• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    riverdaughter on Happy MLK Day from Canada
    Propertius on Happy MLK Day from Canada
    Ga6thDem on Happy MLK Day from Canada
    Propertius on Happy MLK Day from Canada
    Propertius on Happy MLK Day from Canada
    Propertius on Happy MLK Day from Canada
    riverdaughter on Happy MLK Day from Canada
    William on Happy MLK Day from Canada
    William on Happy MLK Day from Canada
    riverdaughter on Happy MLK Day from Canada
    jmac on Happy MLK Day from Canada
    Seagrl on Engrossment
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Engrossment
    Kathleen A Wynne on Engrossment
    William on Engrossment
  • 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

    September 2011
    S M T W T F S
    « Aug   Oct »
     123
    45678910
    11121314151617
    18192021222324
    252627282930  
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • The NYTimes Reveals More Than It Means
      Watch this video. It’s only 39 seconds. It’s worth it. What’s interesting to me about this video is NOT what Bernie says, it’s the reaction. It’s how genuinely uncomfortable the people interviewing him (The NYTimes editors) are. They really think he’s saying something terrible. Something awkward. Something embarrassing. What is he saying? “I ignore the […] […]
  • Top Posts

Racism and Deadlines

So, the Obama whips are trying to get us back into line, supporting Obama for re-election next year.  Why else would we be treated to timely reminders of what racists we are?  It’s a strange phenomenon but I never think about Obama’s race until he or one of his lackeys brings it up and shoves it in my face again.  He is, according to them, as spotless and competent or incompetant as any other Democrat.  Like Clinton.  {{eyes rolling}}  (Joseph Cannon has a nice post on this as well).

Can I just dispel some myths and legends about Clinton because I witnessed it, having been old enough (and born) to vote for him in 1992?

When I voted for him, I thought he was a moderate liberal.  One thing was for damn sure, he was nowhere near as conservative as his Republican opponent.  Nosiree.  Plus, I really liked his wife.  She was smart and didn’t mind sticking up for working women even when the traditional women got on her case.

Anyway, what I remember about Clinton’s terms in office, more than any other thing that happened during those eight years, was the relentlessly negative coverage he got from the media and the endless investigations instigated by Republican troublemakers.  It started before he took office and it didn’t end even after his moving van was chased away from the White House by screeching hordes hellbent on denying the Clintons even one piece of personal china from their friends and supporters.  They were even accused of swiping the “W’s” off the keyboards.

Even the Supreme Court didn’t see the harm in letting him and his wife be subject to crazy, speculative lawsuits.  He’d just have to deal with them.  He did.  But that doesn’t mean his performance in office didn’t suffer.  I think it did.  He had to shelve a lot of things he wanted to do.  DADT was a compromise solution.  So was DOMA.  Without that middle ground, there was a good possibility that some very negative homophobic amendments would have been passed.  Lani Guinier didn’t have a chance.  His attorney general picks were harassed for having nanny problems (but Tim Geithner suffered no punishment for not paying his taxes.  *He* was confirmed anyway for an infraction that would have gotten him fired if he had been an IRS agent).  Even his military strategies were called into question.  Remember the accusations of “Wag the Dog” when he bombed bin Laden in Afghanistan in 1998?  His Republican detractors were convinced that he did it because he wanted to take everyone’s mind off Monica Lewinsky, not because bin Laden was a dangerous terrorist who had bombed two American embassies in Africa and a US Naval vessel.

Then there’s the stuff that progressives say they hate him for, like NAFTA.  If there was a free trade agreement that ever had a reason for being, it might be NAFTA.  We do a lot of business with Canada and Mexico.  NAFTA had the promise of eliminating a lot of bureaucracy, saving everyone a lot of time and money.  You know, smaller government is not such a bad thing when it’s done well.  The problem is that Republicans would not enforce labor standards.  Maybe Clinton should have abandoned it at that point.  But NAFTA is not the most significant thing plaguing the employment market right now.  I am not competing for a job against some dude in Guadalajara.  My competition is in Western Europe and Asia.  Europe because they actually protected their scientific infrastructure and Asia because there is a lot of cheap labor there.  Unions are key to both situations.  I will leave it to the political braintrusts to figure that out.

As for Welfare Reform?  I was all for it.  I think reducing generational poverty is a laudable endeavor and am genuinely surprised that other liberals aren’t in favor of it too.  It is much better to have a job than to have a measly government check that keeps you poor.  I supported programs that trained people, especially young mothers, to get decent jobs and education.  The more we educate women and get them to support themselves, the fewer children they will have and the better the quality of life for the children they do have.  (Well, that was the theory until Obama came along and bought into deficit reduction, but I digress) As I remember it, Clinton’s team wanted to support parents with child care subsidies and housing vouchers and additional Head Start while they were transitioning to a work environment.  And Republicans, as is their wont, were agin it.  I fail to see how asking people to pull themselves up by their bootstraps but denying them boots was actually going to work but our media punditry seem to remove the obligation to make sense from Republican proposals.  The Republicans passed a draconian welfare reform act which Clinton mitigated later.

The area where I think Clinton failed was in the regulation of derivatives and allowing the dismantling of the Glass-Steagal Act by Gramm-Bliley.  Brookesly Born was the legendary regulator who opposed Larry Summers about the regulation of derivatives.  She was right, they were wrong.  Some of the guys who were Clinton appointees who joined with Summers to gang up on Born, now regret that they didn’t take her advice because she was absolutely right.  But note which candidate appointed Summers to his economics team.  That’s right, Barack Obama.  Gramm-Bliley was another matter.  We can’t leave Clinton totally off the hook but I think that he counted on Gore to win in 2000 and keep an eye on how that was going.  So, yeah, Clinton had a hand in this, probably by appointing Robert Rubin and letting the finance industry have a little too much freedom.  That was regrettable.  But the bulk of the responsibility for what happened in 2008 is George Bush’s.  There were plenty of warning signs in 2006 that the markets were going seriously off the rails and his regulators were either complicit or incompetent.  And then Paulson and Geithner failed to prevent the collapse of Lehman Brothers.  That was the disaster that triggered all the rest.  And who does Obama appoint as his Treasury Secretary? Tim Geithner.

The biggest differences that I can see between the Clinton years and the Obama years is that when the Republicans amped up the crazy starting in 1992, no one had ever seen anything like it before.  It wasn’t like Watergate when Nixon really did something criminal and both parties took him out.  No, this was a political media Dresden that seemed determined to wipe Clinton off the map.  He and Hillary didn’t always navigate the firestorm very well.  They were the first that had to go through it.  No other president in my lifetime has had every crevice of their personal and political lives examined in such humiliating detail.  And what did the millions of dollars of investigations turn up?  A blow job.  That was it.  It wasn’t even “paradise by the dashboard light” homerun intercourse.  Other than that, they were clean.  I doubt that any other political family in Washington could have come out of that looking like the dedicated public servants they turned out to be.

But they learned while they were in office what the limits were to what they could accomplish of their agenda.  And, by golly, they got a lot done.  The Republicans were constantly thwarted in what they wanted to do.  Progressives call it “triangulation”; I call it “pol-i-tics”. Gingrich shut down government and got in big trouble for it.  Clinton raised taxes on the wealthy against the Republicans wishes.  They tried to impeach Clinton and the public supported him anyway.  They wanted to pass an amendment to the constitution defining marriage only between a man and a woman and all they got was DOMA.  With another, less experienced, less apt student in the Oval Office, the Republicans would have gotten away with murder.

When Hillary ran in 2008, she was an even quicker learner than Bill.  She took the media on and beat it.  It wasn’t Fox News that took Hillary down.  It was her own party.

And now we are asked to support the guy who “beat” her in the primary.  A guy who runs a sexist White House.  A guy who CEO’s on Wall Street say is even more right of center than they thought.  A guy who was a deficit hawk during a recession.  A guy who didn’t think there was anything he could or wanted to do about unemployment.  A guy who is disgracefully allowing the dismantling of the US R&D industry without lifting a finger to help.  A guy who gave Bankers a pass.  A guy who crafted one of the most inept forms of healthcare insurance reform imaginable that will do absolutely nothing to lower costs but passes almost all of them onto the backs of already stretched consumers.  A guy who hurt struggling homeowners with HAMP.  A guy who gave away the store to Republicans when they took the US and global economies hostage by vowing not to raise the debt ceiling until they got what they wanted.  A guy who wants to make a Grand Bargain with Social Security and Medicare, virtually all that anyone my age will have left after we’ve lost everything else due to prolonged bouts of unnecessary unemployment.  And it’s not like Barack Obama is facing an economic situation that the entire world’s economists and history had no prior knowledge of.  There’s plenty of examples out there that demonstrate exactly what needs to be done from The Great Depression to the bad example of the Japanese lost decade to the Swedish crisis.  He’s supposed to be brilliant.  All he needs to do to put the economy back on track is to support policies that are known to have helped in the past.  But he won’t do them.  Why???

In short, the Obama loyalists say we have nothing to complain about.  The only reason we don’t want Obama is because we are racists.  It’s all in the color of his skin.  If not for that, we would be content with our dwindling middle class lives and diminished expectations.  We would gladly endure the beatings if we could just get over the fact that he is a few shades too dark because the Democratic party says that it has no one else who is more representative of its values or more competent in execution than Barack Obama.

And what would be the point of making your base feel like they have some reason to feel guilty and that the Clintons were not all they were cracked up to be?

I have no idea but somewhere yesterday I read that the deadline for filing for the upcoming primaries is fast approaching.  It’s the end of October.  If I didn’t know better, I think we saw the Democrats blink.  After all, they have been telling us for months now that it is a fantasy and crazy for us to believe that there will be a primary challenge to Obama in 2012.  Even Hillary has sought to dispel the notion that she will take him on.  So, if that’s the case, why the over the top denialism of the Clinton years and the persistent accusations of racism?  I mean, if she has already said she’s not taking him on and there’s no one else to challenge him, what’s the problem?  It sounds like Obama lady doth protest too much, methinks.

Unless the base is getting restless and the deadline isn’t coming soon enough…

53 Responses

  1. There’s been so much revisionist history, lately, thanks for setting the record straight and so well, riverdaughter.

  2. Here’s a comment of mine from another blog:

    And let’s not forget Starr’s henchmen pawing through Hillary’s underwear drawer looking for God knows what re that craptastic boondoggle, “Whitewater.”
    Wake me up when some goon is manhandling Michelle’s lacy frillies.
    Oh, did I mention that Bill Clinton’s super secret Grand Jury testimony was broadcast on every TV in America, a blatant infraction of the law.
    Obama would assume an eternal fetal position on the closet floor if he faced one tenth the witchhunt braved by Bill and Hillary Clinton.
    Funny how the snooty Harvard professor forgets that in 1995/6 Clinton had bragging rights about a roaring economy and twenty million new private sector jobs.
    But that wasn’t what made us enthusiastic about the man; it was his lily white hide, at least according to

    • lol! I love the” lacy frillies” touch! Indeed. Unless one saw it, it’s unbelievable what they went though…it was unbelievable then. It was why Hill could handle 2008 so well. She’s been though much, much worse than that. At least a rouge prosecutor with greater power than of the US Justice Dept wasn’t after her underwear anymore.

  3. I got guilted into voting for Obama once; I won’t be guilted again.

  4. Superb post, RD, and great comments, Sweet Sue. That’s the way I remember it, too. Any attempt to compare President Obama’s accomplishments (does he have any worth mentioning?…well, I am thinking…) with President Clinton’s is laughable.

    djmm

  5. Comment about Clinton v. Obama should have ended “according to Harris-Perry, but I got stymied by the twitter and facebook links.
    Yes, I’m old, why?

  6. I remember the 90’s well, too. And… believe me… Obama ain’t seen nothin’ like what the machine put Bill through.

    Oh… and see how I drop the “g” at the end of nothing? Well…. I think I was being raycist there. Against myself. Don’t you?

    (If one more smartass politician ever calls me “raycist” … s/he, like Obama, will NOT get my vote. Period.

  7. Obamabots were conditioned to hate Clinton. It was Obama’s only chance to win. The Obama campaign trotted out every phony Republican scandal and talking point to denigrate Clinton. The Obamabots regurgitate them to this day.

    Now they can’t stand that the Clinton presidency was the most successful since FDR. It makes their boyfriend look bad.

    While the Republicans have taken a mediocre president, Reagan, and turned him into a combination of Abe Lincoln and Davey Crockett, the asshole Democrats have taken a very successful and beloved president, Clinton, and turned him into Richard Nixon.

    It’s no wonder these shit for brains can’t run the government!

    • Perfectly said!
      We have bragging rights to Bill Clinton- for chrissakes- and Democrats treat him like an embarrassing pariah.

      Exceeeept-when they want him to campaign for them.

  8. The area where I think Clinton failed was… allowing the dismantling of the Glass-Steagal Act by Gramm-Bliley.

    Not fair. Gramm-Leach-Bliley passed both houses of Congress by veto-proof majorities (362-57 in the House, and 90-8 in the Senate). There was absolutely nothing he could have done to stop it.

    Money talks.

    • He signed it. His appointees advocated for it. I’m listening to Confidence Men and there were plenty of former Clintonites who regretted the way they behaved at the end of the Clinton administration. They went on to successful careers on Wall Street and somewhere in the mid 2000’s realized they had made gigantic mistakes and wanted to fix it. Better to have realized you’ve gone too far and want to correct the damage than to party on like nothing ever happened.
      Gary Gensler was one of the people who regretted it. Summers and Geithner don’t seem to have any conscience when it comes to derivatives regulations and Gramm-Bliley.
      Yes, Clinton was partially motivated by the Community Reinvestment Act and I think he did probably think that if Gore won, he would appoint the right people to keep Wall Street from blowing up.
      That didn’t happen.
      Even Clinton acknowledges his part in it and said he was wrong. Republicans pushed for it but the Democrats went along with it. The biggest players were Rubin and Summers. And who is Summers working for now? Obama. Know why? I don’t think Hillary would have hired him for all the tea in China. She knows a pompous, know-it-all, sexist jerk when she sees one.

      • 1) Clinton (along with nearly all the Democrats who voted against it) withdrew his opposition to the act after the CRA and financial privacy amendments were added to it in conference.

        2) Summers doesn’t work for Obama anymore.

        • I know what you’re saying but there was still a contingent of Clinton economic advisors who were more than happy to go along. They weren’t arm twisted.
          I must have known Larry had left but while I was reading Suskind’s book it felt like he was still there. I thought he was just moving from one post to another. But if he’s gone, good. He was a pain in the ass but ultimately, tim geithner is worse.

      • yeah, even if Bill would hire Summers again (and he would not after saying he regretted taking his advice about deregulation) Hillary certainly would not have hired the guy who said girls can’t do math.

        This piece is a keeper.

    • Thanks. That needed to be said.

      • Don’t get the wrong idea. Republicans pushed for it relentlessly against a lot of people’s better judgment. I would put the blame on Phil Gramm and Bliley. They were Republicans. Republicans have been the instigators of this evil. It will take Democrats a long time to reach that level of malevolence, although Obama seems to be highly sympathetic to them.

  9. As has been said by me before, this coming presidential election would mostly be about racism because Obama has no other card left to play..

    • And the only way we could fight racism is by following Sun Tzus’ Art of War especially

      Chapter 2 summary: Waging War/The Challenge explains how to understand the economy of warfare, and how success requires winning decisive engagements quickly. This section advises that successful military campaigns require limiting the cost of competition and conflict.

      Chapter 3 summary: Attack by Stratagem/The Plan of Attack defines the source of strength as unity, not size, and discusses the five factors that are needed to succeed in any war. In order of importance, these critical factors are: Attack, Strategy, Alliances, Army, and Cities.

      Chapter 5 summary: Energy/Directing explains the use of creativity and timing in building an army’s momentum.

      taken from Wikipedia

  10. Wow RD awesome post!!
    I wonder how many obots….though I prefer “culties” can read this and still not get why we reject him? I know, I know, the stupid, it runs deep but never hurts to keep trying to get through!

    BTW, what are the rules about filing? I mean does it HAVE to be done by Hillary? Or could we maybe file on her behalf? I don’t think she’s gonna run, but ya never know either, and why not leave a little crack in the door before it closes shut just in case. Heheheh ^_^

    • Not sure. We can probably assume that there is a plan B in case obama’s numbers plummet in the next month. I’m betting that the Republicans wait until they think the door is closed before they pull some economically catastrophic stunt just before Christmas. Yes, piss everyone off after theres nothing that can be done about it- or so they think.
      The party will figure it out if it has to or wants to. Right now, I think they are counting on fear but that shit’s not going to work if Obama doesn’t handle the next crisis well.

      • I wish that I thought there was a plan B. I seriously think that the party has decided that they’d rather go off the cliff with Obama than have a primary.

  11. Oh god, like the cleaning of a house it NEVER ends!

    AP Labeled “Racist” For Accurately Transcribing Obama Speech

    MSNBC has yet again played the race card to demonize not even criticism, but merely unsympathetic portrayal, of Barack Obama as racist after an AP writer was lambasted for accurately transcribing Obama’s Black Caucus speech.

    During his speech, Obama attempted to fool the black audience into thinking he was one of them and not a paid teleprompter reader for Wall Street by dropping the g’s at the end of his words.

    “Take off your bedroom slippers. Put on your marching shoes,” Obama lectured the audience. “Shake it off. Stop complainin’. Stop grumblin’. Stop cryin’. We are going to press on. We have work to do.”

    However, after the Associated Press accurately transcribed Obama’s dropped g’s, MSNBC aired a debate segment asking whether the decision not to “clean up” Obama’s words was “racist”.

    “On MSNBC, the African-American author Karen Hunter complained the news service transcribed Obama’s speech without cleaning it up as other outlets did–specifically including the “dropped g’s,” reports Yahoo News.

    “Hunter called the AP’s version “inherently racist,” sparring with New Republic contributing editor and noted linguistics expert John McWhorter, who argued the g-less version “is actually the correct one,” noting that the president’s victory in the 2008 election was due, in part, to how effortlessly “he can switch into that [black] dialect.”

    It goes without saying that Hunter’s claim is completely ridiculous. Obama’s dropping of his g’s was blatantly deliberate. If the AP had “cleaned up” his speech it would have been completely misleading and inaccurate.

    Hunter claimed the AP transcriber didn’t “fix” Obama’s grammar because of the color of his skin, while failing to mention the fact that transcripts of George W. Bush’s speeches were routinely transcribed (accurately) by including dropped g’s and other idiosyncratic styles of speech. She then ventured further into the realms of absurdity, claiming the AP writer was using a secret “code” through which to express his racism.

    There’s more which you can read here AP Labeled “Racist” For Accurately Transcribing Obama Speech but you get the gist of it.

    • Trust, is that a pro Ron Paul site? You know Ron Paul, Mr. gold Standard, anti choice, Ayn Rand devotee, slightly less nutty than Santorum and significantly more articulate than Rick Perry Republican candidate for president? Because I would rather not link to sites sho shill for Republican candidates.
      Let’s stick to failures in policy and not dropped ‘g’s. That kind of shit is distracting and polarizing.

  12. It was linked from Drudge, so I don’t know if it’s also linked to Paul. Sorry if I posted something I shouldn’t.

    • Just be careful of posts like that. It could feed accusations of racism and it’s not nearly as important as what Obama does as president. He was supposed to be a Democrat but he sure doesn’t act like one and he’s no friend of the working stiff.
      It’s so weird. Up until 2008, no one had ever accused me of racism. I grew up with kids like Obama. We used to hang out in the military housing complexes and play with our new Sony tape recorders. We used to play SPUD and go to each others birthday parties. I danced and sang in musicals with them in high school. I will never forgive Obama’s campaign for separating me from my past and pushing me into a category I don’t belong to.
      But what really pisses me off is being educated, unemployed and too experienced to get another job after Obama and his administration ignored the plight of the unemployed for the last three years. We saw it coming but I was really hoping I would be proven wrong.

      • I will note that Lambert at Corrente also picked up on this story. While I wouldn’t consider it more than a data point in tracking the use of the “racist” truncheon to marshal the Democratic vote, it still matters because clearly the R-word tactic is back with a vengeance. That’s bad news because tarring a wide swath of the Democratic electorate with this very toxic and undeserved label rather than addressing their economic and political concerns might cow people in the short term (less so this time around) but is utterly destructive in the longer term. This can’t serve anyone’s interests but the GOP’s.

  13. And here’s another distinct difference between Clinton and Obama. Clinton knows when to bow out, so the other Dem candidate can win. Clinton made the smart choice to stay away from Gore while he was campaigning for 2000, lest his scandal-laden legacy taint Gore. Whether it made an impact, the Gore team sure thought so. Instead of grumbling Clinton took the high road and remained low profile. Obama is completely unable to remain low profile standing in the background while someone else heads the show.

    • Independents when polled in 2000, said that they would be less likely to vote for Gore if Clinton were part of the campaign. So much as some love to blame Gore for “losing” and claim it is because he didn’t let Bill Clinton campaign with him, together they did what was best and since more people voted for Gore, including in Florida, the campaign worked just fine.

  14. One cannot compare Clinton and Obama in any way I can see…in thier effectiveness, or in thier treatment by the media, the Justice Dept and their own party …there is no comparison whatsoever….I resent Obama Inc trying to grab Clinton coat tails now….after it labeled Bill and Hillary as racists in 2008 .

    It is hilarious when Obama operatives ask where is the liberal enthusiasm for an Obama’s reelection that was there for Clinton

    HUH??

    WHAT enthusiasm? the Obama loving left l wing of the party, hated Bill Clinton and IF they voted for him , they did so while holding thier nose and snarling .

    Can the Obama Inc ever put down the Clinton pacifier/ bong?

    Guess not

  15. The dismal economy under Obama’s presidency has devastated black and other minority households. If Obama had focused on the economy like a laser beam and had his administration succeeded in enacting policies that produced noticeable gains for minority households, I’d being willing to consider that Harris-Perry isn’t completely full of it.

    The fact that the transparent r@cist ploy arrived right on schedule shows that the Obama camp has nothing.

  16. There was an excellent “Frontline” on Brooksley Born. I watched it several times now and amazed that many of the men that were responsible for our financial collapse were named to the Obama administration.

    Why weren’t more people protesting?

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/view/

    • According to Ron Suskind’s book, a woman’s expertise is still worth only half as much as a man. And then there was Larry Summers across the table from Born…

  17. I 2008 I cast my primary vote for the best person for the job, regardless of race or gender. I hope I can do it again in 2012.

    I think most of the Obats that stunk up the joint at Kos were frustrated Young Republicans because they used GOP talking points in their criticisms of Hillary and Bill. One poster went as far as bringing up the Clinton Murder Tape.

    • I think a lot of those people, including Harris-Perry, are young enough that they don’t remember anything but amped-up Republican crazy and CDS. That’s how it’s been their entire adult lives.

      According to Wikipedia Harris-Perry was born in 1973 and as RD says the Mighty Wurlitzer really went into overdrive when Clinton was elected in ’92. She and her 70’s-born cohort would, however, be old enough to remember the initial liberal hope on Clinton’s election, the “triangulation” to the right after 1994, the witch hunt years, and the Nader liberal-revenge campaign.

      • And the miraculous Clinton Economy wouldn’t have meant anything to her because Harris-Perry was a rich college girl, and, you know, like jobs are for little people.

        • I can’t comment on her circumstances but I do vividly remember the difference between making a living in the Reagan era and the Clinton era and I’ll take the latter in a heartbeart.

      • There is a lot of stuff I can’t remember, or remember wrong, so I look it up. The date you are born or become politically aware is no excuse.

        They didn’t because they were so sold on Product Obama they couldn’t be bothered.

        Too bad the rest of us have to suffer.

        hmmm … President Oama or Product Obama?

      • I remember a Molly Ivins article from the ‘ 94 about the media’s “get Clinton” mission…she noted that on her paper in TX, 5 reporters were assigned to Whitewater…a land deal in which the Clinton’s lost 50,000 and three or four major investigation found they did nothing wrong….

        Molly pointed out that back in the day 5 reporters for the 2nd coming of Jesus would have been thought excessive…but there was no limit to the the ” Get Clinton ” movement….quite similar to the 2004-2008 ” Install Barry” mission actually…The Clintons beat back the first wave, but could not surmount the 2nd .

        • Two books got me through the 2000 election season. Molly Ivin’s Shrub and Conason and Lyons Hunting of the President. Bob Somerby at Dailyhowler blog was also a mainstay.

          Thanks to them I became aware it wasn’t journalism as much as stenography that got broadcast or put into print.

          • Wow, the mention of Molly Ivans! How I miss that gal and would have loved her take on the whacked-out politics of these last few years, especially the trashing of traditional Democrats. She was always a breath of fresh, no-nonsense air.

  18. Having been tarred with all the, “Racist” and “uneducated” labels to which many of us who were the base of the Democratic party were treated in 2008, I resent the fact that the party still does not admit it was dreadfully wrong. I will pass over the fact that I could care less about Obamas complexion and that Having multiple graduate degrees and as a retired tenured professor, I resent that description. The Obots should get down on their knees and apologize to us not only for the insults,but for the disaster they foisted on us. Instead, because I donated money to Hillary’s campaign, I now get multiple letters from the very senators who helped to get Obama elected threatening me that if I do not contribute, we will suffer at the hands of Republicans. While I detest the idea of any of the Republican candidates in
    residence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue,
    I also cannot support the closet Republican we now have or any of the useless Democrates we have in Congress. Unless the great brains who did this have a sudden awakening and Encourage a primary challenge to Obama, there might just be a Rick Perry in the White House. Now that would not be great. To save the party and the country, Democrats better shape up. Threats of being called racists or that things would get worse are not smart. The country needs Hillary or failing that, I wish Independant, Bernie Sanders would run. By the way I have written to Senator Durban, wo sent me two demand letters, saying that since the party stole the nomonation from my candidate, I want a refund of my contributions from the party.
    Ialso

    • Hear hear.

    • Excellent comment. Unless some how Hill is there, a Repug will be in the oval office come Jan 2013 , so why pay good money for it to happen? Can you imagine how Repug Obama will be when he no longer has to worry about reelection ? The Obama RepugDems have not thrown us one freaking bone..not one thing the Dem base wanted. If they had , more obots would still be on board and they would not have to pull out the race card so early.

  19. Please forgive my typos.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: