Wonkette
- OBAMA’S A LOSER: Uh oh, someone wants to look like a Tuff Guy by supporting illegal spying legislation that he previously… didn’t. And now every single comment board on the Internet will flood with great anti-Obama wits, writing “OOH WHOS YR DEM MESIAH NOW??” [Washington Post/The Trail]
Fuck it. Now we’ll have to listen to David “I have no clue what year it is” Brooks compare Obama to Boss Tweed.
Of course, by “angering left,” Paul Kane means “unleashed two hours of intense concern trolling on DailyKos.”
Meet the new boss….
RuperttheBear: Maybe he’ll get really confused and compare him to Margaret Trudeau instead.
The first step is wearing a flag pin, the banning headscarfs, then voting for the FISA bill, Barry. The next step is saying you have 3 testicles, authoring the war in Iran, and landing on a battleship in a codpiece muttering “mission accomplished.”
(I know you did it for the Morans, but after you’re President I want a national “Free Abortion Day” just to prove you’re still hard core)
SayItWithWookies: It pays to remember that if the House of Reps took four months to get to hammer out that bill, odds are that Obama’s position on it would have rather little effect on its phrasing regardless of which side he’d have come down on, so it’s odd he would take a position he has to know will make him unpopular and tarnish his iconoclastic persona. It may be that he’s only playing acquiescent now to gain more attention later when he raises objections about retroactive immunity once the bill actually gets to the Senate. Wouldn’t put it past him.
One and a half whore diamonds. Barry, if you want to sell out, you’re gonna have to try a lot harder than that. As, I’m sure, he will. Not looking forward to five months of him pandering to Republicans andoderates, until my enthusiasm for the Hopey turns into a dutiful vote for Senator Lesser-Of-Two-Evils.
RUSS FEINGOLD 4 EVARRRRRR!!!!!
AxmxZ: Uh-uh. That’s on the other side of my ethics line. I wouldn’t point a gun at someone, loaded or unloaded. I wouldn’t be for telecom immunity or letting the executive branch monitor itself. As a citizen, it’s not my job to trust the government — it’s my job not to trust the government, and to fuckin’ demand accountability and checks and balances. No, no, no, fuckin’ no. If he’s not serious about this, he totally drops the ball.
I am aware of all Democrat capitulation traditions.
Lascauxcaveman: A topless Margaret Trudeau . . . Yeah. Awesome. Waht were we mastrubatin about?
Does anyone have the info on what this bill entails? I’m disappointed in Bear-Bear, but I do think the “OMG Big Brother” objections to wiretapping are a little overdone. I mean, I can still buy and sell drugs. Maybe it’s different if I’m buying/selling them in Arabic?
NoWireHangers: Yay Free Abortion Day! I just learned that in Canada all abortions are free. Which makes perfect sense, because if you can’t shell out $500 for the procedure, you sure as fuck cannot financially support a child. Maybe the first intermediate step in the US would be giving out abortion punch cards, like in Subway, where you get a free one after twelve or so.
(Side note: Until the other day I thought “NoWireHangers” was some crazy abortion reference. But that scene is hilarious!)
ronaldpagan: I think he and his team are smart enough to know that pandering to the right will lose him a whole lot more votes than it will win him. It’s so obvious that frankly I’m willing to ascribe all sorts of hidden nefarious motives to Barry, because if there’s one thing we know about him, it’s that he is smart.
I guess Magaret was famous for other things.
http://www.free-celebrity-nudity.com/images/margaret%20trudeau/margaret_trudeau_nude_naked_1.jpg
hahaha. C’mon, now. Nobody thinks Obama The Human Presidential Candidate is all Jesusy, do they? Mostly we’re just glad he’s not an angry dry-drunk window licker like Mr. 29%… Now there’s A Messiah You Can Believe In! (Except, you know, they really couldn’t. At all. Ever. About anything.) That said, I think Barry’s stepping in it a little bit here, let’s see if he can scrape it off his shoe come November…
SayItWithWookies: Like I said, if he’s serious enough about removing retroactive immunity from the bill, he passes.
This bill got overwhelming support from the Dems in the House, so I’m not sure what Barry was supposed to do here. Chastise them?
I’ve read the analysis of the bill and it seems like the big change to FISA is that there is a one week grace period for wiretapping without a warrant under “urgent” circumstances, but the wiretaps still have to be reviewed by the court. The big giveaway is the Telecom immunity, but it looks like that is still up for debate in the Senate (although I won’t hold my breath waiting for the Dems to grow spines).
Bleh. I hate this crap.
The Candidate of change?
Excuse me whilst I writhe about in laughter.
By going back on his highly touted promise to accept general election public financing (after nearly two years of speaking to and signing his name to his commitment to the public financing system), he has revealed that rather than being the candidate of change, he is in fact the candidate of business as usual.
Indeed, by going back on his word, he has abundantly revealed that he is in every sense very much the proto-politician: someone who is willing to do or say ANYTHING (even if it means having to lie through his teeth!) to attain and retain power.
Look out, America… if you think that Bill Clinton was / is a big, slick liar, and the presidencies of Richard Nixon and George Bush were a horrible, disastrous nightmare, just wait until you vote into office the slippery, duplicitous, Machiavellian, hubris-ridden, snake oil salesman known as Barack Obama.
Tits_LaRue: I’ll take Lord Vetinari over Lord Jesus. For one thing, there is no evidence that Jesus could actually govern worth ass, whereas Lord Vetinari has a well-documented record of executive excellence.
ClitDoris: Is that you, Brooksie?
ClitDoris: Mmmm…. you should probably go re-read that pledge he signed. There were some conditions he set for his acceptnce of public funds. Said conditions not being met, the contract is null and void.
Barry’s fans and detractors alike can call him Change McHopey all they want, but they’d do well to remember that he is, first and foremost, a lawyer.
ronaldpagan: The angriest man alive on this issue is Glenn Greenwald, (http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/06/19/telecom/index.html), and if you get through the rage, he’s always more or less very right about this.
The big problem for Barry is that the Dem Congressional leaders came out with this bill and announced their support, calling it a compromise when it is, in fact, not. Barry isn’t exactly going to take the time or exhaust capital right now to go against the congressional leaders who have just supported a tough bill on national security. It’s just one of those things that sucks.
Maybe he’s tired, or he could have been misquoted, or it could be that he was thinking of something else and got confused…sorry, I got nothing.
Jim Newell: Thanks for that link!
Much more in depth than anything else I’ve seen.
Cicada: That immunity bit is the part he said he’ll fight.
AxmxZ: I hope you’re right, but I don’t know. McCain has to go more conservative, because Republicans don’t trust him anyway, but it seems like Obama’s already locked down the left. We all like him enough now that there’s little he could do or say that would make us go running to Nader. Yeah, there are a lot of Democrats that aren’t happy with Barry, but most of them are in the more moderate ex-Hillary-supporter camp. And doesn’t everyone move towards the middle for the general election? Meh. I love Barry too, but yeah, he’s definitely smart.
ClitDoris: Nice adjectives in that last sentence! Hey, Jim, can we have a clitorectomy?
Well, he had someone disappeared Wednesday. This can’t be a surprise. Get used to the Obama police state.
AxmxZ: from the article:
“It restores FISA and existing criminal wiretap statutes as the exclusive means to conduct surveillance — making it clear that the President cannot circumvent the law,” Obama said today.
But that’s crap. Bush has already unilaterally rendered the parts of FISA he’s broken “quaint.” He’s not going to take anything but a 100% clear unequivocal hogtying of his alleged executive powers seriously. You’re dealing with a fuckin’ sociopath here — caving because the language is sufficiently ambiguous for both of you to feel the law supports your position is not going to cut it.
And it doesn’t make any sense to me why he would faux-support this and reposition himself later. Does that gain him a vote? At the price of a huge current ethical advantage? I don’t get it.
AxmxZ: Re: Lord Vetinari. I had to go look him up, whereas Jesus is plastered everywhere like a lost dog poster. His “bio” says he was enrolled in the ‘Assassins’ Guild’ so he sounds pretty badass, but is he considered a deity? (No matter, really, I don’t worship anything or anybody, but rather occasionally admire someone or another.)
Anyway, the whole FISA things seems pretty complex, Re:: Obama “…pandering to the right will lose him a whole lot more votes than it will win him.”… isn’t part of the problem here the Lefts that should just suck it up and turn Right already?
AxmxZ: I really hope he does, because that friggin’ SUCKS. The problem is if everyone else in the party gets behind it, how can he refuse without losing political capital at a critical time?
This is EXACTLY why people say Dems are spineless sacks of crap. Because they keep acting like they are.
SayItWithWookies: He actually said he doesn’t support the Telecom immunity bit. Reid says he’ll try to organize a separate vote to remove telecom immunity from the bill. I’m not holding my breath.
My only consolation is that President Hopey will use these powers to tap every militia in the Mountain Time Zone.
Jim Newell: Thanks for the link! And yes that does suck balls.
ClitDoris: Barack….slippery….hmmm….oh, excuse me…yeah Barry on FISA sucks ass but if he had come out big time against it (which he really might not be–he’s pretty fucking moderate/conservative on lots of issues) he’d have to go against lots of congressional dems, and probably set himself up for a filibuster over it in the senate, thereby making terror terror terror a big issue right around election time which would be no good. Believe it or not I don’t now and never did believe the man shits ice cream, but I still think he’s right more than not and beats the bejeezus out of the alternative.
ronaldpagan: No, we won’t run to Nader, but we could just stay home. The main thing working for him is enthusiasm. To misquote HST, Barry is riding the crest of a high, holy wave. he can’t afford to lose that. And even though he might not lose too many lefties over this, he will probably lose a chunk of the more politically engaged ones, and those are the people he can’t afford to lose, because he desperately needs them for the ground campaigns.
I’m keeping my fingers crossed that this is part of a bigger plan on his part.
Cicada: What?! Harry Reid’s looking out for my civil rights? Oddly enough, I don’t feel reassured. That’s like using fish guts as shark repellent. Oh — it’s getting dark. I smell bread. Is that you, ma?
AxmxZ: He says he’ll try, trying to remove it will phail like it did back in February (and he knows it), so the upshot is still Hopey throwing the Fourth Amendment under Ye Olde Bus.
ronaldpagan: May main Gawker hangout used to be Defamer, and in that context the reference was more easily recognized. On Wonkette or Jezebel the abortion connection makes sense. These avatars are too small; Faye’s kubuki-esc make-up is hard to make out.
Cicada: SayItWithWookies: Oh goodie, Harry Reid to the rescue. Captain Courageous. That line about how they’re going to try ever so hard to ditch the immunity is the crumb they’re tossing us so that later when they don’t get it they can say ‘aw shucks we tried SO HARD, sorry guys.’
Who is going to get thrown under the bus on this one?
With all the sucking noises on this thread, we might as well all take a break and go out for some brew-pops.
confusionanddelay<: Yeah I feel you.
AxmxZ: You’re totally right about the enthusiasm. But I feel like he’s banking on us already being enthusiastic enough to tolerate a few missteps (which, I think, we should be. I’m still giving his campaign my all no matter how much he breaks my heart, makes me cry, says goodbye, and hurts me.) The thing that worries me is he always had all that rhetoric about being a “uniter”, and now that the Democratic primaries are over he has more incentive to make good on that. Like Confusionanddelay kind of said, this is one issue where he can prove he’s a uniter by being a Democrat who’s “tough on natural security” without being into torture. Even though it is some bullshit.
Hopefully he’s smart enough to realize that our lefty enthusiasm isn’t bottomless, and if he does too much of this shit he really will lose our trust. But I’m still expecting massive pandering. This is nowhere near as bad as it’s gonna get.
confusionanddelay<: I know. Harry Reid always looks like he’s afraid Dick Cheney is going to rabbit-punch him. I’m pulling for some grandstanding at least.
confusionanddelay<: Right? I’m with Republicans; Democrats are a bunch of mincing, limp-wristed pussies.
NoWireHangers: Oh I see Faye now! I’d hit it…if only because of Bonnie and Clyde.
confusionanddelay<: Yes — he will defend us with his amazing powers of capitulosity. Where are the anti-appeasement motherfuckers when we really need them?
SayItWithWookies: Here’s the trouble. History has shown that if a President really wants to stay above the law, he can. And there is fuck all anyone can do to stop him. This applied to Lincoln, this applied to FDR, this applied to Bush. It *failed* to apply to Nixon, but that’s simply because Nixon was dumb enough to break the law on the sly instead of out in the open, so when he got caught, the crime was treated as a crime as opposed to simply ‘things you have to do during tough times.’
So the illusion that the President is bound by the law is mostly just that, an illusion; the executive branch has the ability to trump the other two in times of crisis (to be determined by the executive branch, naturally) because the power of Commander-in-Chief is vested in them. The legislativeand the judicial branches were set up to gridlock and slow down law-making; the executive branch, because it controls the military, can always make the case that it cannot afford to wait. What the President ends up doing with this ability depends largely on the character of the President.
Tits_LaRue: Vetinari is not a deity; he’s the Patrician. His whole modus operandi is sort of anti-Barry - “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” - but the effect he ends up having on the city is one of profound change and overall streamlining of just about every aspect of city life.
Someone should ask Barry if he likes mimes.
>isn’t part of the problem here the Lefts that should just suck it up and turn Right already?
Almost the entirety of the problem is that the Left is so demoralized by the absolute loserhood of 2000-2006 and the subsequent gridlock of 2006-2008 that even if Barry had a spine marginally less twisty than that of a cornsnake, it wouldn’t suffice to hold the entire Democratic Party upright.
Darehead: I’ll join you as soon as I finish my weedsicle. And my peyote bar. And I’ll take this Cup-O-Shrooms with me in case I get — um — hungry later.
AxmxZ: Oh, and also…politically engaged people, Democrat or Republican, aren’t generally the ones who stay home, right? No matter how much he disappoints them, they’re realistic enough to show up to the polls and vote against their least favorite candidate. Plus they all feel naked without their I Voted stickers.
And I do want to reiterate that you’re so right about the campaign workers. Too much of this bullshit and the naive idiots who thought he was the Second Coming, as well as those of us who just liked him a lot and thought he was the greatest candidate in a long time, are gonna have no motivation to work their asses off for him. And he really can’t be too stupid to realize that.
Guppy06: It may well fail, but you know, there are 230 Dem Reps out there and 50 Dem senators. One cannot expect Hopey to do all of their work for them, no matter how super-special we think he is.
AxmxZ: I don’t buy it for a minute. Lincoln, FDR and Dubya got by when they did because they had an acquiescent congress and/or judiciary. And the Republicans stopped many of FDR’s programs, as well as the stacking of the Supreme Court when they worked up the will to. In fact, it can be done and is often done — which makes it so puzzling why they’re rolling over now.
Besides, just because Congress can get beaten on some issues is absolutely no reason for them to give up without a fight on this one. Christ, if the fucking Chicago Cubs can get up and play ball every day, my fucking senators and congressman should be able to do the same thing.
AxmxZ: I love Terry Pratchett. I kept thinking Vetinari, why does that sound so familiar? As soon as you said the Patrician, ding! Hee.
I have to disagree on your reasoning that Bush was effectively above the law on this issue. The reason that this bill is so important is precisely because there has been a breach of law, and the administration wants to block the ability to hold anyone accountable.
I do feel like Barry has been backed into a corner on this issue by the Dems. It’s a no win position because if he doesn’t back the bill, he is in effect undermining those that did at a time when he needs the party unified behind him.
AxmxZ: All he’s really gotta do is say “Fellas, we’ve gotten through seven years without this bill, we can wait another five months until after the election and see if we really need this amnesty bull.” All the Beloved Party has to do is run out the clock a little longer (provided they’re still too much a bunch of pussies to impeach).
Guppy06: Hmmmm. I wonder if that would work? The Repubs would no doubt make it a centerpiece issue and try to paint the Dems as soft on terror, but Barry could make his case. I thin the senate Dems are a little too chickenshit to back off, though.
Gah! The erosion of civil liberties on a Friday evening has sucked all of the fun out of me. I’m off to remedy that with some yeast excrement.
The real people to blame on this is the House leadership - Emmanuel, Steny Hoyer, and Pelosi. I too wish he had shown more leadership here, but I also understand the principle of picking your fights carefully.
SayItWithWookies: All right, so Lincoln, FDR and Dubya got by when they did because they had an acquiescent congress and/or judiciary. So will Barry. The trouble with the Congress and Senate Dem majority is that a) they aren’t filibuster- or veto-proof, and b) they are not exactly a unified front - more of a grab-bag of assorted liberals, semi-liberals, and liberals in name only who probably couldn’t settle on which five types of take-out to order for lunch, much less how to push through a non-appeasing FISA bill.
Cicada: Yes, there has been a breach of the law. Now think what that means. If the Dems acknowledge right now that yes, the Bush administration *has* acted out of bounds, then they can’t just leave it there. They might need to actually start an impeachment process. And that’s the last thing they want right now. They want to retain status quo until November, because tsaid status quo favors them immensely.
Think of it this way. The entire legislative branch is standing chin-deep in a deep ditch full of liquid shit, courtesy of Dubya and the rest of the assholes. And now this guy Obama, who’s standing over by the edge, is telling the Democrats: “Guys, I have a foothold. An honest-to-God footlhold. A rock-solid foothold. I’ll be out of here very soon, and I will come back with a rope, and I am going to pull all of you out of this shit-ditch!”
And now the people on the sidelines, who say they are all rooting for the Dems to get out of the shit-ditch, are screaming at them for not making waves. Silly people. You don’t make waves when you’re in shit up to your chin, and you don’t make waves when someone’s about to pull you out of the shit you got yourself into!
AxmxZ: Okay, great analogy, but where does Steny Hoyer come in? Is he, like, the scat fetishist in the group?
SayItWithWookies: Okay, this is pretty off-topic, but I was just wondering when the last time a president was forced by Congress to appoint a justice to the Supreme Court who wasn’t completely, blatantly partisan.
jagorev: Who the hell knows. When it comes to deciphering Democratic personalities, I am man enough to acknowledge, despite being a woman, that I’m severely outclassed by the sheer depth and breadth of WTFery inherent in the donkey party.
Looks like Obama just lost the crucial Boing Boing vote.
AxmxZ: So? None of this means that you have to acquiesce to (what you think is going to be) the eventual outcome. That’s not how you bargain. Hell, if that’s where you’re willing to end up, and you start with that bargaining position, you’re going to be worse off than your compromise position.
Besides — it’s an ethical disaster to approve of that level of fascism — that crosses the line where political points don’t matter anymore, and it’s pure right-and-wrong. And that position on warrantless wiretapping is, from a civil rights perspective, simply indefensible.
And as for the don’t-make-waves-if-you’re-chin-deep-in-shit argument, that doesn’t make any sense either. You allege that it’s more sensible to let things continue to be awful so that he can correct them during his presidency, than to be able to run on opposing Dubya and McCain’s draconian vision of executive privilege? There’s no way he comes out ahead in that calculation.
If he’s being politically calculating he’s awful at doing the math, not to mention at understanding the real issue here. If he’s not being politically calculating, and really believes this law is constitutional, then he’s no better than Hillary, who was apparently a horrible fascist.
I guess it’s nice that we got this disappointment over with sooner rather than later.
(Stomps on hat, walks up to the flight deck for a smoke.)
dizzydee: Yeah, and he may lost the crucial right to claim that he will support and defend the Constitution of the United States.
ronaldpagan: I think that would be Robert Bork. He was an alleged strict constructionalist, nominated by Reagan and shot down by Congress.
Oh wait — what the hell am I thinking? Harriet Miers. Worst!!! Partisan!!! Choice!!! Ever!!!
SayItWithWookies: How could he be doing this for any reasons other than political calculation? He opposed the bill back in February, and, as everyone’s already pointed out, this new one isn’t a compromise at all.
And I promise there will be much more, much more severe, disappointment to come. There will probably be moments when a lot of us wish we’d voted for Hillary. (Not that she wouldn’t have been far worse, but now that she’s not the Democratic nominee, she’s free to denounce Barry’s pandering.)
SayItWithWookies: Yeah Harriet Miers was ridic, but her position was taken by Alito, which is hardly ideal. I don’t know if Kennedy qualifies as a non-partisan choice. He did the right thing about Guantanamo, but isn’t he pretty reliably conservative almost all the time?
Anyway I’m off to go drink away my crushed hopes. See you disturbingly knowledgeable people later!
ronaldpagan: Kennedy is conservative on some issues, but the swing voter on others. Since O’Connor left the Supreme Court, he’s seen as the broom handle in the doorjamb of Roe v. Wade.
ronaldpagan: I just don’t see how it adds up as calculation — even if one were to toss such a weighty ethical issue into that realm, which I already conclude is a loss. What does he have to gain by it? Seventy-five percent of the country already disapprove of Bush, torture, warrantless wiretapping, etc. — what does this gain him? The center was eaten a long time ago — there’s nobody there to persuade.
If he’s going to do that, why the heck not just name Hillz as his running mate and let her defend the right flank? He can rise above it all and not take any of the punishment for opposing it. I can’t see any way this current stance makes sense.
And I’m way ahead of you on drinking away the crushed hopes. I’ll be very impressed if I read this tomorrow morning and it’s in complete sentences.
SayItWithWookies: It doesn’t mean you have to acquiesce; it means that his response range to this vote is very limited. The stakes are very high; the potential outcomes of making waves is unbalancingly uncertain and certain to be untasty; and the compromise position is better than the status quo. If he manages to remove the amnesty, great. If not, then they can pt this to bed until November and try again with a) a real majority and b) a President who won’t veto the fucker.
As to the fascism that this bill is going to unleash upon us - oh please. You lived under a worse version of this quote-unquote fascism for years and years. You seem to be still alive, and I would venture to guess that you spent very little of those last few years publically grieving the loss of your privacy. A little perspective goes a long way.
>And as for the don’t-make-waves-if-you’re-chin-deep-in-shit argument, that doesn’t make any sense either. You allege that it’s more sensible to let things continue to be awful so that he can correct them during his presidency, than to be able to run on opposing Dubya and McCain’s draconian vision of executive privilege? There’s no way he comes out ahead in that calculation.
Actually, there is. The Congress passes the bill, he makes a brief ruckus in the Senate bout amnesty, gets his ass handed to him, rails publically about the stranglehold on liberty that the GOP hs effected on the nation, gets elected by a landslide.
How do you say “pander” in Arabic?
AxmxZ: Apparently I’m incapable of understanding this. Because I just don’t see where taking a strong moral stand on half a loaf (while also being willing to lose) is better than taking a strong moral stand on the whole loaf.
And on your “oh please” retort — just because I don’t suffer doesn’t mean it’s not fascism. I’m an old ho and always land on my feet. And if survival equals approval, doesn’t that mean that only the dead can legitimately complain? No, I’m not being serious, but you get my drift.
SayItWithWookies: I’m not sure I get the loaf metaphor. Is the compromise half a loaf? What is the whole loaf, in that case, and where does one find it so that one may stand on it strongly?
And it’s not really fascism if you don’t notice it. And you don’t. You may be wire-tapped, you may not be. Fascism is all-pervasive and all-controlling by definition - you can’t not notice it. It informs all aspects of your civic life, or it isn’t fascism. There are gradations of fucking over your electorate, you know. Fascism is a bit far on the spectrum. Do you know what the difference is between being wiretapped in USSR and being wiretapped in the US? In USSR, people suspected it to be the case with so much good reason that they adjusted their behavior accordingly: checked phones for bugs, suspected their neighbors, traded forbidden books in secret, locked their desks, spoke in neutral locations. In the US, people tend to fap about surveillance on one browser tab while keeping three porn tabs and an illegal downloading tab open simultaneously.
In far more hilarious news, Barack Obama can now has a Presidential-looking seal where he proclaims that everyone is a possum. I can’t wait for the Wonkette post.
AxmxZ: What is the whole loaf, in that case, and where does one find it so that one may stand on it strongly?
If you’re going to fail anyway, why not make your last stand on the actual principle, rather than move to some compromise position and get slaughtered there? If I’m going to get defeated anyway, I’d rather lose while disagreeing with McCrone/Bush than agreeing with them.
And it’s not really fascism if you don’t notice it.
Put…the goalposts…down.
Before it wasn’t fascism if it didn’t hurt me. Now it’s fascism if I don’t notice it? Which argument would you prefer to lose?
SayItWithWookies: AxmxZ: Good points on both sides. I dropped in for my daily dose of snark and excuses to mix vodka creatively, only to find that you’ve unleashed an extended debate about Obama’s FISA strategies and motives that is more interesting than I have a right to expect from internet traditions. No, really.
ronaldpagan: Er, you definitely were meant to be included there as well. The dog totally misclicked.
It’s hard for the Republicans to look good no matter HOW you slice it.
Their President started the ball rolling, then threatened a veto to make the vote even tougher.
Then (literally) 99.5% of the GOP House voted for it.
While no Dem Prez would be so raving King-George crazy to suggest it, and more Dem House members voted against it than voted for it.
But yeah: Barry, show some f*cking spine. Or we’ll steal your Nicorette during your debates.
CometHasTheFloor: But this is all about the stalwart intrawebz traditions: Godwin. With maybe a sprinkling of Rule 34 here and there.
CometHasTheFloor: I’m glad you appreciate it, and I’m conscious of not bringing teh funneh. I guess I just needed to let my bitter flag fly on this one, so thanks for the tolerance.
SayItWithWookies:
First the fascism thing, because it is seriously starting to piss me off.
>And it’s not really fascism if you don’t notice it.
Put…the goalposts…down.
Before it wasn’t fascism if it didn’t hurt me. Now it’s fascism if I don’t notice it? Which argument would you prefer to lose?
Dude, they’re the same argument. If you didn’t notice it, then it couldn’t have hurt you. In fact, if anything, I’m moving the goal posts in your favor by revising fascism down from ‘that which doesn’t hurt you’ to ‘that which doesn’t make itself known to you.’ Ostensibly, it should be way easier for you to prove that we live under a fascist regime using the latter goalpost than the former, especially since you’ve already confessed that it doesn’t actually hurt you.
But do go on, tell me how your government is fascistically oppressing you - make this ex-Soviet laugh.
Now for the rest of it.
There are different levels of failure. For instance, one can fail to pass a constitutionally sound FISA extension - if you are the entirety of the House and Senate. One can also fail to denounce an imperfect compromise FISA extension - if you are Barack Obama. But if you are Obama, making a “last stand” on principle is probably close to the last thing you want to do. There’s still that whole ‘running for President’ business to wrap up. So he will go with the compromise position, because if he balks, he risks making waves. Yep, there’s that wave metaphor again. What sort of waves, you may ask? And how many waves?
Let me count the waves.
Let’s say Barack does voice a vehement opposition to the bill, calling it a degradation of every constitutional principle that ever principled. How might this play out?
1) An energizing of the GOP base, who now have irrefutable proof that the Mooslim sleeper is soft on terror. 527s revv into action, the voter base comes out of hybernation, and the Republican scare tactics suddenly begin to look genuinely scary not just to the 24 retarded % who are still into Dubya in a special way but also to maybe another 10 not-quite-retarded % who are sort of suspicious of Obama but don’t like McCain and can’t find a good excuse to vote against Obama. Bye-bye, Obama’s lead in polls!
2) The House is tickled in a special way too. They worked long-ish and hard-ish on this bill - who the hell is this n00b with his two years of legislative experience in the Senate to lecture us on how to craft constitutionally sound bills? Let’s see him do better. Oh wait, FAIL. We should’ve stuck with Hillary. Grumble grumble grumble. Bye-bye, a hefty slice of Obama’s Capitol Hill entourage! And don’t forget to take with you a bunch of supporters, campaign volunteers, and other human election machinery in all of your respective districts!
3) Some of the GOP legislators - those for whom conservatism means more than simply “hands off my money” - suddenly discover they actually dig Barack for his wide stance on liberty issues. Obama hemorrhages cool points; a portion of the young liberal crowd suddenly clues in that he’s not the Candidate of Change You Can Use for Laundry after all. Meanwhile, Obama gains all of three and a halt votes total from the hicks living in the friendly GOP legislators’ districts. Whoopsie.
and now, the most realistic scenario of all:
4) At first, there is not much of a reaction from anyone, except some cheering from the liberal blogs. FOX reports that Obama essentially called the President a criminal, and it is now a dead certainty that he has zero understanding of what it takes to fight terror. The “Manchurian Candidate” meme gives way a much punchier one: “treason.” Olbermann sheds a tear for Obama’s bravery; everyone else on MSNBC wonders if this was a wise move, considering that the bill was a very bipartisan effort. (Nevermind that it’s really a Democratic capitulation.) What does this say about Obama that he professes a deep love of bipartisansip but seems unable to sacrifice to it his lofty lefty ideals? Liberal blogs still cheer but begin to sense that something has gone amiss. Bill moves to the Senate. Obama speaks out strongly against it again and threatens filibuster. He is in turn threatened with closure. He filibusters anyway, driven idealist that he is. Closure is invoked. The delicious irony of the Democrats of the Democratically-controlled Senate voting closure against their own shiny new Party leader cures two years’ worth of peptic ulcers in the Republican ranks. There buzz with a new energy. The spell of Obama’s inevitability is irreparably broken. The bill passes. President signs it into law.
And so, at the ends of several news cycles, Obama has become precisely what the GOP have always so desperately wanted him to be: an egghead theorist so caught up in the purity of the letter of constitutional law that he is both ignorant and haughtily dismissive of politics as a process of give and take. Obama is now handicapped with a humiliating political defeat at the hands of his own party, and he has lost a crucial portion of those centrist voters who worry about national security far more than about being wiretapped; they will no longer give the ‘clueless-on-national-security’ n00b the time of day. Even the liberal blogs, who have been frantically liveblogging this fiasco since it started, are starting to question whether their Chosen One is in fact as clever as he appeared to be in the primaries. Enthusiasm flags and never really picks up again. In November, we vote in President McCain, who may not be an idealist professor but at least hasn’t been short on promises to keep the bad guys out of the country. Obama goes back to the Senate feeling like he’d just come down from about three rural highways worth of cocaine. Sic transit gloria mundi.
In times of trouble, there will be an answer.
http://www.BarrPaul08.com
Gormogon: Is that site supposed to attract BarrPaul supporters or scare them away? Yowza.
AxmxZ: First the fascism thing, because it is seriously starting to piss me off.
It’s fascism if it’s fascism. My government attains its legitimacy through the will of the people, and this isn’t based on whether I’ve been sufficiently oppressed to declare it illegitimate. In fact I can live in complete comfort and still rail against the violations of my civil liberties. If it was good enough for Jefferson and Washington, it’s good enough for me.
And your scenarios:
1) “If we believe in the principles of civil liberties for all, there is no reason we should be ruled by fear of the outsider. Our principles are at least as effective against our enemies as our guns are; and if we fight our enemies without using our respect for our common humanity as a weapon, we fight with one hand tied behind our back. Let us not perpetuate the attitude that has brought us failure for the last eight years in a world that should have brought us success.”
2) Hillary already stands for giving away your important moral principles. Obama doesn’t need to stand for that too.
3) GOP legislators end up liking him and you’re trying to paint this as a failure? Um… the defense rests.
4) This is just an amplified version of 1). To reiterate: We can love America and the principles she was built on. It’s not an either/or proposition. The conservatives want loyalty oaths, torture, imprisonment without charges for an indefinite period of time and no habeas corpus. I’m just weird this way, but I think the fuckin’ candidate of fuckin’ change should fuckin’ be opposed to that.
Cicada: Yeah, we all need the reminder that no one is scarier than Ron Red-herring breath pseudo-libertarian right-winger conspiratorial Paul, but McBush ain’t good either, and if Barry has to bend his skinny arms and legs a bit to get 51% of electoral college votes, I still say get the skinny guy in. He’s not a perfect pretzel but at least he doesn’t choke on ‘em and he is way better than Kerry or even Gore, yes, Hillz too. But continue to make known our concerns: Hey Barry we like you best but here is a,b and c that we don’t like. This is a democracy after all, no perfect solutions on who gets what, when and how, for anyone all the time or any time.
Now for those brew pops….
AxmxZ: Wow. Well worth the reading.
I’m vastly annoyed at this, but feel we should keep our eye on the ball: this is a GOP effort, through and through. As the numbers I said previously point out. It’s a meme we should put forward every time we hear about Dems not fighting this more, or Obama not being more forceful. This belongs to the GOP - (a minority of) our guys were only hitchhiking.
Still, I was annoyed why Obama would capitulate. We know better, let the smarter argument win. Your scenario, even with its contingencies, helps explain why letting this one go might be the wiser part of the battle.
Cicada: Yes. It’s brilliant on either front. That’s its genius!
The problem with the general election season, versus the primaries, is that now Obama needs to play Party Leader and not get egg on the faces of everyone else by saying “Yeah, no, my Democratic colleagues are fucking pussies.” So I imagine we’ll be seeing a lot more of this.
Magsbe: Agreed. And the election is so horrifically long it makes enemies and hypocrites and panderers out of everyone. Pop psychologists, family counselors, designer-drug salespeople and divorce lawyers probably make a killing though. “Doctor, I need Zoloft! My spouse likes McBush!” And Minnesota bars open until 4 a.m.?! Unfucking believable what this election turns us into.
AxmxZ: Compare Hopey to his philosophical forebear, HoJo Dean (pre-scream, of course). Dean would have had a greater proclivity to stick to his guns? Perhaps being non-executive branch originated has a greater filter on Obama’s thought processes than we ever thought possible.
Let’s not get our collective tits caught in a rhetorical wringer on this one, people.
SayItWithWookies: With Ted Kennedy on permanent injury reserve and baby back rib (real babies, natch) gnawin’ Veepney still darkening the door of the upper chamber, the numbers in the immediate run up to the election look less than favorable.
Wait until a “reasonable” iron-clad majority of non-DINOs are seated and then we’ll talk…
Darehead: I for one welcome our new Cylon overlords, who are also us, which doesn’t really get me anywhere.
CometHasTheFloor: Gee, it’s hospitable of you to welcome the Cylons, even if they don’t get you anywhere. but where did you want to go…? You sound like a likable enough and snarky dude but, errrr, rather enigmatic, so, one fine day, could you, say, start with explaining your avatar, not now, but in the bright future world of Wonkette 3.0 when we have a space for self-introductions.
(Because I, for one, always thought Comet worked better in sinks rather than on the floor.)
A tie FTW !
AxmxZ
In the US, people tend to fap about surveillance on one browser tab while keeping three porn tabs and an illegal downloading tab open simultaneously.
Schvitzatura
collective tits caught in a rhetorical wringer
Darehead: This is only because you have not seen a true comet in action. It has the ability to fuck us all up, and it’s possible that we even deserve it as a species, though I sincerely believe that we might yet ward it off through the audacity of hope.
As for my avatar, what can I say? How can one not like Ellen Feiss?
Hey guys? What’s Borgia?
http://www.hillaryis44.org/
CometHasTheFloor: Ah yeah, her, a very good choice for being scurrilous and snarky. As for Comet, all I know i that it makes your mouth turn green and tastes like Listerine. If Hopey has the audacity to spy on us, the resultant vomit might come in handy.
…first of all why do all the CRAZY’S come out when go out for a hard nights drinking(Im talking to you ClitDoris). You all know how much I enjoy picking on the mentally handicap!
Secondly: The DEMS aren’t spineless! The reason why they are capitulating on telecom immunity is because they not only had knowledge that it was going on but they were BREIFED on the program when it started. Just like the whole water boarding issue, the president covered his ass by bringing in the leadership of the Democratic party. If they allow an investigation to go forward then the full extent of their COLLABORATION will be exposed.
It is time for the Democratic party to BLEED and become a true opposition party. If this means we need to lose a few “powerful” Democratic congressman and senators to regain our soul so be it. Democrats and Republicans alike must learn that when you choose expediency over the law you will ALWAYS lose in the end.
Darehead: That’s interesting, with the Comet. Hadn’t thought to try it, but you make it sound awesome.
Darehead: We had slight variation:
Comet - it makes your breath smell clean
Comet - it tastes like gasoline
Comet - it makes you vomit
So get some comet and vomit today….
I saw Goody Obama with the Devil!
CometHasTheFloor: Ahhhhh, I was toyin’ with your age and upbringin’–it was an old (but not as old as McCain) kiddie jingle reference to this COMET which I just noticed is really McGreen!!!— maybe Obamamanians could use it after all!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet_(cleanser)[re=21771]
WonkaBee: Interesting regional variation yet they both produce vomit! Like McCain’s Green screen….
Darehead: Hey, the link there didn’t work. Anyway, it’s for Comet, the cleanser.
AngryBlakGuy: I want to believe this too, but after a generation of Dems selling out I don’t see it happening. I don’t want to believe Hopey is gaming this system, but as is achingly obvious, he’s very smart, but he is a lawyer. He says he supports “with a firm pledge that as president, I will carefully monitor the program.” Even more imperial prezdency? A tactic?
Have to believe Hopey is not only looking at Dem relations, but military & corporate as well. They all want it to go away. Power is as power does.
I think the big story hear is that liberals are assertive enough to actual be heard when the Democratic candidate drifts to the right, just like every Democratic candidate of the last thirty years. First time in my lifetime that’s actually been the case.
To be bitterly cynical here for a moment, amidst all this hand-wringing about “What was Obama thinking,” does it occur to anyone that the future president of the united states might look at a huge, gift-wrapped box of extra-special, brand-new presidential spying power and go “For me!? OK! Gee, thanks!”
Because it certainly doesn’t seem to have occurred to the soon-to-be-opposing-team-to-the-possessor-of-that-power GOP. How does one get elected when one’s foresight extends only as far as lunch? It continuously amazes me.
Darehead: That’s completely wild! Comet…floor…and yet I somehow missed the connection between what I stand on and what I routinely use to clean it, while choosing my pseudonym.
I’m also firmly of the belief that McCain is pro-choice, Obama is politically naive, and the earth is flat.
AxmxZ: SayItWithWookies: Holy. Shit. Both of you are crazily smart and well-spoken, and you better be putting those talents to use. I’m totally with AxmxZ about one thing: there’s a huge difference between a government that abuses its power and a fascist regime.
AxmxZ: Yeah, this is probably what would have happened. I’m just wondering how forcefully he’ll push to have telecom immunity removed…
By the way, stop acting like this is the first cynical thing Obama’s ever done, guys. Why wasn’t there this depression over him voting with the “Bush-Cheney Energy Bill” (as Hillz called it). What about the Democrats continuing to fund the Iraq War like pussies? What about him trying to get fucking Lieberman reelected? Also, give the man some credit. He is responding forcefully in the debate about foreign policy, what with him wanting to meet with scary foreign leaders and opening relations with Cuba and all of that. He may be an asshole for supporting this bill, but in my book he’s still miles above Gore and Kerry (and Clinton, their spiritual successor). He has not completely defined himself by right-wing values; in fact, he’s making a pretty good case for left-wing ones.
Anyway, let’s hope Michelle punishes him for this one for a while. No sex until he does something hopey.
eatsshootsleaves: Sorry that I’m not as erudite as the rest of you, it’s 11 a.m. on a Saturday morning.
eatsshootsleaves: No, very good points.
My only quarrel, in fact, is with your last paragraph, in that I wouldn’t want to see Hopey turn into Bill with respect to the sex.
So about AxmxZ’s scenario, it will obv take a lot more than one stance on one bill to make that happen. (As, of course, everyone here knows.) But it is probably true that if Obama opposed the bill, it would be painted as an extremist rejecting a bipartisan effort to keep the country safe from terrorists. Which would potentially be a lot more damning than the Republicans calling him a flip-flopper. One of Obama’s problems here is that he’s spread two ideas about himself. The first is that he’s the candidate of change, above old politics, taking principled stances instead of politically pandering, etc. The other is that he’s a bipartisan uniter, reaching across the aisle, etc. Pretty much any step he takes is going to have critics calling bullshit on one of these two ideas.
Also…how fucking sad is it that when Democrats make political decisions, they have to think about how Fox News would spin it? I’m not saying we don’t have to think about that. It’s just unbelievably depressing. A prominent liberal can’t take any step without thinking, “I wonder how this is going to look on that openly bigoted television station made by liars, for retards.” Stupid America.
eatsshootsleaves: Yeah, you’re right. I’m writing in Kucinich. Shoulda stuck with the vegan commie leprechaun the whole way anyway.
AxmxZ: Where is this possum seal? That sounds like a fun time.
eatsshootsleaves: No, your post was pretty fucking erudite. When did Bear-Bear try to get Lieberman re-elected? That was sweet of Lieberman to return the favor. And you’re so right about Hillary, Gore, and Kerry defining themselves in reaction to right-wing values.
“FISA” word count on DiurnalKos front page…somewhere in the mid-thirties. Please, please have something whore sapphire-worthy to get the next news cycle purged of this non-story…
CometHasTheFloor: Now that you have led me to enlightenment regarding the Ellen Fleis thingy (Old Fartian word for meme) I am eternally grateful. Count me a fan. I suppose I’m the last to see the Slo-Mo version ? Priceless. http://youtube.com/watch?v=r_FyiO8bFfU
One more internet tradition down, one Googleplex to go….
..by the pool?…
Wonk-quiz: Who said this, at a certain Convention?
And maybe — And maybe, just maybe, you don’t agree with this Party on every single issue. I say to you tonight that I believe that’s not only okay, but that’s what’s great about this country. Here — Here we can respectfully disagree and still be patriotic, still be American. . .
eatsshootsleaves: PS: The FISA vote wasn’t even the first majorly cynical thing Bear-Bear did that DAY.
ronaldpagan: Channel, not station. Maybe I am the one who is the retard.
Darehead: The thing is, I bet 90% of the issues where Barry deviates from the Democrats are issues where he’s to the left of the party line. And he keeps those real quiet. When he gets asked about common ground with the Repubs, he is always like “Well, um, I don’t like bureaucracy” and “I totes defended Democrats who didn’t vote to have John Roberts blocked. I did vote to have him blocked though.” And “I am a good listener with sexy bedroom eyes.” Maybe he’s come up with something better than that by now, but I haven’t heard it.
I think he supported the FISA bill, not because he believed in it, but because, for him, the position’s political expedience outweighed its moral drawbacks.
CometHasTheFloor: oooo Cometmadude, you have the floor tonite! I mean todays, for youze ‘Mericans.
ronaldpagan: It would be cake to oppose the right-wing rhetoric that would ensue after taking a firm moral stand on the FISA expansion. That’s one of the reasons that caving on this is so disappointing to me.
First, the warrantless wiretapping policy is plain wrong. FISA set up a perfectly workable way of obtaining surveillance information with the cooperation of another branch of government — and that’s why Cheney opposed it so vehemently — he only wants unopposed executive authority, nothing less. So far, that’s gotten us crap intelligence on Iraq and Iran, Halliburton’s untold riches, New Orleans, the Valerie Plame debacle and probably plenty more.
Executive branch overstepping of its authority isn’t what made this country great. One of the things that makes Cheney so evil is that the only lesson he seemed to learn from Watergate was that Nixon erred by not being authoritarian enough. And now Obama suddenly thinks that’s okay?
Lastly, it is expected of a leader that he should exhibit leadership. I don’t expect a potential president to say his hands are tied and then go along to get along. Obviously this isn’t an important moral issue to him, and certainly not one of the most important constitutional issues of our day.
Yeah, the only thing I’m hoping for right now is that Michelle is doing the Lysistrata strategy on Barry.
ronaldpagan: Toto, I have a feeling we’re not in lapel pins anymore.
Yeah, well, he ain’t Zeus. Did anyone ever think he was??? Just get him elected!!! He’s still the best candidate in decades. We can elect and disagree both; it’s the god-damned American way!
WonkaBee: Christ, I thought that was Macaulay Culkin. In fact I kinda still do.
Darehead: Yep, here today, gone tomorrow (or at least will return to lurking).
You win.
CometHasTheFloor: No, you win! Come back! Don’t be a lurker, be a smurker. I mean a snarker. We’ll miss Ellen. And U2.
SayItWithWookies: Very good points. I do think there are still far more voters than we want to admit who are easily swayed by any supposed threat to homeland security, and aren’t willing to think it through. That’s one of the major reasons Kerry lost. But Barry is a million times the speaker Kerry is, and you’re right that - if it meant enough to him - he could easily have laid out the exact points you made in a way that would win a lot of people over. But it would be a lot harder for him to defend his position when conservatives would constantly point out that so many Democrats capitulated…I mean, supported the bill.
Hopefully you don’t think I think executive branch overstepping authority IS what made this country great. Because I don’t think that, yo.
Sad to see the likely next president standing up for totalitarian secret spying. Not that it’s a surprise, but it’s still sad.
SayItWithWookies: PS: Nice Lysistrata reference way too early in a Saturday morning. “What would you rather tap, Whitey, the phones or me?” Michelle is better than her often-spineless husband, the end.
ronaldpagan: “What would you rather tap, Whitey, the phones or me?” That’s hilarious — fuck “In God we trust” — that should go on our currency.
And no, I don’t think you’re in favor of executive branch overreaching — but I am disappointed in Hopey. It’s like convincing all your friends to like your new gf, then finding out she’s rude to waiters, or beats dogs or something.
Did not intend to detract from the beauty of this thread by complimenting its contributors. It will not happen again.
Signoff not very nice wishes to Darehead.
CometHasTheFloor: Wow, what did I say? I was trying to be friendly and welcome you here. Sorry for whatever it was.
http://usera.imagecave.com/destonio/Destonio_Wiretaps.jpg
CometHasTheFloor: You misunderstood, Comet. Darehead was being nice. Occasionally we say unsarcastic things here on Wonkette.
Destonio: Beautiful!
CometHasTheFloor: was it the “on the floor” comment? I meant, you are getting attention. You rock. We like you. That’s what I meant.
ronaldpagan: The possum seal:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/20/obama-unveils-official-lo_n_108410.html
Actually we should photoshop a seal and a possum together like a gryphon. Or a Posseal. Sealum?
They say that Vero Possumus is supposed to be Latin for “Yes, We can” but it looks like True Possum to me.
Darehead: Come back, Comet!!
schvitzatura: “Wait until the Dem majority is bigger…” Um, the Dems have a bigger hold on the House than the Repubs had back in 1998, when they, y’know, impeached Clinton.
One fine day, there will come a time when the Democratic party looks down their collective pants and says “ZOMG, testicles!” Today is not that day, and this November aint’ lookin’ so hot, either.
SayItWithWookies: Yay, I’m glad you liked my dumb joke! I liked your girlfriend analogy too. But come on…did you really not expect Hopey to do anything disappointing, ever? Look at his record with the Patriot Act. This is like finding out your girlfriend is a shitty tipper, but she’s still super-hot and amazing in bed, so you have to let it go.
Not to say that we should exactly let it go. We shouldn’t be all “my Lord, my Lord, why have you betrayed me?” every time Obama pulls shit like this, but we’re definitely in the right to get upset about it, so his campaign knows he can’t take our enthusiasm for granted. We’re all gonna vote for him; we’re pretty much obligated to. But we’re not all obligated to keep pumping money into his campaign and buying the Shepard Fairey posters and spending Saturday mornings knocking on strangers’ doors and explaining that Obama isn’t a Muslim. We have to make him realize he needs us.
PS: You know what’s gonna sting the most? When Obama makes some inevitable sell-out move, and then HILLARY, of all people, gets to comes out and say, “With all due respect to Senator Obama, this position is opportunistic and indefensible.” And we are forced to agree with her.
WonkaBee: Darehead: ronaldpagan: You’re right. It was a bit of a rough night offline, and I misinterpreted the initiation snarkiness as something personal, which it was not. I also felt as though I was detracting from a pretty damn good thread. Bad timing all around.
I appreciate the welcome back.
SayItWithWookies: SayItWithWookies:
>It’s fascism if it’s fascism.
Tautological non-argument for the win!
>My government attains its legitimacy through the will of the people, and this isn’t based on whether I’ve been sufficiently oppressed to declare it illegitimate. In fact I can live in complete comfort and still rail against the violations of my civil liberties. If it was good enough for Jefferson and Washington, it’s good enough for me.
…because the representatives of the people weren’t the ones to pass this, of course. It was actually a secret enclave of Dark Wizards disguised as Representatives of the people. Stop fapping and start giving me actual arguments why this is a fascist bill.
And the “good enough for Jefferson and Washington” argument is kind of weak. Slavery was also good enough for them. One patriotic-whore-diamond, though.
>1) “If we believe in the principles of civil liberties for all, there is no reason we should be ruled by fear of the outsider. Our principles are at least as effective against our enemies as our guns are; and if we fight our enemies without using our respect for our common humanity as a weapon, we fight with one hand tied behind our back. Let us not perpetuate the attitude that has brought us failure for the last eight years in a world that should have brought us success.”
And then surely the very Heavens would weep, and every Democrat and Republican who voted for the bill will find their mind magically turned by this pure emanation of oratorical awesomeness? Seriously, let’s say he did say this, or something like this but smarter, better-reasoned and all-around more inspiring. What then? A unanimous uprising of the previously spineless Dems? Mass defections from the GOP? I realize you really really really want it to be like in the movies, where the plucky hero gives a speech to a swelling musical score, and all but the most villainous of villains fall in line, overcome with guilt and feelings of moral inferiority. But there comes a point in everyone’s life when we realize that life is a wee bit more complicated than that. So just what do you expect to happen after such a grandstanding?
>Hillary already stands for giving away your important moral principles. Obama doesn’t need to stand for that too.
So your argument here is, “But I thought he was special, not like the other boring old Democrats”? Boo fucking hoo. No one is so special that they can simultaneously be legislators and remain above the political process, free from having to compromise with the other legislators.
>GOP legislators end up liking him and you’re trying to paint this as a failure? Um… the defense rests.
No, the defense *says* “the defense rests,” sits back down and smiles like a happy toddler, seemingly unaware that the long speech they just heard was actually the prosecution’s opening statement. I take it you don’t have an actual argument for how a personal warming of several GOP legislators to Obama’s sudden flare-up of libertarianism would translate into any kind of political advantage. I mean, do you think they might campaign for him? That their voters will suddenly abandon all their fear about the terror-soft Mooslim and vote for him? That the liberal lefties would actually welcome Obama’s sudden surge of popularity with the right?
>4) This is just an amplified version of 1). To reiterate: We can love America and the principles she was built on. It’s not an either/or proposition. The conservatives want loyalty oaths, torture, imprisonment without charges for an indefinite period of time and no habeas corpus. I’m just weird this way, but I think the fuckin’ candidate of fuckin’ change should fuckin’ be opposed to that.
Firstly, you didn’t point out any place where my analysis went off the rails. You just re-directed me to your first ‘rebuttal’, which as I recall consisted of several stock phrases reducible to “Those who are willing to trade liberty for security deserve neither.” Pithiness doesn’t pass bills. And the phrase “he conservatives want loyalty oaths, torture, imprisonment without charges for an indefinite period of time and no habeas corpus” makes me think that you actually have no idea what the FISA bill corrected and what it left uncorrected. You’re just repeating talking points. Unless you really think FISA legislated loyalty oaths and torture?
I’m starting to feel like Tweety banging his head against the wall of Kevin James’ boundless dumb.
“Neville Chamberlain was an appeaser!”
“But what did Neville Chamberlain do?! Tell me what he did!”
“He appeased the Nazis.”
“Tell me what he actually DID!”
“I just told you, he was an appeaser, and that was wrong and dishonorable.”
“TELL ME WHAT HE ACTUALLY DID! You don’t KNOW, do you?!”
Well, do you?
There’s also the whole media in the BBQ tank for McCain thing. How many days did the OJ thing air for? Why didn’t someone say that anyone who chooses their president based on Orange Juice vs Coffee is fucking retarded? That and the whole Michelle comment thing that still has airtime for months, even when McCain said the same thing.
WonkaBee: A possum-seal hybrid would be a lot more interesting than this seal. It’s kind of classy I guess, but counting down until Fox News goes “OH NO A STAR AND CRESCENT!” 10…9…8…
Question for everyone: would it be possible to conduct a winning presidential campaign without giving any thought to what Fox News would throw at you? Because that would be really nice. I wish McCain and Obama would sign a pact to treat Fox News with all the respect and attention due to the National Enquirer.
ronaldpagan: It’s not the disappointing stance on FISA so much — but that this is (at least to me) one of the big issues. I mean it was bad enough that so many high-ranking Dems voted for the Iraq authorization — for all Obama’s inexperience, he seemed to have his head on straight about the right issues. And so soon, too.
CometHasTheFloor: I’m glad you’re not leaving in a huff. The more non-trolls around here, the merrier.
Destonio: “It takes a great leader to stand up for principles when all about you are caving in. And I… am not… that… leader.”
AxmxZ: Hey I knew you were here and coming up with something good! BUT, first and foremost, don’t compare Wookies to Kevin James. I think crying “fascism” is outlandish, too, but clearly Wookies is smart, informed, and knows what s/he is talking about. And incidentally, don’t compare yourself to Tweety. You are way better than that.
ronaldpagan: It would require a split in the Democratic Party, where the liberal Dems and the conservative, Fox-News-watching Dems (to whom this compromise is intended for) go their separate ways. So long as a good chunk of the party’s seats comes from people who get elected by out-Repubbing the Repubs, this isn’t going to go away.
I, for one, look forward to the Whig-style meltdown; this whole schizophrenic, crazy girlfriend thing just ain’t working.
ronaldpagan: I don’t know aything about Kevin James as a person, and even less about Wookies. Nor do I really consider Tweety to be a role model. So this isn’t a case of “good vs. evil.” It’s more that what I’m hearing out of Wookies is the exact same line of reasoning as Tweety heard out of James. I want Wookies to stop throwing out pseudo-patriotic talking points and pretending like we’re having an argument. Because we aren’t. “Tell me what he did.” “He appeased.” “TELL ME WHAT HE DID!!” “HE APPEASED!!”
He’ll fix it in January, 2009! Patience Libs, Patience..
Anyway, where is the possum-seal post? I want to talk about the possum seal!!
I just read the NYT Blog URL’ed below and, I gotta tell ya, the logo kinda gives me the Qreeps.
Some wise person here wrote that cynicism is the last refuge of the defeated, so maybe I’ve capitulated and see the future as dark and barren. I’m thinkin’ that with the House and Senate full of NoChangeEms, the chance for Hopey being an agent for change is kinda dismal. I’m thinkin’ that Hopey’s gonna sell us out, as we’ve been sold out so many times before.
Let my beating commence.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/20/the-great-seal-of-obamaland/
AxmxZ: It’s fascist because the executive branch started off by unilaterally declaring a law null and void, said it was responsible enough to police itself, declared that Congress was informed and wasn’t complaining (when in fact the Bushies simply gave classified briefings to some of the Intelligence Committee members and said they’d be breaking the law if they even discussed it — Jay Rockefeller wrote several letters to Cheney asking him about the program and Cheney just ignored them — that’s not oversight) and now demands that Congress not only retroactively legalize their behavior, but also immunize private corporations that were complicit so that this whole program we don’t know anything about and don’t have rights to examine can continue.
So if you get arrested, when you get to court you no longer have the right to see the evidence that led up to your surveillance, and you can’t challenge the warrant because there isn’t one. According to the Constitution, the executive can’t obtain information about you without assent from the judicial branch. Warrants serve the purpose of documenting that assent and providing a point where a judge or a lawyer can say “You don’t have the authority to do this,” and that point can be debated. Now that’s gone and we’re trusting the people who brought us torture and tried to take away habeas corpus with policing themselves?
I’m sorry if that’s all Henny Penny to you, but one branch of government amassing sufficient power to subvert our rights and our ability to challenge their actions is fascist whether they use these rights or not.
On 1), you’re moving goalposts again. My argument is that the reactionary right wing can be refuted, and I think persuasively. We can fight terrorism without giving up the ideals we’re trying to secure — someone running against the most overreaching administration since Nixon should be making that point.
So your argument here is, “But I thought he was special, not like the other boring old Democrats”? Boo fucking hoo. No one is so special that they can simultaneously be legislators and remain above the political process, free from having to compromise with the other legislators.
Uh, no. Obama wasn’t my first, second or third choice. But what he lacked in executive (or just plain government) experience I was thinking he could make up for in principled stances on important civil rights, foreign policy and fiscal issues. Agreeing with Bush/Cheney on one of the most divisive issues of our times seems like a losing proposition.
I mean, do you think they might campaign for him? That their voters will suddenly abandon all their fear about the terror-soft Mooslim and vote for him? That the liberal lefties would actually welcome Obama’s sudden surge of popularity with the right?
Standing for civil rights while paring away part of the opposition would not cause liberals to oppose Obama. Liberals would be thrilled that the libertarian wing is standing with them on opposition to warrantless wiretapping. They often find common ground on opposing government authority when it stomps on civil rights, and if Obama took this route it would exemplify his rhetoric about working together — something Mr. “Uniter not a divider” never managed to actually do. This argument that reaching across the aisle on a galvanizing issue is somehow bad is just preposterous.
On 4) — the majority of Americans think Bush has already gone too far. His “24″ rhetoric is obvious bullshit, and the more we find out about his violations of the Constitution, the more the outrage grows. People are getting that FOX is just crying wolf, and Congressional centrists would be fools to think that after all Bush’s lies about other important policy issues, he’s probably telling the truth this time.
And hell — there’s no requirement that Obama do a Mr. Smith Goes to Washington — if this was important to him, it would be nice if he expressed that by — oh, I don’t know — not being in favor of the law. Bush and Cheney have de facto thrown our protection against warrantless search and seizure in the toilet — it would be a nice gesture if Hopey didn’t trip over himself ratifying that action.
In the meantime, Barry only raised $22 million last month?!? Only one million more than the dessicated corpse on the other side?!?! Newell is right; he IS a loser. Forget the possums, his seal should be a barrell with suspender straps. Maybe a bindle. I guess “Plouffe, David” is gonna show up in my Inbox even more now.
ronaldpagan: Yes, do not bring the debate down to Tweety and Kevin James level, or be herded by what Faux might say … remember what Obama said in 30AD: “Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of Fauxlessness is within you.”
SayItWithWookies: Finally, something beyond fapping.
El Bombastico: Yeah, it was a bit low. Could be because last month people already knew the nomination was his after May 6th, and that he didn’t need any more money for the primaries.
AxmxZ: Yeah, it’s a sad story. And then maybe McCain got more money than usual because everyone knew which nominee he’d be fighting? Now I have to give Obama $20 (to let me blow him.)
AxmxZ: Yeah, and probably just general fatigue with the Dem primary. I imagine (hope) its a temporary downtick. ‘Cause his grand plans for a 50-state effort (as well as the establishment of a possum empire) will take a lot more than that.
ronaldpagan: What happens to the unused primary money, incidentally?
El Bombastico: I don’t know, dude. You’d think it would be a lot bigger in the few months before the general election, but then that is prob true for McCain too. I hope everyone wasn’t just pouring money into Barry’s campaign because they hated Hillary. He should probably go from intimidating Joe Lieberman to a full-fledged beating. That would make us all reach for our wallets.
ronaldpagan: I’m curious to see how this will be received on Monday. Especially after a week of hearing about how Barry’s campaign is gonna spend like a drunken sailor on shore leave. I suspect we won’t be hearing much more about a possible ad buy during the Olympics. But I hear TBS’s rates for “Everybody Loves Raymond” are pretty reasonable.
ronaldpagan:
In his statement, Barry said something about working against telco immunity in the senate version. Any real chance that this will happen?
Damn, this thread is delicious and nutritious! Tangy, too.
I’m not worried about Barry, the guy is still insisting that We, The People hold his feet to the fire, to hold him accountable for his actions, which is infinitely better than the assclowns currently in charge (and their scrappy, crotch-sniffing lapdog McCanine) who not only deny that there is a fire which can burn them, but that they have feet at all.
I still trust him to make the right decisions, especially if I don’t agree 100%, why the fuck would I want a President who takes my insert substance of choice here-addled advice every time my knee jerks? He’s a leader, trust him to lead us down strange roads, who knows, maybe he knows a few shortcuts along the way that we’ve never heard of before. This road, FISA Blvd., is crooked, dirty, and seems to lead off the edge of a cliff but there’s no doubt in my mind that Obama would not let us all fly off into the abyss like lemmings.
AxmxZ: obfuscator: Why would you ask me questions as if I know things? I don’t know things! I am here to make stupid puns. But Obfuscator, if you read the comments above, it looks like most people think Barry isn’t going to make any serious effort to work against Telco immunity. Which would kind of make sense.
ronaldpagan: If he threatens the telcos, maybe they will scramble his internets and have his donations go to McSnoop. Better put that $20 on the pony expresses!
Tits_LaRue: “I still trust him to make the right decisions, especially if I don’t agree 100%, why the fuck would I want a President who takes my insert substance of choice here-addled advice every time my knee jerks?”
One of many quotes of the day. I agree with you in theory, but this doesn’t seem like a principled decision Obama is making, contrary to the party line, because he thought it through. It seems more like an issue he opposed in February and supports now. And the obvious for that would be that he was running for the primary in February and now he’s running for the general election.
ronaldpagan:
I want stupid puns AND song parodies. Don’t forget the song parodies… and the limericks.
obfuscator: Harry Bend-Like-a-Reed says he might try to schedule a separate vote on stripping immunity out of the bill, but doesn’t think it’s going anywhere.
Oh, and if Dubya opens his damn mouth again about how warrantless wiretapping is needed to prevent another 9/11, he deserves a smack. He started these before 9/11 and couldn’t figure out how to stop al-Qaida then.
SayItWithWookies: Word. Couldn’t have come close to saying it better. I’m not pissed at Obama. I’m more pissed at myself for letting myself believe someone in politics could rise above their instincts to be anything but political when the rubber meets the road. He had a hard bitten cynic like me pretty close to believing he was my Messiah of Hope. I’ll still vote for him, but I’ve lost a lot of repsect for him. Oh, and I hate having my lack of faith in human nature so strongly confirmed.
Heckofa job, Hopey.
SayItWithWookies: Oh — reference: http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/13/warrantless-wiretapping-in-place-before-911/
ronaldpagan: Allow me to spew a few more fuzzy analogies:
As they say in the parlance of our times: Don’t hate the playa’, hate the game!
As I see it, the main game Obama is trying to win right now is called ‘Become The Master Of All Games*’ Obama cannot change the rules of the current game, but he can try to win it. He must simultaneously play, and perhaps lose, other games.
Once he wins *BTMOAG, will he eradicate all games entirely, or just create a new, more fair games? He’s a politician, so my guess is that the games will continue in a new form. But I’d rather have somebody fair-minded creating the rules of the new games and changing the rules of the moldy, crappy old games than somebody like McCain who denies there are any games at all.
Okay. I got some sleep and I feel a bit better. I’d just like to say a couple of things.
1. The Senate vote hasn’t happened yet. Hopey McHoperson has stated he would support a filibuster. Reid says he’ll try to get the immunity portion of the bill removed (riiiight, but still.)
2. A similar bill passed in the Senate before by a huge margin, so it is doubtful that Hopey’s vote would make a difference in this case. Doesn’t make the cop out ok, but it makes it more apparent that this is a political move, rather than an ideological shift.
3. I’m sad we all got our hearts broken a little, but I think this is good for us. Getting all goo-goo ga-ga over a politician is kind of..um..cultish. I can’t think of a single President this country has had that hasn’t done something sell-outish. Okay, maybe William Henry Harrison, but only because the grim hand of death stopped him.
4. As much as we mock them, we should remember that politicians are people too. They make stupid decisions. They have to balance their beliefs with their ambitions. They have to suck up to a bunch of idiots to get their jobs. Unfortunately, most of the idiots don’t understand what the FISA bill means. Most of them wouldn’t care, they just want gas under $4 a gallon and the terr’ists to leave them alone.
5. Write to Barry, let him know how you feel. I did. I also called. It may not change anything, but it was oddly comforting. One more voicemail in the wilderness and all that.
Gopherit v2.0: I feel you, and I do hold Obama’s ethics and integrity to higher standards than I hold those of most politicians. But was it really this, and exclusively this, that convinced you Obama might not be pure as the driven snow? It makes sense to lose respect for him every time something like this happens, but, like eatsshootsleaves pointed out, this is hardly the first time he’s given us reason to doubt his motives.
SayItWithWookies: Just out of curiosity, who were you first, second, and third choices? Mine were all Ron Paul! Did you know he voted against the war AND the Patriot Act? (Just kidding, of course.)
Tits_LaRue: How about this button? “Player Haters For McCain.”*
*I say “player” because “playa” means “beach.”
Cicada: Very, very nicely put.
SayItWithWookies: Wookies, you should DEFINITELY write to Obama about this, if you haven’t yet. And post your letter here. I’ma send mine when I get back from buying shoes, but yours is gonna be a lot more informed and articulate. Do it!
ronaldpagan: Fuckin’ playas, always gettin’ sand in my crack! And don’t even get me started on the kelp.
Tits_LaRue:
You might want to stop by the Celebrity Center and take a stress test.
Cookie Guggelman: Oh, that’s supposed to be a joke! About scientologists! I get it, I get it… Say something about Kool-Aid™ next, and maybe a “jab” about Charlie Manson. Or, how about I just piss my frilly panties because one of the presidential candidates didn’t drop everything and start running in the same direction as the most popular wind that was blowing?
Tits_LaRue: Wait…frilly panties?? Tell us more…
Tits_LaRue: Burning Man remains nice, in my experience, if one wishes for playa as far as the eye can see and absolutely no kelp.
Excellent comments all. Support rage AND patience. Already sent my thoughts to Hopey and after a quick jog feel much better.
One would hope that Hopey’s big email list will be worth more than just a mode of fund raising and governance from him to us, but also for info from us to him. It would be smart of him to consider Wonkette-style qualitative data to quantitative polling data.
Ahahaha, that guy really fooled us. Progressive reformer and all that shit, when it turns out Abraham Lincoln was just waiting to suspend habeas corpus all along! What idiots we were.
Well, now. HuffPost has their big headline:
OBAMA: NO IMMUNITY FOR TELECOMS
But it looks like they are just focusing on the one part of the same message from Obama about “supporting the bill, but…”
Cicada: ha. good question. i had just found it. It’s a move to get scamdicapper Wayne Allyn Root booted off the LP ticket in favor of Paul… very amateur obviously… but they both have better positions than Obama on this police-state stuff.
WonkaBee: Well, we’ll just have to wait until next weeks vote to find out what the heck he really means.
That statement was designed with wiggle-room in mind.
TGY: Yeah, he totally conned me when he defended the SCOTUS decision. It turns out he really wants to appoint justices like Alito and Scalia. He probably is really FOR the war and AGAINST abortion too. And I bet he wants to do offshore drilling, just like McCain. And he’ll nuke Iran just like Hil-liar-y was going to! There’s no difference at all, really. Change, HAH! He said he was Jeebus and he LIED! There’s no point in caring anymore! I’m gonna vote NADER!
I’ve totally seen rants like this on some liberal blogs. It makes me embarrassed to agree with these people on FISA. It’s weird because the if you listen to Hopey’s speeches, most of his “change” rhetoric is centered around moving away from partisan politics and special interests. He hasn’t said a whole lot about issues like FISA. People have projected a LOT onto that one word.
Gormogon: Yeah, this police-state stuff is a bummer. Third (and fourth) parties often do have worthwhile ideas. I like my nanny-state too much to be a Libertarian, though. Yay welfare and state subsidized education! I depended on both growing up, so I can hardly throw them under the truck now.
That website is headache inducing, with the flashing and the blurriness and the bad graphics. Also, portraying Barr and Paul as Batman and Robin? Are you SURE that site wasn’t set up by a Wonkette operative?
AxmxZ: He is running toward the center. Dick Nixon said: “Run as far to the right as you can in the primaries, and then run as fast as you can to the center in the general.” Barry is doing the mirror image of this.
Cicada: I personally always took his “change” stance to be mostly about cutting down lobbying interests on the executive and the legislative branches. In that respect, he seems to have done pretty well.
AxmxZ: Yeah, that’s what I meant by “special interests”. I’m finding some of the hand wringing over this a bit extreme. Hopey has always run as a cautious centrist on the issues, I’m kind of surprised at how much people have projected their own beliefs onto him. I always knew he was to the right of me on a lot of issues, so I guess I’m less shocked than some.
He’s still miles better than Clinton or Kerry in approach and ability to motivate. He’s still miles better than any Dem nominee we’ve had for a long time in arguing for liberal ideas on foreign policy and social justice. He has also stayed true to his pledge to reform on special interests. But he ain’t Jeebus, oh noes!
WTF is wrong with all you handwringers? FISA is considered a necessary weapon in the anti-terror arsenal, and came with built-in provisions to prevent abuse. Bush abused it nonetheless, which Hopey has argued is illegitimate and unconstitutional. Bush and cohorts want the telecoms to enjoy retroactive immunity, which Hopey also renounces, denounces and rejects.
If you want to have Hopey repeal FISA in toto [which he alone cannot do in any event], you are sending your candydate into the campaign against “National Security” expert John McCan’t with both hands tied behind his back, and kneecapping him to boot, just so he can live up to some arbitrarily conceived degree of “purity.” Are you insane?
The Dems must tread a very fine line right now. If Hopey is to prevail in November, he must be a centrist who seems genuinely concerned about both the nation’s security, and the abuses of the past 7 years. More importantly, one would hope that he is concerned about both, and not just playing everyone for political gain. This is precisely the tightrope balance Hopey is now trying to maintain.
So, WTF is the problem here?
[Ill-informed driveby smears by dispirited Hillaryites like ClitDoris [Tony???] are to be expected. Arseholes of that ilk would never vote for Hopey anyway, and are now actively trying to persuade you to be arseholes too. Take the bait if you like, and prove that you are arseholes. Or you could just grow a pair, and back the man who can. Given that choice, what are you gonna do? Nader? Barr? McCan’t? What a fuckin’ pathetic bunch of pussies y’all are.]
Canuckledragger: I love a man who can use “arsehole” so eloquently.
In defense of the handwringers, this is an important issue. There is a reason why folks care about it. Also, we don’t have to agree with everything Hopey does to support him.
The people that annoy me are the ones saying they won’t vote for Bear-Bear over this. Screw them.
Canuckledragger: Awwww you say the sweetest compensatory things!
Cicada: How does it feel to be annoyed by that few people, and how much are you asking for lessons?
CometHasTheFloor: Good point. I know there aren’t that many folks who won’t vote for Hopey over this, but they sure do make a lot o’ noise. I place the blame squarely on my obsession with lefty blogs. Must…get…out…more.
Lessons? Hmmmm. What kind of lessons? Am I asking for them or are you?
Cicada: re #3 in long post: Yeah, the cultish following is annoying, but I don’t see how something (support for FISA bill) which rationally repels people is a good thing. I’m all in favor of something which takes off the sheen but doesn’t repel ME. And true, anyone who claims to switch sides (or not vote — same thing) over this is an idiot.
But this doesn’t just rise to the level of an important issue — this is hugely immoral. I don’t think anyone honestly believes that HE believes in this vote, unless his entire personality is faked. I’m fine with nods to necessity, but support for retroactive immunity is neither critically necessary politically nor anything short of catastrophic as a matter of policy — we’re setting the ground for future collusion between the most opportunistic part of the private sector and the worst perpetrators of government crime. Next time, Qwest would have to be stupid to resist.
Considering this with the transparently self-serving crap that he gave as reasons for his financing decision, this ain’t exactly his best week.
I like and I’m trying to internalize your #s 1,2, and 4, and I’m going to follow your #5, though.
Cicada: Oh, I’m totally asking. It seems like there are a few people out there who aren’t voting for Hopey because they think he refused to wear a flag pin while rimming Larry Sinclair, and, well, I’ve been watching “Dexter” again. You know how it is.
I’d still like somebody to explain to me why FISA and its court needs such a major overhaul when it lasted two decades or so against the KGB.
ClitDoris: I know I’m late to the party, but, srlsy. This is so retarted taht even whilst durnk it MAKES nO Snese.
Ssrlys.
damnit: No, definitely not his best week. I understand why people feel let down, I do too. I guess I just expected this to happen at some point. Nominees back track and take uber-safe positions once they enter the GE. It’s how they get elected.
I have a feeling Barry is going to be getting a lot of mail on this topic, and I hope it will inspire him to do some hard thinking. I hope that he will be more responsive to his constituency than the current CIC. I’m also very hopeful that we’ll get a couple of nice, progressive SCOTUS appointees out of his term(s) in office.
I guess you could say I’m just full of hope and rainbows :).
Apparently you can’t run a left-of-center website anymore without accommodating Obama’s very earnest fan base. However, the Wonkette staff may want to give consideration to the concept of what happens the day after you have dismantled the brand. This thread is an object lesson. As on other sites, I will now be skipping the comments areas if Obama is in any way mentioned or referred to. I mean I like the guy fine, but there’s very little entertainment value there.
WonkaBee: Well, they ain’t high-waisted granny panties from Wal-Mart, I’ll tell ya’ that much…
CometHasTheFloor: Now that you’ve said that, there will be a camp next year built entirely out of kelp.
Mr Blifil: Whaaat? You mean, people who support one of the 2 viable candidates running for president want him to… win?? That’s fucking outrageous. It must be a cult. I’ll bet the women all wear the same dress and have unibrows.
CometHasTheFloor: Yeah, I on the other hand was sooooo disappointed when I found out he wasn’t rimming Larry Sinclair. I mean, what’s the point of voting for a depraved Mooslem prevert if there are no tossed salads involved? Oh the humanity!
Mr Blifil: I’m not JUST full of hope and rainbows, I’m full of earnesty goodness too. Yeah, it sounds like you better avoid these threads. I wouldn’t want your eyes burned out by the rays of unfunny. Agh! The discussion it BURNS! Agghhhhhhhhh!
Careless clicking causes blindness people. You have been warned.
Guppy06: The Muslims are far more evil than the Commies. And sneakier too.
There is no way we could expect BO to enter into this fray without getting his hands dirty.
Somewhere closer to the top of the page, one of our dear friends illustrated the current political situation as a shit-filled ditch. No doubt about it, BO is trying his best to keep his foot-hold and pull us out of this shit-filled ditch. We, as rational, intelligent adults cannot realistically expect him to do this without getting some shit on him.
I’m no cultist. And I don’t believe in unicorns. But I’m pretty damn sure BO is who and what he says he is.
I also know that the mess that the BushAd has created over the last eight - years which they will gladly bequeath to their replacement - ain’t gonna go away with a snap of BO’s fingers. And all of the ideological perfection that has been projected upon him will be checked repeatedly as we all come to terms with reality.
MoodProcessor: and God Bless Us, Every One!
Barry supported the bill because he was fooled by Hillary into believing illegal spying would be limited to Chriatians.
Live amd learn, Hopey. Live and learn, as the Prophet once said, the Prophet being George McSteindoogel.
May I go home now?
Q: This is true. I built a terrorist trap out of Lego Mindstorms and set it up in my back yard, and by morning, I had 7 Commies and only 3 Muslims, which is the precise opposite of the actual demographics in my gated community.
There was also the one Muslim Commie whose existence was totally screwing up my regression model, so I shot him. Perhaps that was wrong?
Cicada: The only way to force FISA and related issues into the Presidential debates is to drive up Barr’s poll numbers. the only way to do that is money. The Paultards are too paranoid to part with their ca$h to anyone except Paul. Hence, the need to draft Paul as a last-minute quasi-faux-VP candidate.
Aren’t there usually, like, 2 or 3 weekend Wonkette updates? Where’s ours?
CometHasTheFloor: Not wrong. Rule 17, Article 7, Subsection II, Paragraph 7 of the No Mommies Left Alive Act provides for immediate execution of Muslim Communists, provided the bodies are disposed in accordance with local waste recycling statues.
@Q: Statutes. Damn.
Q2: I thought you were referencing this statue of waste:
http://www.ugoto.com/picture_statue_of_a_giant_piece_of_shit_ponta_grossa_brazil.html
Darehead: They should mount that on the Capitol dome!
Q2: It can be the exterior of the illegal surveillance operation (but Hopey-fully NOT)
Bottom line for me in November: Anyone but McTwatface. Except ‘tards or Nader. Then like
Cornel West said, we’ll hold Barry’s feet to the fire on the big issues, and burn his balls when
he gets it wrong.
Darehead: I can’t find the exact quote, but years ago when Frank Rizzo was mayor in Philadelphia, a sculpture by Jacques Lipchitz, called “Government of the People” was placed near City Hall, and Rizzo said “it looks like a pile of shit” or some other similarly colorful simile.
You be the judge:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/115/313159972_e87b1159f0.jpg?v=1165175598
Does anyone know the actual quote?
SO here’s more…
http://www.bluffton.edu/~sullivanm/pennsylvania/philadelphia/lipchitz/people.html
I do believe I see some Wonketeers in there, and they appear to be enjoying themselves!
WonkaBee: It’s a pile of shit…with feet!
WonkaBee: “But Frank Rizzo blew it when he called Lipchitz’s statue an abortion that looked like some workman dropped a load of plaster.”
WonkaBee: It certainly looks like it might scare small children.
WonkaBee: I found the quote, it’s at
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,905966-2,00.html
Thanks for this! I have never been to Philadelphia so didn’t know about this Lipchitz (whose name after all was kinda asking for trouple). Shit, no. But yes, that’s we the Wonkerati of the People, all wrapped up in one another. Who has the stinkiest feet?
Darehead: *trouble.
Darehead: Great! Artists, rapists, whatever…
Now, there’s more visual poetry to be had right there in Philly. They eventually put up a statue of Rizzo himself, apparently intended to look like the tribune of the people, with upraised arm. however, he looks like he’s hailing a cab. AND: they put Frank on the same block on JFK Blvd across from City Hall as the Lipchitz sculpture, with his back to the “abortion.”
So until I can take a nice deep-field photo of it, here is my photoshop wonder (and my first and only photobucket item)
http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/nn131/WonkaBee/rizzo.jpg
I call it. “Rizzo, desperately hailing a cab to escape from Lipchitz abortion - in aeternum“
WonkaBee: I call it “Rizzo’s Facist Salute.”
The Dems are past masters at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory but this time they could be winners. I heard Al Gore is emerging as favourite to be Obama’s running mate.
Now all they have to do is hire the hitman, dream up the GOP / Al Qaeda conspiracy theory and they have a competent candidate and a huge sympathy vote.
Politics has always been a dirty business.
http://greenteeth.blog.co.uk/2008/06/20/first-a-change-of-religion-then-a-change-4340931
ronaldpagan: This thread has therefore been renamed …
W622.1 Omnibus Snarking Bill
CometHasTheFloor: Ironic. My backyard trap for bad guys is modeled on this:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b3/Mouse_Trap_Board_and_Boxjpg.jpg
Canuckledragger: FISA’s been around for nearly 30 years. I agree, its been needed for a long time and no laws or amendments are violated by it. Maybe it’s me, but I imagine the FISA court judges like the people in the red curtains from “Twin Peaks.”
i certainly have all my talking points for the week. Thnx wonketeers!
boggart: are you sure you have the right link there? That’s about Toni Blair!
Obama reminds ME of the young baby Jesus…only because the bible gives no indication whatsoever on what Jesus was doing between his birth and his 33rd year. (Kind of like Obama’s missing years.)
Which would make ScarJo our Mary Magdalene.
Now he needs another Reverend Wright scandal just to make me believe in him again.
Jim Newell,
The Senate takes this up this week with Sen. Harry Reid promising to make one last plea to stop the retroactive immunity of the telecommunications companies. This is a chance for Sen. Obama to show some leadership and reach across the aisle. Which, should be no problem with his change mantra coupled with his uniter status. Yes, we can! Can what? Kick the damn can further down the road.
But, the best he is promising is to oversee it himself while he is president. What if he doesn’t win? He somehow looked better and seemed more up to the task as president while fighting it out with Hillary. God, I wish she would have beat the shit out of him when she had the chance. (Literally and figuratively.)
Sincerely and respectfully,
Mr-Clark
By the way, Jim, confess that Ken made you write this one to break your Hopey spirit. Long live the Hopey relovuiont! Or whatever Marxist slogan the Paultards use. “Death to non-Constitutional yellow running dogs!”