I am so tired of people supposedly on my side, being as F**KING STUPID as the baggers are.
FACTS FOR EVERYONE WHO CLAIMS THEY’RE A LIBERAL PROGRESSIVE:
- ONLY 6 (SIX) DEMOCRATS VOTED TO FUND THE CLOSING OF GITMO. That means that not only did ALL of the REPUBLICANS in Congress vote against it, but MOST of the DEMOCRATS DID TOO. People who blame President Obama for that are F**KING STUPID.
- THE DEMOCRATS NEVER CONTROLLED CONGRESS. No, not EVER. Stop repeating this lie. You look like an idiot, and you’re not helping. There were NEVER 60 votes – enough for a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. Not even for a microsecond. People who blame President Obama for something that is OUR FAULT (for not sending him a Progressive Army, then staying home in a whiny snit) are F**KING STUPID.
- CANDIDATE OBAMA RAN ON CHANGE AND PROMISED TO END PARTISANSHIP. He is still trying. It’s the GOP who refuse. HE has KEPT THAT PROMISE. It’s OUR FAULT there are asshats in Congress who care more about their hatred for one man, and regaining power, than their own COUNTRY, and ALL THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. Either we elect ALL DEMS, or who aren’t bought and paid for corporate whores (BEN NELSON, I’M TALKING TO YOU), or non-insane Independents, or we’re DONE. There are no sane Republicans left. That is a fact. Anyone who cannot understand this is F**KING STUPID.
There is much more at the link, and I advice everybody to click it and read what Tally wrote. And then after you finish e-mail it to all of your so-called "liberal" friends who claim that this President has not lived up to the hype.
Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, could have done more for this country against the unprecedented blowback that has been coming his way since day one from the Republicans than Obama has done. Not Hillary, not Bill, not anybody!
From the second that he was elected, the Republicans have done NOTHING except work against every single policy decision that he has tried to implement. If he were not such a determined and gifted leader, he would never have managed to be as successful as he has been, despite the roadblocks, disinformation, and outright sabotage he has been forced to deal with during these last three years.
If we really want to see this President "be all that he can be," we need to not ONLY give him four more years, we need to send as many REAL Democrats to Washington as we can possibly dig up.
Why can so few people understand this? Because of the propoganda machine - Fox news, plus the Sunday talk shows that have the same (repub) guests week after week. They are allowed to give out misinformation, and the so-called HOST lets them continue, unchallenged. Look who is dominating the headlines now - Cain. Remember how the "reporters" dug in the dung heap and found women who accused Bill Clinton of inappropriate behavior? If they did that now, I wager there are lots and lots of women in Cain's past. His wife does not travel with him for a reason. Maybe she got tired of his boorish behavior. So, since Herman is a repub (funded by the Koch brothers) he is pretty much left alone. Soon more women will come forward. Even while he was campaigning in Iowa, he was acting the same way to some women, unwanted advances. A leopard does not change his spots. Are you listening CALISTA?? (Gingrich)
ReplyDeleteGREAT post!
ReplyDeleteKnow frustration. Know fear.
VOTE!!!!
If the OWS movement doesn't get out the VOTE (like the Tea Party did), humanitarians -- we are f**cked.
Amen!
ReplyDeleteNo other president in the history of our country has been under such an extended, hateful siege by the opposing party. And there is one thing we can do to really mess with those assholes. MAKE SURE WE VOTE OBAMA IN FOR ANOTHER TERM.
ReplyDeleteAmen!! It's really annoying. Given what he stepped into I think he's done an amazing job. He probably should have been tougher at the start, but I think he thought he might have a chance to work with the thugs - no such luck.
ReplyDeleteMore importantly - what would this country be if he HADN'T won? I get sick thinking of it - no question SP would have offed MCINSANE - we'd be in a whole heap of trouble.
I also am just glad that we're out of the bush era and might not get into wars based on lies just to make money. Wise up asshats!
T
Obama - Biden 2012
ReplyDeleteBiden - Clinton(either one) 2016
Biden - Clinton(either one) 2020
DEAL WITH IT REPUBLICANS !
The lie that has been repeated over and over is the the MSM is Liberal!Far from liberal, the mostly Corporate owned news journalists and pundits are not going to report anything their bosses don't agree with and we get the "benefit" of their point of view. We cannot allow or afford this anymore. People have a right to facts and must rely on the Fourth Estate (media) to inform us.
ReplyDeleteYesterday, Nov. 5th, lots of people transferred money from big banks to credit unions and showed the banksters that we the people have the power when we stick together.
We have to take back the airwaves too. In Canada, Fox news was refused a license because they aren't a REAL News program. Canadians are not yet Corporate owned. Heck, just compare countries where Fox isn't and see the big difference!
Thanks for this post!
People need to volunteer to help in President Obama's re election. I just did - from Alaska. The main lead will be coming to my house sometime this week because I have a disease that doesn't allow a lot of access outside of the home - but, I can do other things - phone calls - mail, etc.
ReplyDeleteRepublicans DO NOT need to be a huge influence in D.C. They have obstructed President Obama from the beginning and he has accomplished things in spite of them.
Support our wonderful President!!
I am on AOL, and the headline (HuffPo)is that the election will be close and to say the least (because of the Republicans) not nice. How can you call it close already? Think; subliminal message already? We have to ensure people get out and vote. We set up a way to help pay for ID's, to register, to get to the polls. Whatever it takes.
ReplyDeleteThis presidency has been extremely instructive for demonstrating just how critically important to have a Congress that has his back. It's great that he has been able to accomplish all that he has in spite of their negativity and hate. Along with their enablers AKA Blue Dog Democrats, the Congressional Republicans need to be voted out of office, and replaced with at least enough folks who care about this county to neutralize any who might still remain. The country simply cannot afford a bunch of do-nothings who earn huges salaries in spite of their obstructionism.
ReplyDeleteAs John Stewart says-I can't for the life of me figure out what makes this President of yours different from every other one-maybe if we could we would know why he has faced an unprecedented level of hatred and vitriol to him and his family!
ReplyDeleteCompletely in agreement with the post and the comments. We have an outstanding president and a do nothing, know nothing, Obama obstructing congress.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of Anonymous (Yeah, I know we weren't), what happened to them yesterday? I was hoping they would succeed in shutting down the disgusting Fox news website. Any feedback anywhere?
ReplyDelete"Introducing Barack Obama"
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b91nsPDQFUk&feature=channel_video_title
Great posts, everyone! Think of what our AMAZING President could have done with the "green-light" Congress the dolt, Bush, had. Instead, he had a Congress that hated a black President more then they (despite their obnoxiously large flag pins) love America. TRAITORS, for the most part . . . And, yet, President Obama still wins the race! Even while dragging the anvil that is the Republican/Teabagger Party. And more than a few Dems, too.
ReplyDeleteOccupy sanity! OBAMA landslide in 2012!!
I'm with Tally and womanwithsardinecan and Jeanabella and Lynne and all the other posters so far this morning. The GOP is bent on obstructing the President regardless of the resulting harm to the country, aided and abetted by Fox and the sociopaths pulling their strings, and to hell with the will of the people. The MSM is a willing enabler for the whole ugly process.
ReplyDeleteWe have to be ruthless in our determination to re-elect Obama. The GOP is actually helping us here with their carnival sideshow of candidates. Conservatives scorn the smart ones, like Huntsman and Romney, while buffoons like Perry and Cain are the front-runners. This celebration of stupidity started with George W. Bush, but sunk to new depths when Sarah Palin emerged on the scene. In a way, we should be grateful. She made a caricature of the GOP, and then the Tea Party added the finishing touch. They're unwittingly solidifying and motivating Obama's base.
Complaining about the President not accomplishing all of his promises is like complaining that a swimmer didn't win a race. Let's ignore the fact that the swimmer had his hands tied behind his back, his feet tied to the side of the pool, cement blocks tied to his waist, and a steel cage welded around him. BUT, BUT, BUT...he didn't win!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteAnd the people timing the race were SOOO determined to make sure that he didn't win that they put sharks in the water around the cage. So what if the sharks ate all the other swimmers...at least HE didn't win!
Thanks for cross posting this. Everyone feel free to email, tweet, FB, cross post, and beat people over the head with it..... ❤
ReplyDeleteWe need to re-elect President Obama and give him a 60+ majority in the Senate (so that they can overturn the Republican's 60+ vote rule to get bills to the floor) and a real majority in the House. Only then can we see progress. The Republican Party must be made completely obsolete in 2012!
ReplyDeleteGreat post. Some of my most "progressive" friends really don't seem to get it. I give a version of this rant regularly to one liberal friend. Her response: yes, but... Most Republicans I know, on the other hand, have left that party.
ReplyDeleteAs John Stewart says-I can't for the life of me figure out what makes this President of yours different from every other one-maybe if we could we would know why he has faced an unprecedented level of hatred and vitriol to him and his family!
ReplyDelete6:10 AM
I don't think there is anything secret about this one. It's rabid racism pure and simple, combined with the far right ideological agenda.
The GOP is actually helping us here with their carnival sideshow of candidates.
ReplyDelete8:35 AM
Consider this possibility - A substantial number of these "candidates" are sponsored by Hunt brothers, Norquist, Murdoch or similar and are acting as a test as to just how far the conservative electorate can be pushed. They are legitimized just by virtue of getting air and debate time. Couple that with rigging Diebold machines and the disenfranchising of likely Dem voters that is going on all over the country. Then what do you get? Coup perhaps? I think there has been an ongoing attempt at takeover for decades now. And, they seem to be winning.
"- ONLY 6 (SIX) DEMOCRATS VOTED TO FUND THE CLOSING OF GITMO. That means that not only did ALL of the REPUBLICANS in Congress vote against it, but MOST of the DEMOCRATS DID TOO. People who blame President Obama for that are F**KING STUPID."
ReplyDeleteHey sewer mouth. Gitmo is a military. Who exactly is the military's Commander-in-Chief?
Apparently you think it is Boehner.
But his is the Great Pumpkin Head not the highest ranking officer in the military chain of command. Why do you make excuses for a man who is supporting illegal arrests.abductions, detentions, and torture?
Why dirty yourself with his sin?
I was a very active political junkie during the Clinton years, and I disagree with assertions that Obama is facing unprecedented opposition and vitriol (they've not published a list of suspicious murders Obama is connected to, yet). This is the exact same playbook the Republicans used on Bill Clinton. And President Obama is, to my mind, a similarly Eisenhower-Republican president.
ReplyDeleteNo Republicans forced President Obama to say during his first State of the Union address: "I don't want to punish the banks." No Republicans forced President Obama to appoint Bernanke or Geithner.
President Obama could have used his formidable bully pulpit to encourage voters to push Ben Nelson to support the public option for health care, but instead Obama took the public option completely off the table during closed door meetings with Big Pharma and the hospitals.
The voters did give the Democrats the tools to play hardball with the Republicans -- the Presidency, the House, and 60 votes in the Senate (58 Dems plus 2 Independents that caucus with the Dems) for the first few months of Obama's presidency. The Democrats could have taken the opportunity to reform the filibuster rules, or at least make the Republicans stand up and filibuster, for all to see, their opposition to increasing the minimum wage and all other pro-worker bills. Instead, Democrats played by the Republicans rules, rolling over to their demand for 60 votes for each and every item of business.
Political junkies may know that Blue Dog Democrats are functionally Republicans, but most people just saw the Democrats unable to accomplish anything even when given both houses of congress and the presidency.
When Boehner and the Republicans crow that they got 98% of what they wanted in the debt ceiling showdown, it's crazy to continue to seek bi-partisanship. Yet that's what Obama is doing.
I will of course vote for President Obama, but I agree with Bruce Bartlett that Obama is a moderate Republican, and as a liberal Democrat, I'm disappointed and upset. Still, it's better to vote for the moderate Republican than the certifiably insane nominee of the actual Republican party. Even if I can't muster a bit of hope this time around.
I totally agree with your final sentence. Let's dig up some real Democrats!
I really wish the Occupy movement would be as successful as the Tea Party at electing firebreathing genuine populist progressives to Congress and sweep away the Blue Dogs. They need to start now, though. Is occupy Omaha working to take over their congressional delegation and elect real, not blue dog Democrats? Is Occupy anywhere looking in the direction of electoral politics?
Gryphen,
ReplyDeleteNope. Not buying it. Obama has done much, but it is facile and self serving to say that "Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, could have done more for this country against the unprecedented blowback that has been coming his way since day one from the Republicans than Obama has done."
We don't know how effectively President Obama could have lobbied for a single payer healthcare system, because he didn't even try.
I can cite similar examples for every major policy fight that the president has had. Many missed opportunities, especially in that first year or so when he had much political capital to spend.
You cannot convince me that an FDR, JFK, LBJ, or even Reagan would not have taken better advantage of that much political capital and a genuine desire in Americans to see change.
The biggest fault that I see in president Obama is his eagerness to compromise with the GOP, seemingly at any cost. When I survey his time in office, I just don't see ANY issues in which he clearly articulated a position from which he would not retreat. Not on the war, not on DADT, not on healthcare, not on jobs, not on the budget, not on the deficit, not on GITMO, not on ANYTHING. What exactly is the principle on which this president refuses to compromise? I sense a devotion to policy, not justice.
President Obama is a brilliant man who loves the process of governance, but seems at times to be rudderless. Compromise is well and good if it produces meaningful results. Too often, however, compromise with the GOP has resulted in nothing, only more gridlock.
Boehner, McConnell, Cantor, et al. are feckless clods who should be little more than a nuisance to the president. And yet, time and time again our power slugger President Obama seems easily stymied by their inferior pitching. I just want the president to swing for the fences a bit more often. When he does, he usually knocks it out of the park. I just have grown frustrated watching him take big slow lobs over the plate.
I also find it counterproductive to chide people for not voicing enough enthusiasm for President Obama. The president's failures or instances of underwhelming performance are NOT because of a lack of sycophants, but from a lack of political will or a lack of creativity on the part of the White House. Fawning support from the left would not have made the president any more successful than he's been.
The sad fact is, if the GOP wasn't in such a state of self immolation and there was at least one credible challenger on the left, President Obama would be vulnerable to defeat or even a challenge from within his party.
For better or worse, he's our guy. I accept that, but that doesn't mean I have to applaud when he turns in a ham fisted performance. I simply think that his rate of success would be much higher if he simply inflicted a bit of pain on the GOP now and again to remind them of who actually controls the bully pulpit.
Consider this possibility - A substantial number of these "candidates" are sponsored by Hunt brothers, Norquist, Murdoch or similar
ReplyDeleteSorry. Change Hunt to Koch. Hunt brothers are ancient history. Perhaps so am I.
Yeah, President Obama coulda woulda shoulda done this that and more to push radical liberal left ideology, opening him up to even more blowback from the radical far right, independents, and moderate democratic blocks in this election.
ReplyDeleteHypocrisy is a strange thing.
We can't chew him out and then say "I'm voting for him anyway", it's hypocritical.
I understand the outrage, but if you're being genuine and truthful with yourselves, why kick him when the chips are down, deride him for his hypocricies, the give him a "pity vote".
If you're far left liberal, and SOOOOOOOO convinced he's sold you out, then vote Republican or don't vote at all. Anything less would be hypocritical. As much as I hate to say this, but we're our own worst enemies.
I fully support and will vote for President Obama, I'm busting my ass calling people and getting out the vote, not because I'm THRILLED with every decision he's made, but simply because I feel he's done his best against all odds, and he's the only candiate, regardless of party, that got a superb resume', has demonstrated grace and humility while accomplishing great things for this country, and the world. I voted Obama for President, not Jesus.
Speaking of rants, Guess who's got a bone to pick with Jessie Gryphen of "The Imoral Minority?" His name rhymes with Bill Lunger.
And I think it's people like the guest ranter who are the problem.
ReplyDeleteYou know who you sound like? A BUSH supporter. Yes, that's right. Remember how THEY defended Bush no matter what he did? Well, that's just what the guest ranter sounds like.
I am a liberal who holds all politicians to the same standards. If a Democratic politician acts more like a Republican than a Democrat, I will criticize him or her with a special passion.
Don't like it? Tough. Your insults don't sway me.
I find blind worship of politicians self-indulgent and self-defeating. And attacking those of us who dare to criticize politicians for their very real flaws is simply childish.
Well said, Gryphen ..You are so cool.
ReplyDeleteWe must have voter drives, for Democrats. To have a strong Dem voter turnout.
Anonymous@6:14am - call out any and all politicians based on all the facts, not because you didn't get your need for instant gratification satisfied, immediately, or completely. There is no "blind following" or "hero worshipping" going on here, we're just grownups, but please, go back to your Obama hating and bashing somewhere else - "Progressive Alaska"
ReplyDeleteMost realistic adults understand that sometimes things take a little more time, or there's just no way to accomplish everything - and some things may never be done.
Criticize with false accusations, liken the President to Hitler and being a war criminal, and all the other gross false things you accuse him of - but be prepared to get absolutely none of your issues addressed when a Teabaggin' President, Congress, Cabinet, and Supreme Court rollback the gains that have been made.
You obviously haven't kept up with what's been going on since the midterms - or you are not smart enough to understand the significance of more Teabaggin' Republicans being elected on a local, State, and National level - and how much we have already lost - you WANT MORE of that, eh?
Marleycat,
ReplyDeleteColor me unimpressed with your critique of Anon @ 6:14.
How come it is not possible in your estimation to criticize ANY action of President Obama without being less than a "grown-up," or being an "Obama hater" or "Obama basher?" THAT attitude sounds infantile to me.
Please cite ANY time in history when the Democratic Party has been anything other than fractious. Remember Will Rogers' words about the Dems? And yet, you seem to demand lockstep conformity and unison salutes. THAT is the stuff of the GOP, not the Dems, and it has been so for at least the 80 years or so since Roger's observation.
Seriously, why the hell should we be expected to genuflect when the record does NOT support such a giddy assessment of Obama's record? I cited a rather large glaring failure of Obama to even mention single payer in the healthcare debate. To give it away to the GOP - BEFORE THE DAMN DEBATE EVEN STARTED - was a rookie mistake that telegraphed to the GOP that he was out of his element. It bought him more than a year of inaction and grief and mountains of idiotic bullshit from the GOP that largely went unanswered by the White House. There is no fucking way to deem that anything other than a screwup.
There is a sizable chunk of the Democratic Party that is underwhelmed by President Obama's record. Just because we don't cheer loudly enough or agree with you, that doesn't make us immature. I'll be happy to cite chapter and verse of Obama's underwhelming performances. Don't wax arrogant by damning the president's critics on the left simply because we don't want to sing in unison. I'm not an infant. I realize the need for compromise and I know I won't get everything or maybe even ANYTHING that I want, but goddammit, I expect the president to at least ACKNOWLEDGE the people who got him nominated when everybody thought that Clinton would be the Dems' pick. The president hasn't done even that. Mind you, I only call them as I see them. If the president does a good job, I'll be the first to acknowledge it. However, it does us no good to accept mediocrity when he frequently can do so much better.
The truth of the matter is, if there were a competent liberal rival, President Obama would be vulnerable. Likewise, if the GOP could field a competent candidate other than the pack of assholes they've got, the president would stand a good chance of being defeated. Those realities are NOT because the left hasn't fallen in line, but because this president hasn't really been that impressive a leader. I'll bet that I supported Obama before you did, and I plan to vote for him again, but don't be so childish as to assume that means I must march in lockstep with the rest of the party. That is the stuff of fascism and the GOP, not the Democratic Party.
I can be a loyal patriotic American and Democrat as well as a frequent critic of the president. You can count on THAT continuing.
Gasman - You stated - "How come it is not possible in your estimation to criticize ANY action of President Obama without being less than a "grown-up," or being an "Obama hater" or "Obama basher?".
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I have more than once clearly said people unhappy with the President's actions should criticize that - however, when grossly untrue labels are used - such as "war monger", Wall Street shill, etc., how is that different than the Far Right throwing out terms like "Socialist", "born in Kenya", "pals around with terrorists", "Muslim", "Hitler", and on and on? Two sides of the same coin.
That's just pandering to base human emotions - fears, prejudices, hate, etc., to sway opinions, understanding of an issue. That's not an exchange of ideas or education - that's using hate and bashing, regardless of the validity of your position.
I could have used less inflammatory rhetoric myself - but there has been nothing but hostility and aggressive terminology coming from Mr. Munger - that's what I and many others people have been responding and reacting in kind to, with the tone of the dialogue set by Phil.
Gryphen and Mr. Munger have very different blogs, they are different people, and have different styles of expression. One style is not BETTER or MORE VALID than the other despite what Phil Munger would have us believe - beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
You stated: "I can be a loyal patriotic American and Democrat as well as a frequent critic of the president", EXACTLY! Nobody should say or did say otherwise. AND, by the same token, Gryphen can also be a true progressive Democrat and loyal patriotic American even though he frequently supports our President and focuses on the good. Mr. Munger clearly, and baselessly, accused Mr. Griffen of NOT being a "true progressive".
Gryphen (and others)has been accused of being politically naive and guilty of being some kind of traitor to the Progressive/Democratic cause - for not mirroring Phil Munger's blog or style of expressing his political views. For not being Phil Munger, and not kowtowing to his demands.
That is EXACTLY what Phil Munger demands. That IS what this conflict is about, not whether or not Phil has valid issues to rail about. No one disputes that.
Mr. Munger cleverly frames the discussion so that anyone disgusted with his hostile, aggressive attacks is characterized as stupid, naive, in need of education, questioned about whether the dissenter doubts the "validity" of his issues - when in fact , clearly, the real problem is Phil Munger's aggression, hostility, and demands that we comply with, and accept his "education". It's too bad you can't see this clever sleight of hand by Mr. Munger.
And BTW - have you seen any posts by Gryph attacking Phil Munger on his political views or what he chooses to discuss on his own blog? Has anyone here written a hostile, challenging, condescending public letter bashing him because he's not as moderate as Gryph? Any sneak attacks out of the blue?