Who’s going to support Barry O. in 2012, asks Ian Welsh:
At this point Obama hasWell. I think he thinks that Unions, women, latinos, and gays are going to support him. These are constituencies that pretty reliably sell themselves down the river in pursuit of a more lenient master. I think that blacks are going to vote for him. I think that all the same little proggles who wept rainbow sunshine happy tears at the passage of a health care bill that is basically the opposite of everything they hoped and argued for because Something is always better than Nothing when Something Must Be Done are going to vote for him. Meanwhile, American unions sold out decades ago. When was the last time labor did shit other than fight rearguard actions for anachronistic working conditions and failing fixed benefits packages while management gleefully rode their collectivized ass like a blowed-up Rush Limbaugh on a Dominican whore, taking a mandated smoke break every two years to pull the lever for whatever Donk hack leadership endorsed at the photo op? And every soi-disant progressive blurgher, aforementioned Re: healthcare, from La Digs on down, will diddle themselves and their readers, i.e. White Democrats, into a state of panicked, preorgasmic hot-flashery by painting a cinematic apocalypse of America if the GOP Palin-Rasputin-Zombie Milt Friedman triumvirate ticket wins in November. Obama may be a genuine American idiot, but he's no dummy, and he knows this to be true. Maybe if you watch cable news and read the papers with a less jaundiced eye than mine, you worry that disillusionment and low turnout will make him a one-term president. Maybe if you take politics seriously, you poor things, you fret about Republican party discipline and Donk disarray. Me, I look at the sweaty red face of the tea-party crowds and the spaghettic-western-injun tan of John Boehner cracking with heartfelt regret at the death of America and read only: Losers. You think the Money wants those people running shit?
1) not stopped the Bush era raids against Hispanics which is totally at his discretion;
2) not lived up to his promises to gays, and he can stop DADT any time he bloody well wants to;
3) not been willing to protect women’s abortion rights
4) not shown any intention of passing EFCA (a bill helping unions organize)
Unions, women, latinos, gays…
Who does he bloody well think is going to support him in 2012?
168 comments:
it is what it is.
Luuuulzzz.
That's the simple part dude. We make the hand off, I grab one of em and beat it out of him.
Losers. You think the Money wants those people running shit?
Exactly. Nevertheless, 2012 will Only Be About the Economy, Stoopids. The health care thingy only matters in how it changes the perception of Obama's affect on the economy. Will the economy still suck? Will we all be learning Chinese? Will Obama's action or inaction be blamed? This is all that really matters.
So? McCain perhaps? Or Dennis Kucinich? Nader then. Or maybe just sit it out. The angst of the absolutist is always amusing. Trapped miner politely declines a proffered cup of piss on the grounds he's waiting for Chateauneuf du pape.
I'm voting for Gus Hall again. Unless he comes back to life, in which case ima write in George Noory.
I agree, Mr. Ryerson. Never let the perfect be the enema of the good.
I think I'll go with dead Socialist Eugene V. Debs. Was quite the vote-getter from jail in 1920, so I'm sure that being dead wouldn't be a problem for him. Too bad we don't have a Monster Raving Loonie Party like the UK used to have...
"Trapped miner politely declines a proffered cup of piss on the grounds he's waiting for Chateauneuf du pape."
Unintentionally awesome. It is absolutist to refuse to eat shit or drink piss. Any carping about or outright refusal to do so is impractical.
Raw sewage, motherfuckers! Whaddya gonna do, vote Republican?
make a point, Justin. your mindreading's coming up a bit short.
Yeah, and how about those prisoners at Guantanao? Sucks, sure, but at least they've got dentists!
Shit, the average jackoff on the streets of Kabul has access to free health care. Annnndd, your point is?
"The angst of the absolutist is always amusing."
as is the angst of the accommodating. their smugness while not realizing they are not what they say they are is a little off-putting though.
Lucy Parsons had the right of it. Search the quot. I don't want to put IOZ to squarely on the feebee map.
ugh: quote* and too*
Hall-Debs: the unity ticket of the dead.
yeah, smugness. lol. accusing someone of smugness on IOZ's site is somehow deeply amusing in itself. don't fucking make me laugh.
What's your point, MR? That it's better to have a rapist who whispers sweet nothings while he takes what's not his - compared to a mean, jerk rapist who slaps and bites?
There's a limit. Ten years ago I would have voted for a slime dripping monster if he had a D after his name. In fact, I believe I may have done just that on several occasions. Nevertheless, I now remain home on election day and drink. And I'm exactly the kind of white, upper-middle-class quasi-intellectual pwog little shit you're talking about. I imagine others will eventually find that there's a limit for them too. If, as you point out, that actually means that the Masters of the Universe will allow the teabaggers and their ilk to come to power is certainly another story, but I assure you that the Dem base who can cheerfully drink that cup of piss and ask for more is declining by the day.
What sends you back into the fold, Rachel? An honest question. How many Beck inspired episodes of "domestic terrorism" would it take for most disaffected Donkalots to shove their hindsides back into the pen?
Well Rachel you're not the only person nearing their limit. But politics has always been the art of the possible and like it or not Barack ain't what we hoped he was and looking back we let our wishing get in the way of some pretty obvious signs he wasn't much 'left' of anything. but to smugly sit back and whine about what you want and leave the field to the bloodsuckers is chickenshit. stop whining about the Emerald City. I like IOZ just fine and probably longer than most who visit his blog nowadays but the Mr. Blackwell schtick gets old, too.
Gosh, look at Michael "fellatio for hire" Ryerson go!
MR appears to assume that there is only one "field" in which to wander, fight, work or play.
That's the problem with loyalism (even the disaffected and oppositional kind). It's adherents tend to assume that their chosen ground is the only one that others ought to visit.
Micheal,
At what point is it acceptable for the battered spouse to want a divorce?
What field are you talking about? We all exist, and just plain living is at least as worthwhile as, and probably far more radical than, scrambling for the levers of power. If voting is even that.
Nice to have some progs back up in here though, gets boring sometimes. Like Decoud out in the bay.
"Never be deceived that the rich will permit you to vote away their wealth." - Lucy Parsons
That one, Mr. F. Plus the other, less "savory" one. It flags the user, so I try not to quote it direct.
Don't look now kids but we're not talking about all the ways you might effect change. we're only talking about elections generally and the presidential election specifically and in this case, yes, there is only one game in town. now whine and scream your little heads off but everytime you sit out or vote for a non-starter like Nader you're simply giving an advantage to the badguys. but if you're so motivated to do something 'meaningful' don't let me stop you but I suspect for all your sophisticated bitching, it's really about finding some plausible excuse to do nothing.
"accusing someone of smugness on IOZ's site is somehow deeply amusing in itself"
and yet the charge is still accurate.
pretty easy to feel smug in your company. condescending, too.
How many Beck inspired episodes of "domestic terrorism" would it take for most disaffected Donkalots to shove their hindsides back into the pen?
I can't speak for others, but I don't negotiate with terrorists. Somehow I think our massive, bloated military can handle a few redneck assholes without my assistance.
and yet the charge is still accurate.
real life calls. thanks for the entertainment.
everytime you sit out or vote for a non-starter like Nader you're simply giving an advantage to the badguys
Well, if there's no difference between the "good guys" and the "bad guys" except in their rhetoric, then I guess the "good guys" will just have to suck it up and deal with my absence. Prettier speeches aren't worth an hour of my valuable time.
So the consequence for not bothering to vote for candidates who haven't/don't represent my interests is that I'll be stuck with candidates who won't represent my interests? How dreadful.
MR, perhaps like any good loyalist, seems to assume that the party narrative of "Our Tribe Really Good, Theirs Evil and Bad" is a useful map of reality.
That storyline, it appears, precludes the loyal believer from seeing the facts in question, namely that "Our Tribe" is a just as much a bunch of vicious, beholden, running dog pricks as the "Bad Guys."
Sure, the "Bad Guys" hate on the gays and can't manage to get feminism right, and boy do they fail on some social issues that make comfortable middle class white people with salaried positions and health insurance real hopping mad. And they mention Jeebus a lot, the philandering slanderers.
But that doesn't mean that "Our Tribe" isn't a bunch of corporate stooges, long gobbled up as clients in a Roman style patronage system, replete with company latifundia and profitable foreign wars of conquest...
one last comment before I have to go. Rachel if you can't see the difference between an Obama administration and a McCain administration then you really shouldn't vote.
smugger than you are.
MR, when it comes specifically to presidential electoral politics and you rule out non-participation and voting for non-starters, news flash: there are no good guys.
Rachel, you would accept the use of armed service personnel to square away "terrorists"?
I may not prefer the company of gun fetishists, but I'm not really comfortable with this expanding natsec'ing of all dissent.
are they really calling a brick through a window "domestic terrorism"? is it possible they are really that unaware and hypocritical? can't be.
news flash: not voting still counts.
What's the difference, MR? Obama will sanction the fuck out of Iran before he bombs it, whereas McCain will just bomb, bomb away? Obama will pass National Romneycare without Republican support, while McCain would pass it with GOP votes? Obama will let Bibi insult him gently before he signs off on more dollars to Israel, while McCain will fellate the Likudniks while singing psalms of Armageddon and signing off on more dollars to Israel?
My point, MR, is that your metaphor of people holding out for too much suggests that they should literally drink raw sewage to be practical. That is funny to me that you think the way to go to be practical is to drink piss, which will of course actually dehydrate the trapped miner and bring him closer to death.
the proggle having it both ways since cognitive dissonance got a name. they are making fun of the republican meltdown by pointing out the bill is almost identical to romneycare and then their lesser idiots are still pretending there is a great dividing line between the two parties. your circle don't square, dudes.
I may not prefer the company of gun fetishists, but I'm not really comfortable with this expanding natsec'ing of all dissent.
Me neither. But I do realize that voting for Democrats is going to do fuck-all about it either way, regardless of my level of "acceptance."
Michael - You can think what you like about me, but I am merely baldly stating that unless your party gives me something to vote FOR, instead of endlessly threatening about what I should vote AGAINST, then you won't have my support unless you are actually paying me a salary. Until you learn to deal with that, however stupid and worthless you may feel your fellow citizens are, your voting base will continue to shrink.
Do you think Gates, McChrystal and Petraeus would be sitting on the sidelines in a McCain Admin, MR?
Do you think McCain would have shut down the global CIA prison system?
Would he have reigned in mercenary control of military operations?
What would have been worse under McCain, MR - that Obama isn't already doing?
I also think it's funny as hell that the supposed "progressive" is the one who thinks people who disagree with him (oh i'm sorry, people who aren't smart enough to agree with him!) shouldn't vote.
What would have been worse under McCain, MR - that Obama isn't already doing?
McCain would have neglected the proper pageantry. God dammit, people, am I the only one here who gives a fuck about pageantry?!
lulz@Rachel, I was thinking the same thing: you're too stupid to know what to think, so let us handle that for ya.
BUY HEALTHCARE PEON
wait a minute, IOZ, did you just in the parlance of our times "flame" us? this ryerson guy was the perfect foil for your thesis.
I am NOT kicking that football. no sirree.
err, everything post-colon was meant to be a paraphrase of our friend MR. Shoulda used quotes! Ah well, blawg.
Fun thought experiment: How would the healthcare reform have gone if it was an R president and an R Congress? My guess is that the Rs would have lobbied for essentially this bill, plus something outrageously awful like saying that if illegal immigrants try to use emergency rooms, the government is authorized to make them pay with a kidney or other donate-able organ, and the Ds would have acted outraged and talked really loudly about single payer and public option, then they'd have compromised on this bill (which, btw, resembles not only Romneycare but Gingrich's health reform from the 90s almost to a T) and both sides would have claimed Victory! Same shit, different spin.
It's funny how people cling to illusions of choice. Fuck it,let's go bowling.
I have to admit, Rachel that was a fun. The very notion of Health Care Reform under a Republican president and a Republican congress is frankly hilarious. Thanks. Like I said above, you're right, you shouldn't vote.
And by the way, I'm not the one who opened the 'you shouldn't vote' gambit, Rach, that was you with your 'it isn't worth an hour of my time'. no fair trying to play both sides of the street, sweetie.
the parallel between rachel saying she doesn't want to vote and you telling here "you shouldn't vote" is dubious.
MR: you are the type of guy who cries when he masturbates, and that is why we love you around here
Let me say it another way then, anyone (you included) who thinks voting is a waste of their time...wait for it... should probably NOT vote. I agreed with her characterization. if she feels that way, I agree with her, she shouldn't vote. now stop reaching, trying to gin up some bullshit. she can take care of herself. you got someting? put it out there, pumpkin.
did you just cross the line from petulant hardcore democrat into internet tough guy? i think you did. what fun.
Ryerson would do well to, I dunno, give an example of something. As everyone else fully knows, fucking Nixon proposed health care reform not terriby different than what we just enacted. But Ryserson can't admit that to himself, or else he'd see the casino for what it is. We'll strike it rich someday, eh buddy!? The most specific thing he said was a metaphor, which, as Justin hilariously pointed out, elucidated the point he thought he was refuting.
Entertain us Donk! Dance Boy! Dance!
Let me just state for the record, and for the benefit of Ryerson and all his like-minded comrades: we are not nihilists here, we are dandys, as described by Jules Barbey d'Aurevilly. To wit:
It is not just a mode of dress. It is an attitude of mind, a philosophy, or even a religion, that celebrates impermanence and living for the moment, a willful detachment from ethical and political concerns, and the cultivated display of a provocative individuality.
anyone (you included) who thinks voting is a waste of their time...wait for it... should probably NOT vote.
"Thanks folks, you've been great! Be sure to tip your wait staff. I'll be selling T-shirts and concert CDs just outside. But now, the lovely CARNITA!"
Mr. MR -is- being a bit contentious, yes, but somewhere in his comments is the idea that there's a 'lesser of two evils' kinda thing at play here, and honestly he's right.
Americans like to whine and bitch about how corrupt our system is (it is indeed) but tend to do absolutely nothing to try to push back against said corruption. I know I don't do anything.
Thing is we're all suffering from a bit of 'spoiled kid syndrome' whether we cop to it or not. It's helpful sometimes to look away from our collective navels to look at -other parts of the world- that have suffered under far worse conditions (politically and otherwise) and have been able to affect real reforms and change. These tend to be in places where the folks aren't quite so soft and fat and self-indulgent.
Boo-hoo, I'm a poor set-upon American and things here suck!
Whatev.
we are not nihilists here, we are dandys
Or: We reserve the right to laze about these interwebs during the vast amount of luxurious free time imperial life so graciously provides. Of course, we generally disagree with the exploitative and tyrannous methods by which this imperial luxury has been procured, but whatchagonnado?
I hate to pile on, Ryerson, but --
"I have to admit, Rachel that was a fun. The very notion of Health Care Reform under a Republican president and a Republican congress is frankly hilarious. "
That Medicare Part D clusterfuck didn't happen during the reign of Ashurbanipal, ya know.....
And sorry, all this "don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good" horseshit hasn't played well since the Dems rolled over for our glorious Mesopotamian adventure. Which enters its SEVENTH FUCKING YEAR this week.
-- sglover
YES WE CAN!
"but whatchagonnado?"
vote for the donkle of course. the only possible answer.
Well, I had fun. Thanks, Ryerson! I hope you'll stick around for at least a week or two.
The very notion of Health Care Reform under a Republican president and a Republican congress is frankly hilarious
Gingrich. Were you listening? No? Too busy indulging in a little of that tempting Donk misogyny with the "sweetie" and "pumpkin" bullshit?
Well sugar tits, you can suck my dick.
But seriously, kitten, are you saying that you're HAPPY about low voter turnout? After all, if they're not as psyched as you are to support our corporate overlords, it's right and proper that they shouldn't vote, right? Perhaps we should go with that, restrict the right to those who are most likely to vote, and who best appreciate all the wonderful things politicians do for us. You know, landowning white men.
suck your dick? why Rachel, honey, how you do go on! Fuck gingrich and fuck you. this is the here and now, all this pissing about how things used to be is nice and shows everybody you've had a subscrption to Newsweek for a coon's age and can regale the folks down at the cheese jubilee whenever the mood strikes but our problem is right here and right now. our options aren't Nixon, nor Eisenhower nor Judge Crater. Nixon lies a'mouldering and gingrich is a dead letter and yes the current healthcare overhaul is weak gruel and the alternative is what? again? louder, I can't hear you? what's the alternative? McCain? yeah he'd have done things differently, inconsequential as it may be to you yappers, our military kids (I'm old and I talk this way about 'kids', so fuck off if you don't like it) would be bleeding and dying in a half dozen more global pissing contests or, more likely, shitheel John would lie stiff and cold in Phoenix and Sarah would be pulling the strings (as her husband handed them to her) but of course there being no difference between one brand of rank politician and another, according to the majority of would-be pundits on this thread, what to worry, even pigs-in-lipstick should hold the reins now and again. Right? many of you aspire to a kind of world-weary insouciance that plays like a sophomore debate class. now Rachel, you can suck my dick.
Oh Michael. Are you saying we should be looking forward, not backward? How liberal you sound!
ooo i like rachel...
meanwhile ryerson can go vote. It's an occupation.
One thing is for certain too too many living ex pretzels... and soon to add Obrama to the crowd. At the end of 8 years he will be all of 54/55.
Gah YEARS of him hanging around, making ClintonBush a trio.
Oh Rachel are you saying we should be rejecting out of hand anything that's been proposed before because it isn't the perfect, ideal, organic solution to all of problems? no, actually I'm saying suck my dick.
now Rachel, you can suck my dick.
I'll pass. The odor of rotten smegma stinks from a whole Internet away.
Isn't it neat how they have to make the Republicans more and more of an OMG UNPRECEDENTED DANGER to ALL WE HOLD DEAR to even make people grudgingly vote Dem? But yes, no comparisons at all to righties calling Obama the Antichrist. Totally different. See, you're RIGHT! Cripes.
Oh Rachel are you saying we should be rejecting out of hand anything that's been proposed before because it isn't the perfect, ideal, organic solution to all of problems?
Can't recall saying anything of the sort. But isn't that what you're doing with any alternative to voting Dem forever, lest Sarah drag us to Hell?
By the way, go ahead and use the word "cunt." I know you're just itching to.
You're right, Rachel, I'm convinced. You have arrived at a nice, tidy, wholly plausible world view. as for the dick-sucking thread which you introduced, I withdraw my offer. find another dick to suck.
Purple thumbprints for all.
Cunt? a minute ago you were telling me you had a dick. why would I think you were a cunt?
You certainly are obsessed with dick sucking. Are you quite certain you're not a Republican?
I'm obsessed? it's your bag, lady, Rachel at 6:04. really improved the quality of the exchange but don't blame me, sweetie, it was your idea.
"Sweetie" now huh? Do you get your kicks by calling your secretary that, and watching her wince?
See, that MR comment at 6:44 just proves that he's not an IOZ sockpuppet.
I myself have yet to come up with a good enough rejoinder to "Don't vote, it only encourages them" to worry about elections at a national level.
Blow! Ryerson Blow! I could watch this all day long. So factual examples mean nothing (Nixon, Gingrich), but counterfactual examples mean everything (McCain pres, McCain dead). I seriously cannot get enough of this guy.
What's the alternative?! DO SOMETHING!!!! Right here and right now! That which can be done shall be done lest it not be done absent alternatives! Right here right now! Blow Man Blow!
This McCain aggression cannot stand, man.
la rana, you silly pimp, what the fuck do the examples you cite have to do with anything? so what if gingrich had or suggested a similar plan? so fucking what? so we say, well we can't do that, gingrich said it, first fifteen years ago! oh shit man, I didn't realise gingrich said it first I thought I said it first, gingrich said it? are you sure?? oh man I hope nobody notices that there's a similar plan out there with hsi name on it. oh my god! now you can blow, you little pimp.
Ain't this fun? If this isn't nice, I don't know what is.
so we say, well we can't do that, gingrich said it, first fifteen years ago!
I realize this is hard for you to understand, but it does tend to rebut your assertion that we would never never ever see healthcare reform from Republicans.
And yes, it is fun.
Another unimportant example of R health care reform - Medicare D.
Ryerson, if Nixon and Gingrich have shit to do with anything, then please explain the relevance of a trapped miner drinking piss?
And what happened to gingrich's plan, honey? lots of things get talked about. in case you haven't noticed we've been talking about universal health care for, oh I don't know, maybe like forty years? fifty? I'll go out on a limb here...without a Democratic congress and a Democrat in the White House (you can see where I'm going with this) we don't even get the itty, bitty baby step-in-the-right-direction overhaul we've gotten so far. Republicans play to the moderates all the time by talking about things they know they don't have the political will to actually enact. The Republicans would, what(?) abandon their base in order to overhaul healthcare? Aside from the watergate faux pas, Nixon was a raging centrist, paranoid as a cocked hare but still well left of the current crop of GOPers. but, again, what does any of that history have to do with manipulating the options we have open to us right, fucking now?
Oh, and let's not forget another example of Republican health care reform - Mitt Romney up there in New England.
Flunkin social studies...
The options open to us, right fucking now, boil down to either your strategy, to take whatever weak gruel the Democrats give us and keep voting for them lest the seas boil, the locusts descend, and whatever else your fantasy Republicans will totes do if we ever let them in office, or to do, well, anything else at all. All your strategy has gotten us is a steady and accelerating slide rightward, such that policies once thought to be conservative, even only ten years ago, are now the pinnacle of liberal achievement even with the presidency and both houses of Congress. Being a condescending sexist douche with "honey" and crap like that (is it a verbal tic, like Tourettes, or are you really incapable of treating me with even basic respect?) will not change that basic reality. And the threats grow less convincing each election.
That poor woman... that poor SLUT kidnapped herself. Come on dude, you said so yourself.
IOZ makes an important concession here, though, doesn't he? He admits that a Palin presidency would be worse, he just doesn't think it'll happen. Or rather, he doesn't think it will be *allowed* to happen.
well ryerson is someone's sock puppet.
BLAWG 101
I keep asking you for the alternative. you propose the 'threat' of a Republican agenda is overblown? Really? the last ten years (essentially all under the Republican boot) have given us Enron, Iraq, Afghanistan, waterboarding, a seventeenth century public discussion of what constitutes torture, a private army in the field roughly equivalent to the actual army in the field only without the accountability, dirtier air, dirtier water, a broken military, a gutted EPA, a brittle, incurious vice-presidential candidate who conflates seeing a rock outcropping owned by Russia with understanding Russia, renditions, official lies delivered in the UN and on the floor of congress which led us into a shooting war, a war by the way which was based on the premise of preemption and an actual, sitting vice-president who sawed poeple in half in the basement of the Naval Observatory. and you have the temerity to suggest that the threat of a Republican adminstration is overblown? are you serious? am I happy with Obama? of course not. I'm deeply disappointed but I'm also a realist in seeing we are stuck with what is possible, albeit fragmentary and slight and cannot waste time anguishing over what might have been. all politicians are liars, these are rich people with ties to the sources their wealth. they'll lie,cheat and steal every chance they get. armed revolution is the only meaningful answer if you're looking for a fresh start. but that's the stuff of bullshit posturing. fresh starts aren't on the menu and you'd better hope we don't see an actual fucking armed insurrection. it ain't gonna happen, so any time you waste chatting that idea up is wasted time. the only option we have access to is incremental change, slow, tedious, frustrating, with the politicians trying to fuck us every step of the way. but those are the cards we've got. happy day.
You want a toe? I can get you a toe, believe me. There are ways, Dude. You don't wanna know about it, believe me. Hell, I can get you a toe by 3 o'clock this afternoon... with nail polish. These fucking amateurs...
dick cheney sawed people in half! ryerson said so!
they also proposed on a national scale multiple times and enacted at the state level the exact set of policies that obama just signed into law. you are living in your head. your heroes, they suck.
get this through your thick skull, romney selling universal coverage in a mostly liberal, well educated state like Massachusetts doesn't count for shit when the issue is UNIVERSAL coverage. you know, like Oklahoma, Mississippi, Texas. look, knothead, the idea of a Republican rallying his troops to sell or force healthcare reform in places like South Carolina is ludicrous.
the idea of a Republican rallying his troops to sell or force healthcare reform in places like South Carolina is ludicrous.
LOL WHO IS THIS MAN HE IS GREAT
dude, you are so far beyond your depth its become a waste of breath.
the liberal Massachusetts that elected 4 straight GOP govs before 2007?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Governors_of_Massachusetts
you drank too much kool aid.
one last time, ignoramous, California elected Ronald fucking Reagan twice and you think California is what? Conservative? it represents the single largest bloc of wholly predictable blue electoral votes in the nation. And Auhnold's the guv now. so what?
Ryerson, I know you have all these imaginary counter examples that prove your point, but the original intent of dredging up zombie Nixon, Gingrich (what a great name), Romney, Medicare D are to give examples of actual Republican led/assisted health care system reform, something you implied was impossible up-thread at 3:15. (Was Medicare D under a Republican president and Republican Congress?) Now, I'll give your list of grievances a whack...
First, you are wrong about the last 10 years under Republicans. It was 8 years, that may not seem like a big thing to you, but the math works out to 20 or 25% depending on how you want to count. The other problem is that for 2 of those years, the Democrats controlled Congress. Additionally, a bunch of prominent Democrats voted FOR all of those things you listed. Now, for the particulars...
Enron
Lulz, so Enron was caused by a Republican Administration? What is the problem here, that Enron's shenanigans were exposed or that they occurred at all? And how is that tied to Republican rule?
"Iraq, Afghanistan"
No shit, and if McCain were president we would STILL be in Iraq and Afghanistan, and probably bombing Pakistan and Somalia to boot. Of course, under Clinton we left Iraqis alone for the most part...
waterboarding, a seventeenth century public discussion of what constitutes torture
The problem here appears to be that we are talking about this, not that it occurs. Oh, wait, do you think that we haven't been doing shit like this for years? Go to the library and check out Alfred McCoy's book on the subject, for example. Or google Tuskeegee experiment, MKULTRA, or look up what we did in Vietnam, helping to train SAVAK, etc.
a private army in the field roughly equivalent to the actual army in the field only without the accountability
Oh noes! No accountability for mercs! So THAT'S the problem with the military industrial complex.
dirtier air, dirtier water
And this represents a break from Clinton how? But yeah, I'll give you the Bush EPA sucked significantly worse than Obama's.
a brittle, incurious vice-presidential candidate who conflates seeing a rock outcropping owned by Russia with understanding Russia
As opposed to a blithering, imperial idiot like Biden.
renditions, official lies delivered in the UN and on the floor of congress which led us into a shooting war, a war by the way which was based on the premise of preemption
Because Democrats never lie to the public? Because Obama hasn't actively acted to suppress evidence about past crimes? Because Democrats never lead us into shooting wars based on false premises? Have you heard of a thing called Vietnam, Michael?
Now, let's go back to Clinton. He was a champion of deregulation and free trade treaties, which did much to lead to the latest financial disaster, 'bad apples' like Enron, and a collapsing middle class - a collapse that has been ongoing since the 1970s through Democrat and Republican presidents.
'now let's go back to Clinton' WTF? would you agree deregulation has gone too far? would you agree there may be some sentiment in the country to try to put some of the brakes back on? and who exactly do you think you have the best chance of influencing in that direction? I say the Democrats. you don't think blabbering Biden is an upgrade over what a Palin vp would be? really? really? I don't need to go the the library little boy, I probably know better than you (and most anybody in this thread) what happens in a war but because those things happen doesn't mean we take the brakes off, abandon the Geneva Accords and codify official rape, torture and murder. are you serious? have you thought this through? you can take the snarky tone concerning the merc's all you want but we've never seen the wholesale use of mercenaries in direct contact to our regular army as we are seeing today. this is a bad thing. you can try to sound all world weary again like it has gone on in the past, yadda, yadda but I'm telling you this is different and not in a good way. and one last time, the piecemeal healthcare reforms you keep going back to are just that, piecemeal. the entire point to this HCR is we are finally talking about and acting on UNIVERSAL healthcare. Romney is in a party where he'd have to bring along the party aparatchiks from the deep south to deliver UNIVERSAL healthcare. if you can't see that is an impossible undertaking, I feel bad for you. Romney could talk til he was blue (yeah, nice allusion) in the face and he'd never, NEVER bring McConnell along. so if we're going to have UNIVERSAL healthcare it has to come with a political apparatus that isolates, marginalises and ultimately offsets the McConnells of the world, i.e. the Democrats. sorry.
Michael, my point is that significant chunks of what you pinned on Republicans have widespread bipartisan support. That is true if you stick to actual examples rather than fantasy and rhetorical questions.
And as far as mercs, they are a pretty small problem in the grand scheme of things as it relates to the political economy of our military industry and foreign policy.
So you can think Democrats are better, but if you want to convince anyone else of that who doesn't already share your convictions you might want to cite some evidence or examples that demonstrate your point.
Justin, that was a savvy takedown of MR's imperial donking.
Hey, there's no birthday party for me here!
Sure, I don't wanna drink piss, and, of course I kinda was able to tell that I was gonna have to. But nobody in their right mind can honestly say that it wouldn't have been more pungent than the piss we'd be drinking were we not drinking the piss we're drinking. And whatever you do, don't forget the last eight years of piss that we drank! Now that was piss!
It's nice that they have their own little nine-eleven. The last eight years. How quaint.
look I don't think Democrats are better per se, I've said up thread they're all rich liars but at this point they are vastly more likely to carry our water than the Republicans. and I said ten years and I meant ten years. do you recognise the enormous inertia Obama inherited from Bush? fuck Bush started the bailout by giving away $700,000,000 dollars NO STRINGS ATTACHED, no way to know where it went or how to get it back. and the working press buys into the meme that the bailout is somehow OBAMA's. ha. and two wars, 300,000 troops in Iraq, an open spigot of our money pouring into Pakistan again with no strings attached and no way to know who got it or where it ended up. we're fucked. once this dinosaur gets started down the trail we're little more than a flea biting his ass trying to influence the direction he's running. Democrats? Republicans? shit give me Goldwater, Eisenhower, christ give me George H.W. Bush, fer christsake. it ain't about them or what we had ten, twenty years ago, it's about what we have to work with right now. you think we're better off bringing the Republicans back? yeah, tell me about Clinton and his triangulation but when you're done showing me you read Primary Colors, tell what you're going to do today with the fucking cards that are on the table right now.
I'll have what Rachel's having. Pumpkin.
I'm sure MR will find a good way to explain this, in his kneeling defense of all things Obama:
http://www.distantocean.com/2010/03/theres-an-ahab-in-the-white-house.html
Perhaps he can take up with BJ, Ezra, Yglesias, Apostle Paul and the rest of kneelers and find a good reason to sneer down at we hoi polloi, to better explain that the of course have the right answers, and it's really just our place to follow behind.
Perhaps he can explain how this latest Obama move is really just for the good of the fish. And poor people...
"...that they of course..." *
Ja, you vote Democratic or ve cut off your johnson, IOZ.
who exactly do you think you have the best chance of influencing in that direction?
whatarewegonnado?!
the national government isn't something for us regular folks to "influence" it's something to cope with. you're being very undude.
jack crow, I can give you the longish version or the short version. the longish version: what on earth do you mean my defense of all things Obama? what part of my postings here didn't you read? what part of they're all rich thieves and liars didn't you understand? what part of give me goldwater, eisenhower or even old george h.w.bush fer chrsitsakes didn't you understand? but I'll go with the short version 'cause you obviously have difficulty reading so: fuck you.
and besides, that rug really tied the room together. 'night all.
I saw "122 comments" and thought digby had linked to you :(
Unless MR is digby after 3 bottles of nasty californian rosè
What a performance for MR, first come in with a ridiculous metaphor that undermines the point he is attempting to make, then throw out a bunch of alternate dimension examples to prove his point, dismiss and ridicule actual real world examples that contradict him as pedantic or older than two weeks and therefore irrelevant, make sexist, condescending remarks to women, pull the 'I have such life experience' card on the men, and then wish us a good night. Big day for him.
what Justin said above.
i hope he's at least getting paid for this.
shorter Michael Ryerson:
You're not dealing with morons here, IOZ.
Shorter shorter MR: Want good, will take not good.
*
But seriously - who cares if you'd go gaga for Goldwater? The point: you spent a chunk of your day defending Hopey Changey and the Dems as lesser evils. Every objection, you met with some version of "If not Obama, what then?" That's the breach you decided to sit.
lol, hey rachel, howsitgoin TOOTS?
I just want to categorically deny any and all rumors that Ryerson is my sockpuppet. But I wish he were. Lord, this takes me back to the 2000 post-mortem on the election over at La Nation's boards: I still suspect that the "Roger Cohen" who was busy smacking around all the "Naderistas" 24/7 was actually an authentic Alterman sockpuppet. Not that I could ever prove this, of course.
But thanks for the nostalgia trip, IOZ & Friends. It's the most fun I've had all week while (relatively) sober.
Totally off-topic, but hey, anyone else read Nixonland? It's an excellent book, but Official IOZ Crush is even more crushworthy in it as a Senator. Hell, I got the flutters, and I don't swing that way at all.
I like how NE from Schwarz's place posts as Michael "fellatio for hire" Ryerson here.
Good thing no one had any work to do today, given the length of the argument.
Lucky also it was "digital". Had it been in the flesh, ambulances and paramedics would have been needed.
Paramedics? It's not dangerous to spooge in a sock-puppet and put it beside your bed before you go to sleep.
Meme! Lulz.
lol, hey rachel, howsitgoin TOOTS?
I knew I should have called myself Lance Thrustington. :-P
"Don't vote, it only encourages them."
that's a keeper.
hmmm. what the fuck happened here? fucking ay, man.
I'm assuming half the comments are Chinese spam.
Yeah where the fuck were you fundamental? Justin an rachel an me had to pick up your slack. They were threatening inherited inertia* dude! Don't you realize that the man in the black pajamas doesn't want health care reform?!
*seriously, 9:35 pm.
I was at a charity event with the Mrs., actually. even nihilo-american defeatists attend charity events (she made me go. there was all-you-can-drink drink there, so. . .). I was a little bit outclassed at the event last night, but not outsmarted. definitely not outsmarted.
You're so cute when you're mad. I love the way you crinkle your nose. Adorable.
I had expected to spend the thread defending my previous Donkitude - meeting someone like Michael this far from Digby/Kos is unexpected, as is his limpet-like tenacity!
..but he's getting tiresome.
'Limpet-like'? 'tiresome'? so it's limpet-like to have the good sense to respond when spoken to? or to comment when commented about? ya, know Rachel you're a prissy little thing and your opinion of yourself smells an awful lot like a little girl simply wanting to be the center of attention. and you want respect? earn it, honey. step up and act like an adult.
This is fun. Apparently I can send him into spasms of impotent rage simply by continuing to exist, even without directly addressing him. Or perhaps it's the use of words above a fourth grade reading level he finds so unseemly.
So, IOZ, are you going to grace us with another Foodie Friday? I loves them, yes I does.
I rest my case. thanks, princess.
Surely you can do better than "princess." I had such high hopes for you.
He ain't done dancin' yet! Tell me again how the republican base is opposed to better medical care! Or a discourse on inhereted inertia! EPA: good guy, then bad guy, then good guy! Blow man blow!
what is this in aid of?
I usually rise to the level of the competition. with you 'princess' is plenty.
whose fucking sockpuppet is this?
Blawg!!!
la rana - your democrats are the same as republicans argument is so EDGY
you crackers all make me sick
SELF-EVIDENT is the phrase you were looking for.
There's no fucking way I'm reading all the comments in this thread (I suspect I've seen them all before anyway), but:
Too bad we don't have a Monster Raving Loonie Party like the UK used to have...
We still do. I think it's a very worthwhile project - they're never going to get elected, but at least they do their best to make sure that whichever Serious Candidate wins, they have to make their acceptance speech whilst sharing a podium with someone dressed as a clown. (Or Elvis.) We also have a number of other joke parties / candidates who share the same mission.
Can anyone seriously argue that that's not a good thing?
As said above, and a primarily catholic thought:
Rules to live by:
Never let the prefect be the enema of the good...
Shiny, Dunc. Real shiny. Me like.
"Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others!"
"You can pretend to be serious, but you can’t pretend to be funny."
sure, O's a torturing, warmongering, lying, renditioning, drone-happy, AIPAC fellating, constitution shredding mass murderer, but goddamnit he's more articulate.
I never get tired of this shite. There's something slow-down-to-look-at-the-accident fascinating about people who think they can build a moral highground on the vagaries of America's stupid system of vote-counting.
all right who poked the hornet's nest (ok, not so much hornets, but rather those little black flies that don't bite but just hover there just inside your field of vision)
It was very interesting for me to read that post. Thank you for it. I like such themes and anything that is connected to them. I definitely want to read a bit more soon.
Joan Kuree
Rather interesting blog you've got here. Thank you for it. I like such topics and anything that is connected to this matter. I would like to read more soon.
Joan Benedict
Pretty cool place you've got here. Thanx for it. I like such topics and anything connected to them. I would like to read a bit more soon.
Kate Benedict
new york escort service
You ladies fit right in. Be sure to tell all your friends. And thanks for the link, Kate.
Cool blog as for me. It would be great to read more about that theme. The only thing this blog needs is some pics of some gizmos.
Kate Trider
cell jammer
Pretty interesting place you've got here. Thanks for it. I like such themes and anything connected to this matter. I definitely want to read more soon.
How about changing it once in a few months?
Avril Hakkinen
ny asian escort service
Post a Comment