan was his man. Remember that moment? Boy, I sure do. I’d suggest going back and reviewing the film footage. Don’t forget to take a gander at HRC’s reaction and response.

        Hillary’s biggest sin? Her “unforgivable competence.” She makes Obama look small and weak. Because he is.

    • Stuart: I understand your outrage and I agree that obama lied to you.

      The part you would “own” is not paying attention enough to notice that he triangulated. You had the evidence and should have noticed (I won’t assume that you were too busy being “outraged” with whatever CDS favorite hitjobs at the time because I’m too lazy to look.)

      His ENTIRE campaign was spent telling each different group of supporters what they wanted to hear.

      Frat boys got: “99 Problems”
      Lost souls got: “Camp obama”
      Whole Foods Nation got: “those bitter clinging…”
      Canada got: “Oh, don’t worry about Nafta”
      Bankers & Insurance got: EVERYTHING

      We got? “This is what a feminist looks like” yeah.

      • Don’t forget that evidence of Obama’s triangulation occurred BEFORE he was elected. Obama’s rejection to take public financing of his election once he became the nominee. And then he claimed that “private money is public financing.”

        The evidence of Obama’s willingness to capitulate to the interests that the Third Way claims it rejects was there right out in the open BEFORE the man was even elected. They just chose to IGNORE it.

        • Also, the biggest “tell” for me, before even looking at his campaign, was the Rezko house deal. I am sorry, but that is not the action of an honest elected official. It is plain corruption. Then and there anyone could see that this is a crooked couple.

        • And they eitehr discount or share his homophobia.
          Obama lost me the day he put Donnie McClurkin on the stage.

        • …”just chose to ignore it” or thought it was BO’s 11-dimensional chess strategy.

      • Honk Honk !!

    • Basically, I think this old adage applies to the main difference between Obama and Hillary:
      “All talk and no action!”

      Obama is such a perfect example of this, and Hillary is its exact opposite. Thanks for reminding me again how Obots are totally unlike real Liberals.

      As far as the Third Way so-called political movement I’ve been hearing among Obots, same adage applies. Because when push came to shove, the Third Wayers let Obama walk all over them, and didn’t protest one iota while it was happening.

    • Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are both New Democrats
      Thanks for the laugh. That’s a good one. Those two couldn’t be more different in their experience, effectiveness, and policy philosophies. And if it hasn’t become obvious to you over the last two years, then there’s not really much to say. I guess it makes it easier to sleep at night because to actually come to terms with that difference might involve dealing with guilt and coming to terms with playing some part in the destruction of the party if not the country itself.

      Seriously, nearly a billion in “small” (read small enough to be untraceable) donations to a completely inexperienced unknown didn’t raise a red flag? Seriously? You might want to watch those primary debates again too. Kind of shocking. Well, anyway, don’t worry, be happy I guess. La la la…

    • When you want to know what a person will do… look at what they’ve done.
      When I compare the history of Obama and the history of Hillary, I can clearly see she was ready to lead us to a better place and I see that he wouldn’t lead us anywhere.

      She is a leader , he is not.
      That was abundantly clear in 2008.

    • Oh, geez. It’s the old “hillary is just as bad argument” that is completely false. The fact of the matter is that on the economy she ran to the left of him in the primaries. The problem was that Obamacrats were single issue voters who ignored the economic issues and were mostly single issue anti war voters. The ultimate latte liberals who could care less about the working class and in fact called working class voters all sort of names to boot. If you had taken off your rose colored glasses you could have seen him for what he is/was A con man of the first degree. He never did anything worthwhile in the Il Senate nor the US Senate and apparently you paid no attention to how he even treated his own constituents in Chicago. That was the biggest clue as to how everyone was going to be treated. Welcome to the same treatment half the party got two years ago.

      • Honk.

      • But, but, but she voted for the war. But she also was abundantly clear in the debates that she would begin withdrawals from Iraq as soon as she was inauguarated. And then Obama said, “me too, me too” Well still waiting. Plus more soliders in Afghanistan. Yep, just loving this fairy tale of an anti-war President. Oh wait, that’s a racist comment.

    • Both New Democrats, my right ass cheek.

      Buddy, Clinton may be a pragmatic centrist in practice and that may stick in your idealist little craw, but the fact of the matter is that she is no more cut from the same cloth as that scabby little corporate-toadying Changeling Obama than Obama is the socialist that ill-informed Right-wingers think he is. Hillary holds genuine liberal values, and that was obvious from the way that she has been an Actual ally to the Queer community, an advocate for women and children, a defender of the working and middle classes, and a tireless workhorse. Not to mention her being too smart for the room when she called the housing crisis two years before it happened. Obama wasn’t able to call the oil spill until six weeks AFTER it happened, he has repeatedly courted homophobes and misogynists and thrown minority groups under the bus, and has handed over what belongs to the many to the priveleged few. He is a creepy inversion of Robin Hood, and if you cannot see the difference between that and a pragmatic liberal workhorse, then you sir, are a blind, insensible idiot.

  9. In general, people do not like to admit that they are wrong. It’s always someone else’s fault. Initially, Rahm was blamed for all of the bad Obama decisions. Rahm is no longer near the White House and people need another scapegoat, thus, Hillary. After all, Hillary reminds them of their terrible choice and huge mistake in backing Obama. Reality is a b*tch and they prefer she go away so they can feel better about themselves.As much as I dislike all the haters (Aravosis, Huffington, Kos Sullivan and many more,) I think we may need to unite with them and use power in numbers to rid ourselves of this potential Obama presidency on 2012. When the Obama machine sees the former Obamafans united with PUMAS, Obama will face reality and possibly retire in 2012. Just my 2 cents.

    • How can you unite with someone who doesn’t want to be with you? It takes two to unite.

      Anyway, RD, you’re preaching to the choir. For months now we’ve gone over and over why these people still feel the need to flagellate the woman. For my 2 cents, I don’t think it’s fear. I think she’s a mirror reflecting their irrelevance. They’re been played and now their worthless in every sense of the word; and they know it..

      And yes, Hillary is the best hope for the Democratic Party in 2012; and they know that too. Even a right wing reactionary like Pamela Gellar knows it. This from Atlas Shrugs:

      ” Assange said that Hillary should resign …

      And how convenient that is for Obama! His only competition in the Democrat party for 2012 is Hillary….

      There is no way that one guy leaked all this without the help of very senior people and the infiltration of our government. There is no way that Julian Assange got his hooves on hundreds of thousands of documents from the State Department and other sources without people at the senior levels of the White House and the Justice Department turning a blind eye and a deaf ear. Particularly when the documents were so unflattering to Clinton.

      What a perfect way to bring down Hillary. I am no fan of Clinton, but that is hardly the point. Obama means to destroy Hillary. His man? Assange.”

      • They may not want to be with us but if they are intellectually honest or have some kind of conscience or scruples, they will stick with those who were right all along. If they truly want to get rid of Obama, they need as much support as possible, even if it means sucking up to us..

  10. Very good post this morning! Even if Hillay never becomes president, one of the many things that we have got to address is the handling of the laws by the DNC.

    What these bloggers you’ve mentioned well remember is the count/recount and Harris of the 2000 election. They can tell you detail of those events, but ask them about Brazile, and their minds are empty. They were tickled pink with the fraud during the 2008 election.

    I use to be a life long democrat, no more. If nothing else let those rich people in the democratic party aspire to a big tax break. They will keep looking down on us, and blaming us.

    Bout time the Obama love train comes to a complete hault.

  11. riverdaughter:

    Let me try to understand you:

    When you write “The Marcys and the Stuarts will continue to fume indignantly about how Obama betrayed them,” are you aware that we’re indignant precisely because Obama lied, dissembled and misled ordinary people about his affiliation with the Third Way center, and its wing of the party (the New Democrats)?

    Do you not know that we’re less than thrilled to find out that Bill Clinton was correct in saying “It’s a fairy tale,” but that this lack of enthusiasm comes from Clinton’s accurate assessment of Obama as being indistinct in policy terms from the DLC?

    The problem with Obama is that he held out a choice between Third Way centrism to movement liberals like us during the Democratic primaries that turns out to have been a perverse lie. Did you know that this cynical manipulation is where that sense of betrayal originates?

    Movement liberals, of course, understand that many New Democrats are extreme ideologues with respect to Third Way centrism. To the extent that Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama moderate that extremism, and compromise with liberal policy proponents for the good of the country, that will determine left support for either of these politicians. To the extent that either of the two continue the radical, knee-jerk, Third Way rejection of the reality-based community and its analysis, movement liberals will continue to look elsewhere for political leadership.

    Did you not understand that this was the point of the discussion yesterday?

    Or are you simply not aware that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are both New Democrats?

    • Stuart, where the fuck have you been, my friend? We could have told you two and half years ago what kind of person obama was. In fact, we *did* tell you that. Over and over again, we told you to keep an eye on his economic advisors, to look at his lack of a voting record, to pay attention to how he frames reproductive rights, to listen to what he says and carefully gauge his “presentation”. You may be surprised by how conservative Obama is but he never fooled any of us who have been blogging here since 2008. You should have listened to us.
      Oh, that’s right. You were too busy calling us racists and old ugly uneducated working class women.
      Stuart, I have more education in my little pinkie than some of the A list bloggers. I live cutting edge biotech. In the past year, I have even surprised myself at my capacity to learn new stuff. And I am proud to call myself working class, just like all of the rest of Americans who make a living through labor, not investments.
      We have been trying to tell you, warn you, beg you to pay attention and don’t sell us out to people like Obama. In fact, I was at yearlykos in 2007 when I smelled it, that mob mentality, fueled by emotionalism and trigger words that propelled Edwards to the top of the dailykos polls. I spoke out and warned people to not get caught up in that. But they didn’t listen. They were no better than the 30%ers that clung to bush to the bitter end. No amount of reasoning got through to you.
      But the biggest clue to what Obama was all about and told us what was to come was in the way the primaries and convention were held. You let him get away with it because you wanted to win the nomination. And as a result, 18000000 of us lost our say in the process. Don’t try to sugar coat this. I live in NJ and saw what my governor did to my vote at the convention. Obama never stood up for us, the voters. Was never gracious to Florida and Michigan. Didn’t care if Hispanics in Texas were bullied and locked out. THAT is they guy you signed up with. He started his presidency with that record and legacy. Nothing good ever comes of s bad seed.
      Do I give a flying fuck if Hillary is a new democrat? No. I do not. In the past 10 years, I have seen her time and again stick up for women, working people, Internet freedom, privacy and home ownership. I don’t much care for her vote for the IWR but she is only one of many votes. And her reasons for doing it were probably more understandable than most.
      I like a forceful foreign policy. Who loves war? But it’s not always easy or safe to pull out of an unstable war zone. Over time, I have come to trust her to do her best under very difficult circumstances.
      In this Recession, which was preceded by the most dangerous collapse of the financial system in living memory, the concept of third way has no meaning. We are dealing with fundamental issues here. I see no evidence that she would have let unemployment fester as Obama has. Of course, we’ll never know, will we?
      But I just gotta ask you: when you and your buddies decided to relieve the rest of us clintonistas of the burden of making our own choices and ins read stuck us with Obama, what exactly did you think you were saving us from? Because, after 2 years, it turns out that we were right about him and you were wrong. So, there’s a good chance you were wrong about Hillary too. But you shackled us to you and then darted out in front of a speeding train.
      Why should we ever trust you? Your judgment is shoddy.
      Sent from my iPad, where editing is a pain in the ass.

      • Also, I’ll be damned if a single one of these “Hillary is just as Bad” anti-war activists has even HEARD of the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act, let alone knows where the big zero stood on it, or what he said about it afterwards. But I bet they ALL remember the Kyl-Lieberman hoopla. That’s not wonkery, that’s wankery.

  12. Is there an angle other than bashing Obama that this sight can present.

    Someone attacks Hillary and Riverdaughter rushes to defend her (something I can support) and by the halfway point, everything negative that has happened is Obama’s fault again).

    To be direct, Riverdaughter would be consistent in making this point if she attributed everything good coming out of the State Department with Obama as well.

    Blame Obama for everything good and bad out of the state department or blame Clinton for everything good and bad.

    Blaming Obama for the bad and celebrating Clinton for the good is the only indefensible position.

    Yet it is the one position Riverdaughter, and most other people here, consistently take.

    • One of your weaker efforts. You’re getting defensive. Cheating, race-baiting and misogyny made him President, and now he can’t lead at a time when the nation needs real leadership. Some more experience and maturity might have helped.

    • Did Egalia ban you?

    • Sunday, December 5, 2010
      Why Julian Assange is everything Obama isn’t.

      The two people most in the news lately has been Julian Assange and Barrack Obama. Assange because of what he’s been able to do and Obama because of what he hasnt. Regardless of what you think of Assange (and there is not the slightest shred of evidence that the release of those cables has harmed anyone), Assange has shown what one person with scant resources but who believes in what he is doing, has convictions, and is willing to stand up against adversaries can accomplish while Obama has shown what doesn’t get accomplished even with vast resources when someone has no courage, no convictions and believes in nothing.
      http://tominpaine.blogspot.com/2010/12/why-julian-assange-is-everything-obama.html

      ABG,

      I hope you don’t pass out upon reading this, but Tom In Paine makes good points, if he couldn’t or wouldn’t do right by the people, then what can we expect now? He had it all and blew it. He took out the Public Option (he could have been historic by passing it), which could have helped so many and now he is keeping all of the BUSH II policies and expanding them. WHY?

      • Duh, 11-dimensional chess, hello… /snark

        • OMG a main reason to be for Hillary was that she tried for health care once and it didn’t work so I felt she wouldn’t let a second chance go by, that we would get real health care reform. Obama sold out to his “investors”, I mean, “campaign contributors”–well, the ones we know about anyway, so much money, such a mystery who it was from. (Which is why when he complained in the last election about Republicans getting so much outside money that influenced the election, I found that rather enjoyable.)

    • I take it you’ve never been in a leadership position. When something goes wrong it is the fault of the leader, because it is their role to direct the efforts of the group and to forsee problems. When something goes right, it is the accomplishment of the group, because they were the ones doing the actual work, and bringing the actual skills. Leadership is a thankless task, which is why lying worthless narcissists shouldn’t have run in the first place.

  13. Think you’re right about this No Labels thing RD. More progs have been floating it on facebook. Was hoping it was something more original, but looks like a PR move to calm people down so that Barack can do his job type deal. I doubt it’s a Hillary thing.

    On Dec. 13, more than 1,000 citizens from the 50 states will convene in New York to change the odds. They are founding a movement – No Labels. Among them will be Democrats, Republicans and independents who are proud of their political affiliations and have no intention of abandoning them. A single concern brings them together: the hyper-polarization of our politics that thwarts an adult conversation about our common future. A single goal unites them: to expand the space within which citizens and elected officials can conduct that conversation without fear of social or political retribution.

    (snip)

    That’s what No Labels is. Here’s what it isn’t: It is not a nascent third-party movement. It is not a stalking-horse for an independent candidacy. And it is not a front for anyone’s agenda. In an act as old as America, citizens are coming together out of frustration and patriotism to give their country a better future. The challenge is enormous. But as Margaret Mead said, “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.”

    • (blinking) 1000 people coming together? What does that mean? I saw millions of people march against the war and it was barely mentioned on the news. What’s a 1000 people?

      Still…. who are they?

      • Bloomberg people probably. Dave Weigel was with the No Labels people over the weekend, and today he was tweeting about how much money Bloomberg has for a run.

    • Boo. Civility is a red herring. It’s just corporate feel-good code for stepping back so you don’t get splashed with blood when the big boys go in for the kill.

  14. I throw in the towel. There’s no winning this thing. Obama or a GOP, heads you lose, tails you lose.

  15. “What is it about Hillary that drives guys straight into crazyland anyway?”

    Here is my take on that. POWER.
    Hillary was never one to be a “dumb female.”

    Women in her part of the Baby Boom were part of Second Wave Feminism. Coming out of the women’s movements of the 60’s. I have some women friends that are her age. They are about the strongest batch of women I know. Really.

    Second Wave women needed to prove they were “equal” to males. At work.

    Second Wavers got educations on purpose.

    Second Wavers expected to do great things in life. One look at that Wikipedia entry on her? Yep.

    Regardless of whether she runs again (which I hope she does) she stands as an icon for all working women. The thing is, she didn’t give a damn about baking cookies. And? She is an EQUAL with her husband Bill Clinton.

    That is what people can’t stand. Her power and the fact that she is equal to males.

    There is a very easy way of knowing who is who. Contrast the female roles in terms of Hillary Clinton, Barbara Bush, Michelle Obama and Sarah Palin.

    Isn’t that easy?

    Hillary is the FDR Democrat. That’s only one thing, though. Track record is what counts, or should count when making the comparisons.

    Hope she runs, RD & Co. Otherwise? Geez. Thinking about it boggles the mind for actual Democrats.

  16. “She doesn’t get to make those decisions. Hillary Clinton is not the president. Remember? You had a hand in that. Therefore, you can’t hang the albatrosses of this administration’s failures around her neck. Obama is the guy who is perpetuating wars and torture. ”

    I’m sorry but this is deeply disingenuous. Hillary, as SOS, is the face and voice of our (horrible, bloodthirsty, verging-on-war-criminal) foreign policy, and she is in full support of every administration FP policy. She wouldn’t be in that job if she wasn’t..and she expressed the same beliefs when she was a candidate. Again, they ALL did, with the notable exceptions of Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich. Dem or Rep, when it comes to foreign policy they are all alike. That said, it’s horrible policy and every thing she does in her job simply furthers that horrible policy.

    To deny that is to descend into the Kool-Aid-ism that we rightly accuse the Obamabots of , and I think (I hope) we’re better than that.

    I am certain most people here know that I was a staunch Hillary supporter in the primaries, deeply admire her, and am not in the least touched by CDS. But my admiration does not preclude my realistic assessment of our foreign policy and her role in furthering it. That’s not CDS and that’s not sexism. Our treatment of other countries–under the mask of our “diplomacy”–is detestable, and if I took Condoleezza Rice to task for advancing that “diplomacy” then I’m going to take the current SOS to task for doing the exact same thing. I don’t care who it is.

    So let the flaming begin. Fine, I am too upset by our funneling of more arms and more money to slaughter more women and children to really care if I get vilified for not supporting that.

    • You will get no flame from me. Our foreign policy is in most regards still empire driven and I don’t expect it to change soon.

    • Agree with you to a point: that point being recognition that HRC does not set policy, she implements it. However, the fact that she implements BHO’s policoy leads me to believe that she is not in disagreement and that a HIllary Clinton presidency would have been attended by the same foreign policy we see now.

      Let’s not forget that during the primary, Hillary was often more hawkish than many of the other candidates. So I don’t doubt that she has no real problem with implementing Obama’s foreign policy.

      If she did and she’s as principled as we all say she is, she would have resigned already.

      • I largely agree with this, but I have to ask: Was Hillary more Hawkish, or more Honest? You can’t just pull a bit fat military presence out of a wartorn area overnight. But that is a very unpopular little fact. It hurt Hillary’s chances with the young prog latte crowd in a big way. Did you really think the rest would have owned up to it in public knowing what it did to her popularity?

        I think American foreign policy is largely appalling. I hate the covert ops and the bullying and the jingoism and the rhetoric. But under Hillary’s influence there has been an emphasis on microloans, and getting women involved in peace negotiations and an awful lot of emphasis on human rights. If that needs to be paired with a little pinching and prodding to get other nations to stop abusing their own citizens, I don’t particularly care if it comes off as patronizing. It’s WORTH IT.

    • What are you talking about specifically. Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Pales-tine, Is-rael, North Korea, South Korea, Sudan, Vietnam, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Somalia, Bosnia, Turkey, Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Mexico, Indonesia, Kuwait, Algeria, Libya, Kenya, Uganda, Uzbekhistan, or the other 200 plus nations around the world that an SoS maintains diplomatic relations with. Who is “slaughtering the women and children” of the world.

      • What are you talking about? I was agreeing with DancingOpossum. I don’t get your litany of countries and “slaughtering women and children” quote? Repeat: what are you talking about?.

  17. What’s the reason for all that hatred towards Hillary? It’s not complicated. She’s the only thing that stands between the American working class and the Wall Street plutocrats having their man, Obama, Romney, Gingrich, etc. Hillary is the only threat. Those with CDS are out to destroy any possibility of entering the race.

    It’s not tinfoil stuff. It’s obvious.

  18. Three Wickets,

    Who is slaughtering the women, children, and men (I hate the thinking that killing women or children is somehow worse than killing men, btw, and am sorry I used that term) of the world? We are: Our arms, our money, our troops. We’re doing it every single day.

  19. RD,
    Nice post, great pic 🙂

  20. “Lazy Mary, will you get up, will you get up, will you get up
    Lazy Mary, will you get up, so early in the Morn-ning!”

    pre-Lou Reed & the Velvet Underground (Heroin)

  21. I think the deranged reaction of Hillary supporters to Wikileaks shows that CDS runs both ways (see http://anglachelg.blogspot.com/2010/12/what-did-you-think-was-going-to-happen.html). Hundreds of thousands of documents leaked and a credible threat to Versailles’ hegemony … but the real story is that the leaks might have caused a minor embarrassment to Hillary? Just WTF?

  22. Ah, a classic Riverdaughter rant – great read. The reasons for CDS are beyond explanation, each sufferer unique only in their mindlessness. Think mice in cage going round endlessly – repeat, repeat, repeat.

    No Labels plays right into Bumbles stated approach – keeping on the mice track. jeeesh.

  23. I don’t have a dog in this particular fight, since I tend to vote from the “right” side of the ballot box.

    But when you call Obama a greedy, inexperienced twerp, all I can say is ‘You go girl!” Took the words right out of my mouth.

  24. Fantastic post.

    My grandmother used to wake me up with “School days, school days, dear old golden rule days. Reading and writing, arithmetic! Taught to the tune of a hickory stick…”

    All that while pulling the covers off my feet and shaking me by my ankle. Good thing I adored my Nana is all I can say!

  25. Let me try this from the Obama perspective. Obama is playing a game of chicken with an opponent with far superior bargaining position. If tax cuts aren’t extended for the middle class, the economy is going to back slide very quickly, starting this month when people do less holiday shopping. All of those negative effects will be attributed to Obama. I guaranty that even sites like this won’t view Obama as being courageous, they will view him as the cause. Obama and the GOP both know that, so he has to get those middle class cuts through and he can’t use the outrage over a failure to help on the rich tax cuts. What I hope his game is is as follows (I just posted this at Egalia’s blog):

    1. 3-6 month unemployment extension
    2. Fast resolution to buy time for START, DADT, and other initiatives
    3. Sunset on tax cuts to give him a chance to veto if he is reelected. If he is not reelected, it doesn’t matter anyway because the GOP will control the government and extend them anyway.
    4. Maintaining the ability of Dems to say that it was they, and not the GOP that kept their taxes low in 2012.

    Is that a good set of outcomes? No. It’s actually horrible, but game theory suggests that when one party has the advantage of not facing consequences for a negative outcome, the negotiating position of the person who will face those consequences is ridiculously low.

    Place any politician in Obama’s position and he/she would end up in the same place in terms of concessions.

    Now what I will fault Obama for is the fact that he’s managing the optics poorly. He’s going to have to cave but he should be doing a MUCH better job of explaining how horrible the GOP is for making him do that at the risk of middle class relief. He’s failing at the communications piece big time. No doubt. All of those criticisms are valid.

    But would we end up in the same place even if he was putting up the good fight? I think yes. That’s where I differ from most here, who believe that there is a different path.

    If tax cuts aren’t extended, there are all sorts of consequences (withholding from paychecks, etc.) that can’t be reversed. Even if employees get the tax breaks in February, let’s say, their January checks will already show lots more $$$ being withheld. That’s going to effect someone’s rent on February 1. That’s going to mean less lunch money for someone January 23. You can’t fix those hardships by passing something a month later. Once it’s done it’s done (although they may be “grossed up” later).

    Bottom line: Obama’s situation is far more complex than the “fight, fight, fight” chant indicates. If Obama fights as hard as some want him to, there are going to be some real hardships in January.

    And it won’t be the folks getting the upper class tax cuts that feel it.

    • Jeez, that was worthless. I felt brain cells dying as I read it.

    • Try not thinking about everything from Obama’s perspective all the time.

    • LAME. Tax cuts are Obama’s only option to fix the economy! The Optics are bad! Try the politics are bad, especially when you waste two years kowtowing when you don’t have to and then only ever consider the perspective of your alleged foes.

  26. Obama primaried in a fascist style and governs in a fascist style. Most of his white male [some young women tossed] supporters supported his fascist campaign style and even now support Obama, with false narratives against Hillary that would make Pravda proud.

    I have never been a big fan of Hillary, but to me the choice was never clearer, a right wing fascist, or Hilliary’s FDR’ish domestic policy combined with a Scoop Jackson type foreign policy.

    Let’s remember in Af-Pak alone, Obama has gotten more Soldiers and Marines killed in less than two years than Bush the 2nd did in 8 years.

    Truly Obama is the most extremist right wing President on Foreign & Domestic issues of any of the post FDR presidents….and for the most part the Obamanation is highly supportive. Clearly, his fan club includes some pretty sick puppies

    • And used more drones with more collateral damage than BushBoy.

    • I thought during the primaries that Obama was the worst possible choice for President of either party. I can’t think of any serious candidate of either party who could say with a straight face that he had the power as President to actually order the death of American citizens. I think he may be the most unbalanced person to ever win the job.

      Bush II seemed alright, I was never a fan, until the tragic attacks occurred in NYC and then he went of the deep end. I’ve never seen one redeeming feature of Obama. He pretty much has every characteristic you could ever NOT want in a leader. Narcissistic, weak, stupid, short sighted, etc. He has them all covered.

  27. It’s a little ironic now to be accusing Hillary Clinton of authoritarianism after the fraudulent sham primary elections of 2008 where the rest of us were shut out of the democratic process and were told to surrender our votes to the Lightbringer.

    Great point. Their chronic selective perception is so boring.

  28. The buyer’s remorse is all over the internet now but they will continue to let Obama walk all over them by saying they’ll still vote for him. He knows that his base of latte liberals and AA’s will never abandon him so he’s free to walk all over them. That being said, as we saw in Nov, it’s not enough to win though.

  29. Excellent post, RD!

    I am glad that some former Obama supporters now better understand our long-held concerns about the President. I hope some will feel they can join in the new F-D-R movement that RD kicked off here and Cannonfire is also promoting, to get a real Democratic president into office.

    OT, if I may: CNN has breaking news that Elizabeth Edwards has been told further cancer treatment is futile, so she has ended her treatments and is at home with her family:
    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/12/06/elizabeth-edwards-stops-cancer-treatment-releases-statement/?hpt=T1&iref=BN1

    I wish her peace and want to express sympathy for her and her family.

    djmm

    • Heard this and figured this was why she wasn’t weighing in on issues lately.

      I will miss her voice. Her loved ones will miss her.

    • I didn’t originate Fairness, Dignity, Respect. Anglachel did. But The Confluence reserved the blog name ForDemocraticReform back in 2008. So, we were ahead of the curve, as usual.

  30. Oy is this guy weak tea. The news right now.

    “Tax Compromise Reached”

    idk democrats anymore (since 1984). Dishonorable… but oh well

  31. Great post. Great conversation.

    Just heard on the news. Elizabeth Edwards gravely ill and doctors say no additional treatment can be helpful. Sad.

  32. Let’s face it. The pres and his dems have an incredibly weak hand. I don’t think O did so bad on this deal. He only had to give up a temporary 2 yr ext for the rich but got all tax reductions including those in stimulus extended and unemployment bennies ext. for a year. Frankly, I think that is a reasonable deal for the American people and our economy right now. You can’t lose all those Dem seats and expect to still rule the roost.

    • I respectfully disagree.

      I agree with Professor Krugman: he should have held firm. The tax cuts would expire at the end of the year. Then the Republicans are in a much weaker position. Democrats in the Senate could pass tax cuts for the Middle Class next year. If the Senate passed such a bill, could the House Republicans vote against it? They could pass a separate bill with broader tax cut, but then the two houses could duke it out in committee — all subject to a Presidential veto.

      President Obama is a poor negotiator — or a closet Republican or both.

      djmm

      • ditto

        Remember when in 2008 Obama started talking up the Reagan “Transformational” Presidency? Now he can do the same about W…. nothing to hide now.

        Oh yeah, if you need to know what great negotiators the WH pussies are just read Ezra Klein & Kevin Drum

        • The use of the word “pussies” to describe a weak person is always wrong and particularly inappropriate on a woman-friendly blog.

          • Agree–“pussies” and “pantywaists” are stupd terms. But conversely, why is it a compliment to say someone “has balls” when that is about the weakest physical part of a man (just try kicking one there to see this is true). i have never figured that expression out–if someone could enlighten me . . .

          • That’s where we store our testosterone. Don’t like using “balls” much myself, but “pussy” is definitely offensive because men have made its context sexist, imo.

  33. Since Obama’s speech today, where he pretty much didn’t compromise at all, he went with 100% of what the Republicans wanted, the remaining fauxgressives seem to be surprised and angry.

    Breaking up is hard to dooooo… Idiots. I’m still stunned that people are surprised at these things. What in Obama’s past history makes any of them think he would do anything different than he’s doing?

    • He really had to twist their arms to pass a UI extension, huh. They can count votes as well as the next guy and would have passed it anyway soon. He sure gave them a great out what with twisting their arms to accept his tax cuts. 😉 SInce when is it hard to convince a Republican to vote for a tax cut?

  34. Ouch, a Republican analyst on the tube just said, is Obama going to support his base, or is he going to do what it takes to survive politically. Then he said this last move shows he will always do the latter. Sadly that meme works because it’s true.

  35. IIRC, CBS Evening News broke the Obama compromise with the Repubs as ” Obama and Repubs” decide. Ack. No I can’t quite recall the wording, but it struck as exactly what we hate about his president’s caving, kowtowing, executing Repub policies.

    And why does he do that? All together now: “Because he s a conservative!”

  36. I heard an audio clip of a Republican saying back when the Bush tax cuts were passed with the 10 year “sunset” provision that the sunsetting would never happen. By getting the tax cuts passed it meant they were there in perpetuity. Dems would not be able to vote them out.

    And now, with DINO Obama, they won’t even let them sunset.

    I’m sick to my stomach. That insula reaction.

    From This is your brain on metaphors.

    Consider an animal (including a human) that has started eating some rotten, fetid, disgusting food. As a result, neurons in an area of the brain called the insula will activate. Gustatory disgust. Smell the same awful food, and the insula activates as well. Think about what might count as a disgusting food (say, taking a bite out of a struggling cockroach). Same thing.

    Now read in the newspaper about a saintly old widow who had her home foreclosed by a sleazy mortgage company, her medical insurance canceled on flimsy grounds, and got a lousy, exploitative offer at the pawn shop where she tried to hock her kidney dialysis machine. You sit there thinking, those bastards, those people are scum, they’re worse than maggots, they make me want to puke … and your insula activates. Think about something shameful and rotten that you once did … same thing. Not only does the insula “do” sensory disgust; it does moral disgust as well. Because the two are so viscerally similar. When we evolved the capacity to be disgusted by moral failures, we didn’t evolve a new brain region to handle it. Instead, the insula expanded its portfolio.

  37. ATTN: Confluence Authors/Contributors ….

    Please check your email for a message from me.

    (thank you)

  38. I wonder what Obama will have to give the Repubs to get hem to vote for SocSec cuts…?

  39. OT – but, I have to.

    My grandbaby arrived this morning. A precious little girl (well, not so little….8 lb 3 oz, 21.5 inches TALL).

    When my grandson was born, I had to spend days returning all the dresses….not this time…. 🙂

  40. I haven’t read the commnts yet but I went over to FDL and mentioned Hillary, the primaries, my state and vote not being counted, the caucus’, then the convention. The daggers went flying at me. I didn’t wait around. Funny how they ignore the elephant in the room just like 2008 was an ordinary election year and Bush won again – they had nothing to do with it.

    • It;s because their complicity in the political @ssasination of Hillary is their initiation atrocity. They can’t go back from it.
      It’s like when a gang forces a new member to do a terrible crime. Once you have blood on your hands you can’t turn back.

    • Yeah, they’re still very much in that, we do not mention her except to bash her state of mind.

  41. Progs have made a sexism is bad movie…going to Sundance. They still don’t remember their behavior in 2007-08. Sad.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: