Tuesday, July 01, 2008

I Told You So, Part Zillion

Watching vero possumus transmogrify before progressive eyes into status quo ante is less entertaining than it ought to be because it lacks an element of suprise. Still, it's good for a grin. Barack Obama made such fast work of it, leaping to the defense of defenseless nuclear Israel, then proceeding to wrap himself in an American flag, arm himself to the jowls, climb atop the Statue of Liberty, and fire warning shots in a wild, easterly direction, lest the Hordes mistake New York for Vienna and the twenty-first for the seventeenth century. Yeah, but they'll show him. They're gonna vote for him, and they're gonna give him money, but by motherfucking god, they're gonna blog about their disappointment.

34 comments:

Rachel said...

Are you talking about the faith-based program thing?

chthulu's mom said...

Voting for Obama is a "faith-based program", so I fail to understand his supporter's offense.

Me, I put my faith in kruggerrands. Delicious gold kruggerrands.

Anonymous said...

Be fair. Some of us are only gonna vote for the scumbag. Give him money? Good lord no.

Lesser of two evilism still has me in its grip--Silber is at the point where he is beginning to suspect that might be McCain, but that still seems crazy to me.

Donald

Rachel said...

I decided to sit this election out a long time ago. And to think i made fun of the greenies in 2000 for saying the parties were the same! Have they changed, or did I just have my head up my ass?

Rachel said...

understand his supporter's offense

If that was a reference to me, not only are you barking up the wrong tree, you're meowing in the wrong forest. I just didn't understand what the post was about - hadn't seen digby yet.

chthulu's embarrassed mom said...

rachel, not referring to you. I think I put the apostrophe thingie in the wrong spot.

Mr.Fundamental said...

Bush and Gore make me want to Ralph.

Rachel said...

Ah, gotcha.

Meh, I wasn't impressed with Ralph either - he did (and does) seem like a self involved, purposeful "spoiler candidate."

I threw MY vote away on Gravel. ;-)

Brian said...

Myself, I'm writing in George Carlin.

Or maybe George W. Bush.

After all, if you don't support GOD'S candidate, you can expect some SMITING, no?
http://www.writeinbush.com/

Anonymous said...

I'm starting to think all of this outrage the pwogs are always evincing is at least a bit manufactured, no?

Rachel said...

It doesn't feel manufactured to me. I think they really are that gullible. The best part (if you're a schaudenfreudian sort) though is them saying triumphantly that they will no longer vote for Obama but against McCain! I'm sure his feelings are just crushed, crushed.

After the 2006 election failed to produce substantive change, that was a real blow to their belief that Democrats are the "good guys." This next four years should do much, much, more if Obama wins and changes nothing. If their outrage persists for the NEXT election, then i'll agree it's gotta be fake.

Anonymous said...

I don't know, I don't think they really believe Obama "betrayed" them or is selling out or what-have-you, I don't think they feel he's compromised their values or their issues, because I don't believe they really have any. Any issues they say they support are only paid attention to because the Republicans are against them. They don't really give a shit about FISA or torture or any of that other crap, they just recognize that those things represent a challenge to their idealized view of their team, and as such the Republicans "win", and this angers them. They just want to win and perpetuate the con that they were sold and the image of the Democratic party that they were told was its substance. They don't really care about any of this shit they crow about. See: Plame, Valerie. If they were any kind of real "progressive" or "liberal", they'd be all for the outing of as man CIA officials as possible, but since the Republicans were behind it, it's suddenly OMG TREASON!

ExecutedToday said...

No "How Barack Obama Brought Me to Orgasm" tag?

Time for a "How Come Barack Doesn't Call After I Put Out on the First Date, and Should I Tell Him I'm Late?" tag?

Thomas Daulton said...

Hey, "Executed Today" -- funniest comment I've read in months. And absolutely, absolutely right on the mark. Perhaps that's why the Donkle got all upset about that Fox News "Obama's Baby Mama" thing. "Hey, I'M his Baby Mama!" they protest.

Rachel said...

If they were any kind of real "progressive" or "liberal", they'd be all for the outing of as man CIA officials as possible

One can be progressive/liberal without being an anarchist or anti-government (as digby et. al clearly aren't, they are liberal AND big government) - it doesn't mean they're not sincere. Don't confuse the two positions. They're FOR our current government in its current form, they just think they can have an effect on what it does.

Anonymous said...

Oh lordy, check out the Digbyites!:

http://www.haloscan.com/comments/digby/5162552881120469513/

It's a sumptuous feast for the eyes!

charlie said...

As a confirmed masochist, I decided to head over to Daily Kos to see what the "Netroots" think about Obama's endorsement of "faith-based initiatives" -- you know, the exact same initiatives all these Good Liberals bitched and moaned about when Bush announced it.

So what did I find? Beautiful, beautiful rationalization (on the front page, of course!):

"[I]f you support government aid to secular groups that provide services to the poor, it's hard for me to understand objecting to assisting religious-based groups that do the same. That is, as long as there are clear-cut guidelines that assure that there will be safeguards against proselytizing."

Such is the governing philosophy of the liberal managerial class: keep on raping the American public at every chance, but for god's sake, have some guidelines!

Anonymous said...

Can we have a "Barack Obama Gave Me Herpes" Tag?

Anonymous said...

Yeah, I'm beginning to find the Digtards to be all the entertainment I can handle. All the liberal commissars are riding herd to make sure nobody bolts, guilt-tripping anyone who utters a discouraging word, and then - as if that weren't enough - the Hillary dead-enders are trying to pretend that she wouldn't do all this! She would have fought for all our proggressive values! Much like how Trotsky would have created the socialist paradise had he not been betrayed by Stalin...

Christopher said...

Meh, I wasn't impressed with Ralph either - he did (and does) seem like a self involved, purposeful "spoiler candidate."

Here's what people don't get: It's fairly easy to create an electoral system where Ralph couldn't be a spoiler candidate.

A "spoiler candidate" can exist if and ONLY if the system is designed to regularly and predictably produce results opposite to those the voters want.

The system is rotten. I was talking with my Dad's girlfriend, and she's one of those "work to make the Democrats your kind of party!"

The problem, which I was at the time too drunk to articulate, is that no Democrats are running on a platform of fixing the fundamental problems with the system.

First of all, I'm far too radical to ever have a Democratic party that is mostly aligned with my views.

But second, even if I join a grassroots effort and somehow rebuild the party from the ground up to be rabid supporters of the pacifist atheist agenda, they're still dictators. I'd just be depriving some other constituency of their ability to ever effect the government.

I don't want my tyrants to be in charge; I want a government without tyrants.

Anonymous said...

"I don't want my tyrants to be in charge; I want a government without tyrants."

and me, i want unprotected sex without the risk of pregnancy or gonorrhea

Anonymous said...

"I don't want my tyrants to be in charge; I want a government without tyrants."

and me, i want unprotected sex without the risk of pregnancy or gonorrhea

chrisanthemama said...

Vote for Obama? Probably. Give him money? No way. Any checks I write will be to the ACLU.

Rachel said...

Chris - a lot of people get it. I was taught about different voting systems (and why ours is terrible) in high school for god's sake. It was part of the regular curriculum. But knowing a government policy sucks and having the power to do anything about it are two different things.

Anonymous said...

Torture Porn for those who've been subjected to Hitch's torture for years:

Here

M. Pyre said...

christopher @ 12:04 AM --

Whenever I mention such things to my friends, they tell me I am a pie-eyed idealist.

And then they tell me that they can change the Donkeyfest from within, by voting for Barockstar Obamiracle, who is destined to change EVERYthing bad within the Donkeyfest and within greater America.

But I'm the pie-eyed idealist.

Who needs Syrup of Ipecac?

LA Confidential Pantload said...

IOZ, I think Doghouse Riley may share some of your views.....

http://doghouseriley.blogspot.com/2008/07/plus-hair-totally-ruined-american.html

Anonymous said...

rachel @ 12:57pm: I decided to sit this election out a long time ago. And to think i made fun of the greenies in 2000 for saying the parties were the same! Have they changed, or did I just have my head up my ass?

rachel @ 1:09pm: Meh, I wasn't impressed with Ralph either - he did (and does) seem like a self involved, purposeful "spoiler candidate."

So, what exactly is Ralph spoiling?

While I'll agree he's purposeful, I have to take issue with your characterization of Ralph's candidacy as "self involved."

A brief glance at his platform shows that it truly is the "platform of fixing the fundamental problems with the system" that christopher earlier lamented no Democratic candidate was running on.

Unlike Barack, Ralph doesn't ask you to take a leap of faith and believe that he's just pretending to transform into the next Emperor in order to be more electable for now and later he'll change back into the Great Changer once he gets into office. Ralph actually lays out in plain English exactly what he would do to fix the system if 50% of Americans were smart enough to vote for him.

If Ralph is on the ballot in your state and you decide not to vote for anyone at all, then you're an idiot who deserves a government that doesn't represent your interests.

I'm not claiming that voting your conscience is sufficient to secure a government that represents you, but it's certainly one necessary step.

Brian said...

christopher. You don't get it. The system is broken. Ralph can't save us. If he was elected with 70% of the vote (assuming 30% dead enders from both parties) the entire economic structure and reality of modern America would make substantive implementation of his "platofrm" impossible.

I'm sorry...I don't think the United States can be "fixed." Given our current debt loads, economic structure, trillion dollar military and huge nuclear arsenal and self-righteouss sense of entitlement, I'm not sure I even WANT it to be fixed. We are not the light of the world. We are a menace. The Solution is, indeed, Dissolution.

Anonymous said...

Brian said...
Myself, I'm writing in George Carlin.

Or maybe George W. Bush.


Bush already served two terms. Try something more realistic like Dick Cheney.

Brian said...

anonymous: read the link. It's a joke. The whole premise behind the parody website writeinbush.com is to take the underlying statements by the Bush supporters "Bush is God's President" to their logical extreme. i.e., THE LORD doesn't care about no U.S. Constitution! If enough True Christian Believers write in God's Chosen Leader, then God will make it so! Write in George W Bush for 2008! :)

M. Pyre said...

Brian --

"christopher. You don't get it. The system is broken. Ralph can't save us."

I think what's broken is your reading comprehension, Brian. I don't read Christopher as saying Nader will "save us."

I see him only as saying this: if you think voting is worthwhile, then you should vote for someone who comes closer to representing your interests.

That is NOT the same as saying Nader is our savior. I agree with this narrow read on voting, but I don't think that voting is any use right now. But jesus tittyfucking christ, Brian. You can't convince EVERYone to drop the vote right now. At least you can convince them that the fake binary of Rep/Dem is a charade. Eh?

Brian said...

.No...my reading comprehension is not broken. And, half the population has already decided, for various reasons, to "drop the vote" so why should people who "care" NOT join the majority, or very large minority, of their fellow citizens.

Plus, Nader has a strong authoritarian streak to him that I fervently dislike. YOU VILL DO ZIS-FOR YOUR OWN GOOD. I can see a Nader outlawing butter, for instance, because we have to be protected from the evilllll dairy cartel.

Brian said...

And...people who fervently support the Naders of the world are very much into looking for saviors, individual LEADERS who will somehow overturn a century of bipartisan policy and economic structure. That just seems naive to me, frankly.

I am not denying Nader would be better.