21
Thomas Frank is making sense
Holy freaking crap, does Thomas Frank ever get a gigantic “Heh-Indeedy” for this:
If Barack Obama or anyone else really cares to know what I think, I will simplify it all down to this. The landmark political fact of our time is the replacement of our middle-class republic by a plutocracy. If some candidate has a scheme to reverse this trend, they’ve got my vote, whether they prefer Courvoisier or beer bongs spiked with cough syrup. I don’t care whether they enjoy my books, or would rather have every scrap of paper bearing my writing loaded into a C-47 and dumped into Lake Michigan. If it will help restore the land of relative equality I was born in, I’ll fly the plane myself.
Memo to Clinton and Obama supporters: your candidates’ differences are vastly smaller than their similarities. Also: they’re politicians. Politicians are not saviors. Politicians are there to be used to achieve political goals. As long as you elect one of them that isn’t actively hostile to your interests - and let’s be honest, neither HRC nor Barry X are in the same category as Holy Joe Lieberman - then it isn’t all that important which one of them gets in. I supported Obama mostly because he was right on the Iraq war from the start and I thought it was important for that particular viewpoint to get the mainstream cred in the press that it deserves. But other than that, I honestly don’t care. Both of them have similar strengths and weaknesses. Both are vastly better than St. BBQ.
That is all.
(Also, I should’ve stuck to my guns from the beginning and become a fanatical Mike Gravel supporter. Oh wellz, that’s water under teh bridge and whatnot.)
Hoosier X said,
April 21, 2008 at 20:28
I’ll support Hillary over McCain, she’s about a hundred times better than Big John McFlipflopper. (That’s no compliment.)
But watching her scorched earth policy of the last few months, I hope it doesn’t come to that. I’m starting to think she really DID kill Vince Foster with her bare hands.
t4toby said,
April 21, 2008 at 20:29
But did Gravel have a blimp?
Sadly, No!
spencer said,
April 21, 2008 at 20:30
Of course you’re right, brad. But damn, the stench of desperation emanating from the Clinton campaign is really dispiriting.
I’ll vote for her, if it comes to that.
FuriousGeorge said,
April 21, 2008 at 20:38
I’m starting to think she really DID kill Vince Foster with her bare hands.
When “The Clintons”, Sean Hannity’s blockbuster bestseller about how Hillary and Bill are single-handedly responsible for the invasion from space of the Ant People, comes to virtual reality movie theaters around the globe in 2029, what semi-ironic boomer-era singer-songwriter song will be playing in the background during this scene? I’m going to say “I Feel The Earth Move”.
PeeJ said,
April 21, 2008 at 20:46
WTF? When did the wsj start printing sense?
Gerald Curl said,
April 21, 2008 at 20:46
I’ll vote for either Obama or Clinton simply for the fact that I’m still trying to atone for the Andre Marrou vote I cast in 1992.
steve evfuture said,
April 21, 2008 at 20:48
Hillary Clinton voted to kill hundreds of thousands of people to help her presidential campaign. She certainly knew Bush was lying. It was a calculated decision and showed a complete lack of moral courage the one time it really mattered. There can be no bigger difference than that. Her disgusting Rovian presidential campaign is annoying and enough of a reason not to vote for her, but the war vote is all that really matters. I don’t care what she does in her personal life, but that isn’t the issue. The issue is the war. It always was. I would never vote for her.
Ralph Nader said,
April 21, 2008 at 20:49
Noooooo! Don’t listen to him! Don’t compromise at all! Keep paying attention to ridiculous character issues! Don’t investigate stuff on your own! Listen to the media! Listen to me! Obama is eeeeevil! Hillary is eeeeeevil!
Noooooooooo! I’m meeeeellllting! Meeeeellllting!
Arky H8r of VurdPress said,
April 21, 2008 at 20:54
In Gavel’s case, that should be “it’s all water splashed out of the pond by the big rock.”
(Same as it ever was, same as it ever was…)
Hoosier X said,
April 21, 2008 at 20:54
Hey, it’s that really irrelevant guy who pretends to be Ralph Nader.
Hi, Nader Hater! How’s that “being a total asshole” thing working out for you? Getting all the chicks, I bet!
t4toby said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:04
How come anyone says that we should vote for whoever gets the nominee, the Naderbot gets all fired up?
And how come the Naderbot is a semi-regular commenter here who is too cowardly to own up to his obsession?
Inquiring minds want to know…
Dr. BDH said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:04
I favor Obama myself, but I sometimes wonder if what is needed to defeat St. John of the Desert is exactly the kind of character assassination campaign the Clintons are running.
Oh, and I see Glennzilla says much the same thing in this new book he just wrote.
t4toby said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:05
…er, nomination…
That guy who plays Ralph Nader said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:05
Here’s my point: Nader, a Halliburton stockholder, war profiteer, and McCain buddy, benefited from our media’s ridiculous focus on the banal and the glossy. Nader was billed as the ol’ champion of citizen/consumer rights, which he ONCE was…but any investigation below the surface revealed him to be a backstabbing enabler. The creation of “Nader” in 2000, along with the ubiquitous Clenis “issue,” were the big jump starts to the rotten media situation we have now.
It would behoove many people to realize that their support in St. Ralph was just a gear in the machine that has recently given us Obamacan’tbowlgate, Bittergate, et al. Elsewise the big picture is lost.
D.N. Nation said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:09
Some Hillbots are big into this as a reason why Obama would falter if nominated…it’ll take a mean, calculating machine to battle the incoming wingnut onslaught, etc.
Just one problem: HRC’s been taking her cues from Rovian talking points, so I’m not sure how that’s gonna work against McCain. Nor am I able to see how, after months of painting Obama as a wimpy, elitist fraud, she’ll then be able to paint McCain as a warmongering nutso. It’ll eventually boil down to the Clinton campaign blistering anyone and everyone who is un-Hillary and, um, that won’t work.
t4toby said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:15
But isn’t Nader a classic Straw-man? His influence was minuscule next to the Republican voting machine’s consolidated push to disenfranchise voters.
That is the point. For every vote that went to Nader, 3-4 were simply not allowed or tossed out.
So by dwelling on Nader, and not the outright cheating, you are playing into their hand. They want you to think Nader single-handedly threw the 2000 election, which statistically is a falsehood.
mikey said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:17
Oh christ, it’s Deja Thread.
Seems to me I’ve heard this song before.
I’m pretty sure I know everybody’s position on “will hillary”, “won’t hillary”, “won’t obama”, “will mccain”, “won’t mccain” and “I’ll sit this one out”.
We seem delighted to keep shouting our positions at each other.
It’s all beginning to seem like a vaudeville routine.
Once more. The primary season ended in March. The media doesn’t want to say so because the ‘horserace’ moves product.
Hillary doesn’t want to quit ’cause she’s got nothing to lose but her supporter’s money, and who knows? A miracle COULD happen.
Except, no. Barack Obama is the nominee.
We should just quit encouraging them…
mikey
fardels bear said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:18
So…… Just curious….. Um, does that bong hit w/ cought syrup thing work? You know, hrmmph, just from a scientific point of view, er…. Not that I would try it myself, ah….. Just, uh…..
So, does it get good then, or what?
steve evfuture said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:23
Fardels,
As I remember, from way back in my college days, a beer bong is a little different than a bong hit. How about a beer bong spiked with a shot of whiskey, followed by bong hit with cough syrup as a chaser?
t4toby said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:24
It works if you want to feel floaty for a minute, then pass out for a few hours.
We called them Robo-tokes (After Robatussin).
I’ve broken in a bong in before with Jagermeister. We took the toke, then emptied out the bong into a shot glass and drank it.
It was at that moment that I realized that the liquid smoke industry was just a bunch of BBQ obsessed stoners.
That Nader troll guy said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:25
The point is not that Nader helped Bush steal the election (he didn’t), but rather, that he was a Bushie from the start, and the lefties aaaaadored him anyway. This is a very, very, VERY dangerous precedent.
You know how we act when Matt Yglesias goes on a rampage? Like, that’s nice Matt, would have helped had you been like this in ‘03? Like, that’s nice Matt, but how can we trust that you won’t give support to the other side again just off of ridiculous impulses? This should be how we feel about the old Nadroids. It’s nice that you’ve risen to the challenge and have admitted that yeah, the Wingnut Front is a dangerous thing and should be fought tooth-n-nail…but how can we trust that you won’t go kissy-kissy to another wolf in sheepskin down the line? How can we ever trust you again if you don’t even make the slightest attempt at reconciliation?
Good for you that you’ve decided to compromise now. I hope- pray- that this is not a one-time event.
Arky H8r of VurdPress said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:26
Ah, but that’s the beauty of cribbing Rover’s notes. She already knows the tactics work against McCane. Plus, we all know Rove-style attacks don’t have to make sense, be consistent or even true. She could paint McDaddy as an wimpy elitist warmongering nutso fraud (with a black love child) if she wanted. Maybe she’ll buy up those leftover Purple Heart bandages. Anything can happen when you follow the RoveTastic Playbook and the media will OoooOooOo! like Jerry Springer’s audience and need to change its collective pants.
t4toby said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:30
So if one person ever votes for someone you don’t like, they are forever written off, D.N?
It’s this kind of condescension:
…that gets you called a troll.
How can we trust that you won’t be a self-righteous ass down the line?
D.N. Nation said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:38
What an interesting way to summize my argument. By interesting, I mean “wrong.”
Here is the correct way:
If one person ever votes for THE FREAKING ENEMY because they’re enamored with the media’s ad hoc plotline, D.N. Nation thereafter wonders if that person will do it again. Additionally, that person’s inability to see how their own deeds/words were of the same machine that’s currently spitting out garbage against Obama makes D.N. Nation wonder if that person can really understand the problem.
You can’t, because I will. Deep convictions are funny that way.
D.N. Nation said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:39
This plan appears to surreal to work.
Appears.
Governor William J. Le Petomane said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:40
T4toby - I think you incorrectly attributed that to DN Nation, rather than Nader troll.
-Guv
t4toby said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:40
I guess you win…something.
Yay!
D.N. Nation said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:44
Guv- I’m the “Nader troll.”
Toby-
This is exactly what I’m talking about.
t4toby said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:51
Yeah, you wouldn’t want people going around trying to improve their surroundings so that they can afford to be home owners in 5-6 years, because that plays into the hands of the…Gentrifiers?
Effin’ Gentrifiers. They cost Dukakis the Presidency, don’t you know. Anyone who has ever leased a broken-down fixer-upper in order to one day have a tiny bit of this earth to call home is and will never be worthy of my respect…
Better?
NutellaonToast said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:52
Steve, why the hell would you endorse McCain (either by voting him or not voting for Hillary) if that’s how you feel? He’s gonna be a lot worse on the moral courage front. He can’t even admit he was wrong.
DragonScholar said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:52
One of my speculations has been that the Republican win-at-all-costs identity-politics slash-and-burn tactics are now ingrained into our CULTURE. We take them as normal, we assume the way one “plays” the game is a sign of how well they’d do as president, which is like arguing that a person capable of running a marketing department is capable of designing the product as well.
In short, this is our “normal” from the last few years. It keeps us very abstracted from actual issues because we’re too busy “playing the game.”
Hümor Me said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:56
Nader was a Bushie?
I’ll take a hit of whatever you’ve got there..
Was too stoned to comment in the 4/20 thread, but I read something that seemed related this morning
<blockquoteRecently disclosed Pentagon documents indicate that the gas has a dissemination radius of four to eight miles, and that neither protective masks nor a positive outlook on life can prevent infection. Symptoms include uncontrollable sighing, repeated utterances of the phrase “What’s the use?” a confusion and bitterness regarding one’s place in the universe, and an increased proclivity to listen to Lou Reed records.
If one’s skin comes into contact with the agent, the physical effects are more severe. These include a sudden numbing of the very soul, a feeling that one is being crushed under the weight of the emptiness all around him, and mild eye irritation.</blockquote
actually, I prefer a good sativa to ennui weed…
Hümor Me said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:57
So wordpress is just fucking with us a little now?
t4toby said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:59
You forgot to close the blockquote, methinks.
steve evfuture said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:00
Nutella,
Voting for Clinton is saying to any future politician that they should vote for whichever bogus “war of choice” is put on the table, since it won’t matter and might even help them in the future. So there is a practical reason for my position if you think I need one. Here’s a simple solution: have the Democrats stop putting up candidates who voted to kill hundreds of thousands of people in order to help their presidential campaign. I don’t care whether Hillary Clinton or John McCain show a bigger lack of moral courage. And Hillary Clinton has never apologized for her murderous vote. So she gives double talk about why she made the vote and John McCain stands behind his vote. If that’s the criteria, McCain is showing more moral courage than Clinton anyway.
D.N. Nation said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:07
Basically, Steve would be fond of America imploding, because at least it’d show some damn umph in doing so.
Toby- We just aren’t going to see eye-to-eye, if that’s how you’re going to characterize everything I say. Peace.
D.N. Nation said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:08
Yes, that’s what we call people with Halliburton ties, Clenis obsessions, save-Terri inclinations, McCain friendships, etc.
Hümor Me said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:09
Was working in the preview…
God, can we please get this friggin election over? I like Obama and all, but it feels like we’re picking the captain of the Titanic.
t4toby said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:11
We are. Pick wisely.
OneMan said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:11
Gee, maybe I’m missing something…I’m pretty sure the first, last and only poster to bring up Nader was…you, D.N.
Don’t look now but your obsession is showing.
justme said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:13
Well, I was an Edwards fan. Of the three early possible winners, he was the one speaking to this issue. However fucked up, poorly thought out and utterly contemptible the Iraq war is, the class war that has been waged, and virtually won with little more than a whimper from the losers, over the last three decades, but particularly during this administration, is really the defining issue of our time. No less a dude than Warren Buffett said in an interview some time back something to the effect of “Of course there’s a class war going on, and we’re winning.” In the same interview he brought up how ridiculous it is that his overall tax burden is actually less than his secretary’s. Ah, the joys of a 15% capital gains rate.
I don’t see Hil doing an awful lot to reverse the trend, though she’d not be the sort of tool McSame would be. Oh, and it wasn’t her bare hands she killed Foster with. She tore out his beating heart with her teeth and ate it as it tried to pump. Everything that says otherwise is just a big coverup by alien greys and their Bilderburg robots.
Just because Obama has been fairly nice so far doesn’t mean he won’t take the gloves off in the general. I don’t think he’s a dumb guy, and he doesn’t seem to be listening to dumb people. I have a feeling that should the race require it, there’s a deep enough well of “fuck you too” available to him. Bog knows, there’s plenty of target.
Whoever gets in, just trying to repair our federal government to a pre-2000 level is going to be job one, and a rough one at that. After eight years of slash and burn, scorched earth Executive Branch policy, they will be starting from scratch at best. If they don’t fire everybody, in every agency, down to the janitors, that has been put in in the last eight years, they are a fool.
Then, after rebuilding it to resemble a functional government again, rather than the wingnut welfare office and political toolshed it has become, they can think about how to return it to its rightful owners. This all while the right screams bloody murder about everything they fucked up in the last administration is all the new guy’s fault, and are being as obstructionist as humanly possible and screaming about how ineffective the new guy is.
Anyway, sure, I’ll vote Hil over gramps, but I hope not to have to. Real change is going to have to start with Congress anyway. ‘06 was a good start. It put the brakes on some truly outrageous bullshit, but was hardly a cure-all. It’s looking good for our chances to pick up more in November, but ten Senate seats is a bit much to ask. Even if we win, and win big, this time, the fight is hardly over.
Dan said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:13
If you want to stop the plutocracy, you’ll have to do better than “BO and HRC are quite similar”. In this respect they are not. She is in the deep pockets of some mighty big businesses.
D.N. Nation said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:14
Deep convictions are funny like that. I’m also “obsessed” about the Bill of Rights. What a freak I am!
Hümor Me said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:15
Oh, no D.N. Don’t try to engage me in a “substantive discussion”, I’m only here for the fart jokes.
But, Nader’s framing of society as controlled by corporate oligarchies seems pretty accurate, despite his shitty, triangulating decision to use their money, I don’t know, lemme rub some more anusol on my eyes and get back to you.
DocAmazing said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:21
DN–
I presume you’ve got links to show that Nader is a Halliburton stockholder and that he has ties to McCain and that you are not, say, pulling these things out of your ass. You do have such evidence, right? Please show it.
Voting Democrat when shit candidates are running is not the only option, and the 2000 election was Gore’s to lose–and he did, without help. Nader and other third-party candidates are not the problem; an out-of-touch Democratic Party is a much greater problem.
But hey, get excited about trifles and make shit up. It’s kinda cute.
Stan Darsh said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:23
Bollocks. He and his part should never have let it get close enough to be stolen, but stolen it was.
FuriousGeorge said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:26
Voting Democrat when shit candidates are running is not the only option
Clearly, this is an accurate statement. Just as clearly, if you didn’t vote for Gore in 2000, you are at least partially responsible for the mess we’re in now. Nader’s “the major parties are the same” bullshit didn’t really wash then, and it damn sure doesn’t wash now.
dim-witted badger said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:27
Ralph Nader is secretly a fucking pelican.
t4toby said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:34
Oh, like we’re going to take a badger’s word for it.
I still can’t forget that weasel ticket you voted for in Ought Six.
Malfunctioning Thanksralphing Bot said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:37
Ralph Nader, John McCain, Scott Bakula, The Rock, and Vlad Tepes are the secret heads of the Bavarian Illuminati and operate the world’s biggest pedophile ring. Also, Ralph Nader smells bad, and I hate hi–bzrrt-thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph! thanksralph! thanksralph! halliburton! thanksralph!
Grand Moff Texan said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:43
The guy should blog. He’s that good.
.
dim-witted badger said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:45
It was supposed to be a ferret. In hindsight, they look pretty weasely now.
Hümor Me said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:49
Fucking Democrats.
Clinton the first was worse than the republicans!
Empire Lite, NAFTA, no reluctance to bomb the shit out of various countries and perpetuate exceptionalism, with ribs and a brew!
Better to be slowly boiled by the democrats, or thrown right in by the republicans…hmmm..
If only Gore could have more convincingly frenched his wife, or perhaps, as some advisers suggested, pretended to guard Bush in the debate, waving his arms like Robert Parish on Lambier, instead of just looming over him. We’ll never know.
OneMan said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:49
Deep convictions are funny like that. I’m also “obsessed” about the Bill of Rights.
Please to show me the post in this thread that proposed a vote for Nader and/or against the Bill of Rights. Oh wait, you can’t.
Thanks for the warning against Nader but hey you forgot to warn me not to vote for the insect overlords, nor the Borg, nor the Crypto-fascists. I’m nothing if not a completist so please provide a canonical list of those I shouldn’t vot for.
kthxbye.
OneMan said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:51
er, make that “shouldn’t vote for.”
Joe Max said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:51
No, he won. It was stolen from him, with the theft enabled by Nader, and by the goat-blowing whores of the mainstream media.
Sorry, Doc, but there is nothing you can say that will convince me of Nader’s central thesis in 2000: that there would be no difference whatsoever between a Gore presidency and a Bush presidency. I think we can look back with 20/20 hindsight and know with certainty that was a false premise. Hindsight’s a bitch, ain’t it?
But what do I know? I’m only a tool of the running dog capitalist-imperialist lackeys!
D.N. Nation said,
April 21, 2008 at 22:54
Best thing I’ve got on a second’s notice w/r/t Nader and Halliburton is something from (by all people) Jake Tapper, so I’ll keep fishing for something not written by a dumbshit. Suffice it to say, I read enough to be convinced back in ‘00. As for Nader/McCain, that’s easy (http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2008/02/29/mccain_nader/):
Now.
Did you read a single thing I said, man? My point was not that Nader helped Gore lose the election (he didn’t) or that Democrats weren’t out of touch with progressives (they were), but that too many of my current allies were too willing to see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil on the real Nader, and were to willing to throw their hat into the media’s sickening ad hoc storylines that are still up and running now. I’m glad you’re back with me here in Reasonville, but I’m worried when you act like you didn’t learn a damn thing this past decade. I mean, congrats and all for opposing the right-wing noise machine when it’s got the backing of President 21%, but what will you do when the wingnuts are playing moderate and are propping up a faux-activist sock puppet?
Also, Gore *was* the better choice in 2000. Surely you must see that. Surely you haven’t enjoyed, well…we’ve been through this before.
I’m not going to repeat my argument again. It’s easy enough to understand.
SeemED. SeemED. SeemED. Keep repeating it.
Anne Laurie said,
April 21, 2008 at 23:00
One of my speculations has been that the Republican win-at-all-costs identity-politics slash-and-burn tactics are now ingrained into our CULTURE. We take them as normal, we assume the way one “plays” the game is a sign of how well they’d do as president, which is like arguing that a person capable of running a marketing department is capable of designing the product as well.
DragonScholar, it’s been immensely convenient for Our Media Village — the “pundits” and the people who pay those pundits — to convince as many Americans as possible that ‘Politics is just another sport’. One of those minor divertissements, like college basketball or horseracing, that occupies a tiny minority all the time but is only serious enough to require attention from normal people during the annual playoffs, or when there’s a spectacular accident/scandal. Framing all political activity as just another distraction from “real life” has let the Media Powers (the billpayers, who are as naturally conservative as any other plutocrats with high-performing investments to protect) pretend that any attempt to discuss the ever-rising inequalities of modern American life is just ‘partisans’ (fans) ‘talking trash’ about the opposing team. And any attempt to tie our elected representatives’ speeches to their votes, much less their personal behavior, is just the kind of petty obsessiveness about an unimportant HOBBY that only laughable losers find exciting. Because if Politics Is Sport, then all the Media Powers need to cover is the player lotteries, the draft, the cheerleading squads, and (most important) the media buys… not all that old-fashioned, high-cost, low-return JOURNALISM stuff that used to be chic back when the baby-boomers were young and fiesty.
Rugged in Montana said,
April 21, 2008 at 23:02
Well, at least CNN (the Communist News Network) has hired on Tony Snow, so at least we’ll start to get a *little* truth from those LIE-bruls!!
DocAmazing said,
April 21, 2008 at 23:02
JoeMax–
Your stupid’s showing. The election was stolen, but that was the Supreme Court– Nader had no role in that. The difference between the parties–yeah, Corporate Party or Clumsy Corporate Party. I’m so happy we have such a wide variety of choices.
DN–
I vote in California. I voted Nader. State went Gore, then Kerry. My vote did not affect that; my registering Democrats might have. And anyway, who cares about “the real Nader”? He had no chance of winning; one might as well have voted Harold Stassen. Point was, the Dems need to earn votes, not just be the slightly-less-destructive party. They’re starting to learn that now, probably because of losing two elections they should have won.
Djur said,
April 21, 2008 at 23:16
So am I supposed to be outraged by Nader accepting the help he could get, or by the Democrats working to shut lefty third parties from getting ballot access? Personally, I know which one is more of a threat to your beloved American democracy.
And it’s still “seems”. Or did you hit your head and somehow come to the conclusion that the Democrats are a left-wing party, or that their candidates are in any way friendly to the left? The Democrats voted for the Patriot Act. They voted to authorize the Iraq war. They continue to vote to fund the Iraq war. They refuse to investigate or prosecute the administration’s war crimes because they are happily complicit in those crimes. I don’t see where Nader was wrong.
Nader’s stance on the Schiavo case was rooted in the disability rights movement, where there was a significant current which sided with the parents and another which was uncomfortably silent. I disagreed fervently with him at the time, and even more with some DR activists’ decision to explicitly collude with deranged pro-lifers. It’s dishonest to pretend that Nader was showing secret wingnuttitude in that instance.
Hümor Me said,
April 21, 2008 at 23:21
I think a certain mustelidae has some explaining to do..
Michael Hayden on torture subcontractors..
PeeJ said,
April 21, 2008 at 23:29
I can’t decide whether to be disgusted or amused.
Seriously, why the fuck would anyone with >= two active neurons maintain the ridiculous Nader apologia? If you were too fecking stoopid to recognize that Nader 2000’s “Gore == Bush” was, if not at least in hindsight a supremely inane thing to believe, I just can’t take anything you say seriously. To pretend now that der Ralph wasn’t willingly accepting the help and support of the republican machine makes everything you might say as credible as the yelping from the kennel down the street.
Now as for all this talk about “change,” I was hoping that most indigenous S,N!ites would have the intellectual honesty to ask the obvious question, “what the fuck could possibly change in DC?” How the hell would that actually, you know, happen?
“Blah blah change blah” “blah REAL change blah blah”
What does “change?” Kinda like “victory”, lots of people keep talking about it and holding it up as their standard but no one is saying what they mean by it. At least Obama has given us some clues so let’s talk about that. I mean before we all go at each other’s jugulars, TALK ABOUT WHAT IT MEANS TO YOU
You may now commence.
Homosexuals are aids monkeys said,
April 21, 2008 at 23:30
The truth is, John McCain is going to win this Presidential election by a landslide. The Democrats cannot do good in Presidential elections ever since their far-left turn during the George McGovern era. America is a right of centre nation and will not elect a Democrat to the Presidency because they are too far-left and have been since the 1970s. While Democrats may from time to time win in Congressional elections do to the fact that they (unfortunately) have more to do with personality than the actual issues, they will never win the Presidency again because the Democratic party is too far-left for America. And unlike the Congressional elections, Presidential elections have more to do with the actual issues than with personality which is why John McCain will win by a landslide just like Bush did in 2004.
DAS said,
April 21, 2008 at 23:38
Point was, the Dems need to earn votes, not just be the slightly-less-destructive party. - DocAmazing
Think of this from an evolutionary point of view, though: if the slightly-more destructive party keeps winning elections, then the selection pressure is for ever more destructive party platforms. Look, for better or for worse, a real DFH (or even Nader) is never gonna get elected. And unless voters reward politicians and parties with incrimentally less-destructive ideologies and platforms, the rewarding of politicians and parties with more-destructive ideologies and platforms will lead to the evolution of ever worse ideas.
No matter how much the right is trying to confuse everyone so they can sell their own snake oil, the result of an evolutionary process is not necessarily something that could even be seen as intelligently designed. Those organisms/ideas/parties that are incrimentally more fit are those which survive. And if fitness is dependent on being stupid or bat-guano crazy (as it is in our modern political [fitness] landscape), then it is the stupid and insane that survive and propagate their views in our political discourse.
At some level Dems. need to be rewarded for being incrimentally better if we want them to evolve. All of this Eric Cartman (is he, of all characters, our hero as DFHs?) “screw you guys” at some level is counter-productive toward the goal to which we need to evolve.
t4toby said,
April 21, 2008 at 23:41
I think change, in a progressive sense, would be to stop convening circular firing squads every time us Leftys disagree on something.
So you’ve said it before, PeeJ, Nothing I say is of any value to you because of a choice I made 8 years ago when I was smack dab in the middle of my idealistic phase. Fine. But that seems to work against us working together to accomplish any real change.
I believe that people are allowed to grow wiser, and change their minds. I also believe that people have a right to be wrong sometimes, and that does not make me a better person than they.
What you advocate is the wost from of intellectual elitism. i.e. Someone makes a decision that is proven wrong, so their opinion is therefore null and void forever. What is it like for your shit to smell like roses? ‘Cause mine smells like shit and I’m okay with that..
You sound more like an absolutist, or maybe a fundamentalist. Whatever kind of -ist you are, it’s not helping. This is the same weakness they have exploited over and over again to discredit the progressive agenda.
They march in lockstep while we stand by the side of the road, yelling from our soap boxes about how right we were.
Homosexuals are aids monkeys said,
April 21, 2008 at 23:45
You are right DAS my liberal friend. A leftwinger will never be elected POTUS and the sooner you all realize that the sooner you all might wake up and support policies that will actually help America such as the GOP Platform proposes.
Hümor Me said,
April 21, 2008 at 23:45
God, this thread is starting to smell like Saul’s ass. The rotting corpse of Nader being dragged out again and kicked around.
I’m going over to Scott’s to read about something that matters to me.
justme said,
April 21, 2008 at 23:48
Hey! Who knew? 50.73% is officially a “landslide”.
Of course, if you take Ken Blackwell’s dirty tricks out of the equation…
David in NYC said,
April 21, 2008 at 23:50
@t4toby 21:15 –
But isn’t Nader a classic Straw-man? His influence was minuscule next to the Republican voting machine’s consolidated push to disenfranchise voters.
That is the point. For every vote that went to Nader, 3-4 were simply not allowed or tossed out. (emphasis added)
Really? Nader received 2,883,105 votes in 2000. Are you seriously suggesting that nearly 12 MILLION votes were not allowed or tossed out? Really? I bow to no-one in my estimation of the dirty tricks the Rethugs and their enablers are capable of dreaming up and carrying out, but c’mon now — 12 MILLION?
Look, Al Gore won the 2000 election, fair and square (after all, he did get the most votes). The not-so-musical Supremes, using twisted logic that not even the Red Queen could follow, decided that Chimpy won Florida — or, more accurately, ruled that the recount should not continue because it might make people think that Chimpy didn’t win. (Seriously, that is the legal “reasoning” behind the decision — check it out; the full cite is Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000).)
And, yes, Gore ran a lousy campaign, didn’t carry his home state, etc., etc. — ALL TRUE.
BUT (and a mighty “but” it is) — Nader votes in both Florida and New Hampshire were greater than the difference between Bush and Gore. I am pretty sure that nobody here is prepared to argue that Nader voters would have preferred Chimpy if they had to pick between only two candidates, so there is at least a CHANCE that Nader might have been the difference, no?
All statistical analyses that I have read (yes, I am a statistics dweeb) indicate that the likelihood of Gore winning a 2-candidate election against Bush, absent Nader, is rather large. In fact, the last one I read, about 2 months ago, put that likelihood at 99.43% (or about 174 chances out of 175).
To say that Nader had NO effect on this result is akin to saying that your house burned down because nobody called 911, the fire department didn’t arrive in time, there was insufficient water pressure for hoses, and you lived in a house made entirely out of flammable materials WHEN IT WAS NADER WHO SET THE FIRE IN THE FIRST PLACE! Yes, all those other things, much like Gore’s bad campaign, had an effect, but none of them would have mattered if the fire hadn’t been started in the first place, and Nader is the one responsible for that.
On his good days in this century, Ralph Nader is a useful idiot for the Rethugs. On his bad days… well, ask anyone who lives in Iraq if there is no difference AT ALL between Gore and Chimpy.
Sagra said,
April 21, 2008 at 23:50
When I hear that, I hear them saying that they wouldn’t help Obama get elected.
Republicans protect their main candidate and never require him to play dirty himself. Nobody ever pointed to Bush as the author of the swift boat liars, and Bush got to appear like he was above it all, mildly admonishing all 527’s.
Democrats have to pick up this strategy in the general election. No matter who the nominee is, we need every dirty fighter in the party to wade in and start clawing out right-wing-noise-machine eyeballs. If we treat this like another spectator sport, we’ll have another 2000 and 2004, with everyone sitting around tsking that our candidate isn’t effective in single-handedly fighting off the entire Right, we’ll lose and our country will be toast for another decade.
dim-witted badger said,
April 21, 2008 at 23:52
Shalo*ppphhhtttttt*m gentlemen.
I am badger neither blue nor green. You can’t pin that rap on me, copper.
I’m tellin’ ya. It’s the fucking pelicans. It’s always the pelicans. You get in a burrow with one, just once, and tell me different.
PeeJ said,
April 21, 2008 at 23:53
>em> PeeJ, Nothing I say is of any value to you because of a choice I made 8 years ago when I was smack dab in the middle of my idealistic phase.
No, no, no. By which I mean no. IF, knowing what you know now, and with the wisdom you’ve acquired since, IF you keep making the SAME mistake (yes, I say ‘mistake’ - the term is not a knife, it’s an assessment) or continue to argue that it wasn’t such a mistake THEN everything else you say now is suspect. It’s really simple: Did you learn from your mistake?
If you’re going to argue that it was not, in fact a mistake, please consider the actual outcome of the last seven+ years (which is even worse than we expected). Your actions have consequences. Hence your actions enabled, at least in part, the total cluster fuck fiasco disaster of Bush II. THAT’s what I call a mistake.
ortho_bob said,
April 21, 2008 at 23:53
Water under the bridge? Not necessarily, squire. Gravel’s now left the Dems and is running for the Libertarian presidential nomination so you can still become a Gravelhead or whatever his supporters are called.
Homosexuals are aids monkeys said,
April 21, 2008 at 23:56
Mike Gravel is a far-left loon who will never make it in American politics because America is a right of centre nation. Mike Gravel is a man who is to the left of Nancy Pelosi. If any of you think that anti-American gasbag stood a chance to win the primary than your’re even dumber than you appear which is saying alot.
FuriousGeorge said,
April 21, 2008 at 23:58
In America we spell it “center”, you ignorant foreigner.
Homosexuals are aids monkeys said,
April 22, 2008 at 0:01
I am a Conservative Canadian who appreciates that America is Western Civilization’s last great hope.
OB-GYN Kenobi said,
April 22, 2008 at 0:09
Once again, I don’t care who or WHAT the Democrats nominate, even if they nominate a bloated, rotting opossum corpse lying in the road.
Whoever they nominate will receive my vote in November.
PeeJ said,
April 22, 2008 at 0:12
Er, umm, in most of America, it’s spelled that way. Not in all of America.
Homosexuals are aids monkeys said,
April 22, 2008 at 0:12
The far-left Democratic party CANNOT WIN a Presidential election in America. Bill Clinton was the first two term Democratic President since Harry Truman and that was only because he pretended to be a moderate.
FuriousGeorge said,
April 22, 2008 at 0:13
If there’s one thing I hate more than a conservative, it’s a Canadian. How aboot you leave the governance of our country to us and go have some poutine, eh? Or better yet, just go outside and let a bus run you over. Yeah, the second one.
Simba B said,
April 22, 2008 at 0:13
Adam, is that you?
OB-GYN Kenobi said,
April 22, 2008 at 0:17
Aids Monkey: Doesn’t matter to me. The Democratic candidate will receive my vote in November, no matter who it is. And that’s coming from a gun-owning disabled veteran who grew up in and resides in the Bible Belt.
I’m done with the GOP. They had me for twenty-some years of my voting life, but that relationship’s over. I’ve moved on. And the GOP should do the same.
Olexicon said,
April 22, 2008 at 0:20
CANADIAN PRIME MINISTER DENOUCCES TROLLS HATE SPEECH
Olexicon said,
April 22, 2008 at 0:22
‘The Democrats cannot do good in Presidential elections ever since their far-left turn during the George McGovern era”
you know nothing of our history
-America
Homosexuals are aids monkeys said,
April 22, 2008 at 0:23
There is no way the far-left will carry a single state in the South or the Great Plains or the Mountian West. The Dem candidate will carry MOST of the Northeast corridor except for New Hampshire, Illinois in the Midwest, and the West coast. THATS IT. The South, most of the Midwest, the entire Great Plains and the entire Mountain West will go Republican.
Olexicon said,
April 22, 2008 at 0:24
by “far left” he of couse means “Not to the right of mussolini like republicans”
t4toby said,
April 22, 2008 at 0:26
Dave in NYC -
Here is my reasoning about the disenfranchised voters. My off-the-cuff stat was a bit hyperbolic, I admit.
PeeJ- I would not change my 2000 vote because it was what it was when it was. Don’t forget, I live in Washington State. I could’ve voted for Chimpy and still would not have influenced anything. The past is the past. If I lived in Florida, maybe I’d feel differently.
You and I seem to usually be on the same page, so I can’t understand you saying if I don’t kow-tow to the great wisdom of the Gore voters, my oppinion is useless…
robert green said,
April 22, 2008 at 0:27
i like the sound of my own voice.
i like it when other people acknowledge my correctitude.
brad, i’ve said it on this site a hundred times before, so thanks for reiterating: people who don’t get what a republican, any republican, will do to this country in a time of–great environmental crises, financial crises, food crises, energy crises, plus 3 supremes coming up for death/retirement and on and on–that person is a tool, a blackguard, a loser, a fuckwit. i don’t like hilary. at all. not a bit. but i won’t just vote for her–i will fundraise, i will cajole and hector, i will canvass door to door–anything to get a non-republican into office. and anyone else smart enough to know the problems we face who WON’T do the above–go fuck yourself. hard.
OB-GYN Kenobi said,
April 22, 2008 at 0:29
Aids monkey: The inane predictions of raving lunatics will not cause me to change my vote.
The GOP will not receive my vote. And many people like me — who used to trust the GOP — are coming to the same conclusion. Your party would be better served by trying to actually *win* the votes of people like myself, rather than by trying to *berate* us for not falling in step with it.
My vote. You can’t have it.
Troll-biting monkey with aids said,
April 22, 2008 at 0:29
There is no way the far-left will carry a single state blah rant rave
Sure. And tonight we’re going to have ice-cream. And the brain fairy will leave a dime under your pillow for the cerebrum you lost.
NobodySpecial said,
April 22, 2008 at 0:30
Hey, I can’t talk about Nader, I wrote in McCain on my ballot.
Of course, I can still point and laugh at Nader voters who still defend that vote.
Rugged in Montana said,
April 22, 2008 at 0:35
Aids Money is SO right!! Tony Snow, now of CNN (’cause they don’t have nearly enough Right-wingers for “balance”) says that the Democrats are extreme Leftists (you know you love Harpo Marx, don’t even try to deny it!) and that people who enjoyed “Horsefeathers” couldn’t possibly be elected in the heartland of the USA of America. Our Patriot President, George Willard Bush, jet pilot hero of the Battle of Iraq, will win this election against Hitlery and Osama, as only he can protect us from the vampirical bloodlust of pelicans.
Joe Max said,
April 22, 2008 at 0:39
You mean like the stupid of being so convinced I was a stereotypical flyover refugee, libertarian yuppie, carpetbagging my way to divest San Francisco of rent control and environmental protections?
Now, that kind of stupid I understand. It shows itself very prominently by the jerking of the knees, and the engaging of the mouth before putting the brain in gear. You’re a doctor, you should recognize the symptoms.
en-a-ble v. To make possible or easier.
en-a-bler n.
What, you think I’m happy about it? I’m not. But I live in reality-land, where we now have an endless war and a near-endless conservatard majority on the Supreme Court.
OB-GYN Kenobi said,
April 22, 2008 at 0:40
Rugged, is Tony Snow still dragging that poop-bag around?
Rugged in Montana said,
April 22, 2008 at 0:44
Rugged, is Tony Snow still dragging that poop-bag around?
I’m sure his wife is a very nice lady, hardly worthy of being called a “poop bag”. And yes, as far as I know, he’s still married (one of the few of us on the Right who can make that claim).
PeeJ said,
April 22, 2008 at 0:44
I can’t understand you saying if I don’t kow-tow to the great wisdom of the Gore voters, my oppinion is useless…
Perhaps you don’t understand it because that’s not what I said / what I am saying. I am remined of the old saw: the biggest barrier to communication is the assumption that it’s occurring. And I know it doesn’t help to say the same thing in the same way. So I will say it one more time in yet another somewhat different way.
I sed, sed I, that if you (that’s a generic ‘you’ there) continue to argue that voting for Nader wasn’t a mistake, that Nader was somehow “right” or “correct” in his wildly inaccurate assessments of the Bush:Gore dichotomy, that shows you haven’t learned from your mistake. If a body keeps touting their mistake or arguing that it wasn’t a mistake at all, no not really, instead of saying “oops - I made a mistake, what a naif I was!” THEN your current views/opinion are suspect.
Maybe it wasn’t you, maybe it was someone else, maybe you’re just not communicating well either. I got the impression that you were continuing to defend Nader, his position and claims. That WOULD be reason for me to pay you no mind at all from here on out.
Rugged in Montana said,
April 22, 2008 at 0:58
You Leftists can never win another election, not while the Right is still breathing:
“I believe demolishing Hussein’s military power and liberating Iraq would be a cakewalk.”
- Kenneth Adelman, member of the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board, 2/13/02
“Support for Saddam, including within his military organization, will collapse after the first whiff of gunpowder.”
- Richard Perle, Chairman of the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board, 7/11/02
“Desert Storm II would be in a walk in the park… The case for ‘regime change’ boils down to the huge benefits and modest costs of liberating Iraq.”
- Kenneth Adelman, member of the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board, 8/29/02
“Having defeated and then occupied Iraq, democratizing the country should not be too tall an order for the world’s sole superpower.”
- William Kristol, Weekly Standard editor, and Lawrence F. Kaplan, New Republic senior editor, 2/24/03
“I would be surprised if we need anything like the 200,000 figure that is sometimes discussed in the press. A much smaller force, principally special operations forces, but backed up by some regular units, should be sufficient.”
- Richard Perle, Chairman of the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board, 7/11/02
“I don’t believe that anything like a long-term commitment of 150,000 Americans would be necessary.”
- Richard Perle, speaking at a conference on “Post-Saddam Iraq” sponsored by the American Enterprise Institute, 10/3/02
“I would say that what’s been mobilized to this point — something on the order of several hundred thousand soldiers are probably, you know, a figure that would be required.”
- Gen. Eric Shinseki, testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, 2/25/03
“The idea that it would take several hundred thousand U.S. forces, I think, is far from the mark.”
- Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, 2/27/03
“I am reasonably certain that they will greet us as liberators, and that will help us keep [troop] requirements down. … We can say with reasonable confidence that the notion of hundreds of thousands of American troops is way off the mark…wildly off the mark.”
- Paul Wolfowitz, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense, testifying before the House Budget Committee, 2/27/03
“It’s hard to conceive that it would take more forces to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq than it would take to conduct the war itself and to secure the surrender of Saddam’s security forces and his army. Hard to image.”
- Paul Wolfowitz, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense, testifying before the House Budget Committee, 2/27/03
“If our commanders on the ground say we need more troops, I will send them. But our commanders tell me they have the number of troops they need to do their job. Sending more Americans would undermine our strategy of encouraging Iraqis to take the lead in this fight. And sending more Americans would suggest that we intend to stay forever, when we are, in fact, working for the day when Iraq can defend itself and we can leave.”
- President George W. Bush, 6/28/05
“The debate over troop levels will rage for years; it is…beside the point.”
- Rich Lowry, conservative syndicated columnist, 4/19/06
“Oh, no, we’re not going to have any casualties.”
- President George W. Bush, response attributed to him by the Reverend Pat Robertson, when Robertson warned the president to prepare the nation for “heavy casualties” in the event of an Iraq war, 3/2003
“Why should we hear about body bags and deaths? Oh, I mean, it’s not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?”
- Barbara Bush, former First Lady (and the current president’s mother), on Good Morning America, 3/18/03
“I think the level of casualties is secondary… [A]ll the great scholars who have studied American character have come to the conclusion that we are a warlike people and that we love war… What we hate is not casualties but losing.”
- Michael Ledeen, American Enterprise Institute, 3/25/03
“Iraq is a very wealthy country. Enormous oil reserves. They can finance, largely finance the reconstruction of their own country. And I have no doubt that they will.”
- Richard Perle, Chairman of the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board, 7/11/02
“The likely economic effects [of the war in Iraq] would be relatively small… Under every plausible scenario, the negative effect will be quite small relative to the economic benefits.”
- Lawrence Lindsey, White House Economic Advisor, 9/16/02
“It is unimaginable that the United States would have to contribute hundreds of billions of dollars and highly unlikely that we would have to contribute even tens of billions of dollars.”
- Kenneth M. Pollack, former Director for Persian Gulf Affairs, U.S. National Security Council, 9/02
“The costs of any intervention would be very small.”
- Glenn Hubbard, White House Economic Advisor, 10/4/02
“When it comes to reconstruction, before we turn to the American taxpayer, we will turn first to the resources of the Iraqi government and the international community.”
- Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, 3/27/03
“There is a lot of money to pay for this that doesn’t have to be U.S. taxpayer money, and it starts with the assets of the Iraqi people. We are talking about a country that can really finance its own reconstruction and relatively soon.”
- Paul Wolfowitz, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense, testifying before the Defense Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, 3/27/03
“The United States is committed to helping Iraq recover from the conflict, but Iraq will not require sustained aid.”
- Mitchell Daniels, Director, White House Office of Management and Budget, 4/21/03
“Iraq has tremendous resources that belong to the Iraqi people. And so there are a variety of means that Iraq has to be able to shoulder much of the burden for ther own reconstruction.”
- Ari Fleischer, White House Press Secretary, 2/18/03
“Now, it isn’t gong to be over in 24 hours, but it isn’t going to be months either.”
- Richard Perle, Chairman of the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board, 7/11/02
“The idea that it’s going to be a long, long, long battle of some kind I think is belied by the fact of what happened in 1990. Five days or five weeks or five months, but it certainly isn’t going to last any longer than that.”
- Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, 11/15/02
“I will bet you the best dinner in the gaslight district of San Diego that military action will not last more than a week. Are you willing to take that wager?”
- Bill O’Reilly, 1/29/03
“It is unknowable how long that conflict will last. It could be six days, six weeks. I doubt six months.”
- Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, 2/7/03
“It won’t take weeks… Our military machine will crush Iraq in a matter of days and there’s no question that it will.”
- Bill O’Reilly, 2/10/03
“There is zero question that this military campaign…will be reasonably short. … Like World War II for about five days.”
- General Barry R. McCaffrey, national security and terrorism analyst for NBC News, 2/18/03
“The Iraq fight itself is probably going to go very, very fast. The shooting should be over within just a very few days from when it starts.”
- David Frum, former Bush White House speechwriter, 2/24/03
“I think it will go relatively quickly…weeks rather than months.”
- Vice President Dick Cheney, 3/16/03
D.N. Nation said,
April 22, 2008 at 1:26
Right. I guess his impeachment bleating over the Clenis back in the late 90s, too?
Stop carrying this tool’s water. He no longer deserves it.
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
April 22, 2008 at 1:29
mikey said,
April 21, 2008 at 21:17
Oh christ, it’s Deja Thread.
Seems to me I’ve heard this song before.
I’m pretty sure I know everybody’s position on “will hillary”, “won’t hillary”, “won’t obama”, “will mccain”, “won’t mccain” and “I’ll sit this one out”.
We seem delighted to keep shouting our positions at each other.
It’s all beginning to seem like a vaudeville routine.
Once more. The primary season ended in March. The media doesn’t want to say so because the ‘horserace’ moves product.
Hillary doesn’t want to quit ’cause she’s got nothing to lose but her supporter’s money, and who knows? A miracle COULD happen.
Except, no. Barack Obama is the nominee.
We should just quit encouraging them…
mikey
This thread came to a proper and just conclusion at 21:17.
Thank you, mikey.
D.N. Nation said,
April 22, 2008 at 1:29
WAS too. Eh, you know what I mean.
Hey, let’s check out the Nader blog: http://www.votenader.org/index.html
- Democrats bad
- FOX news poll good
- Krugman eeeeeeeeevil
- “Corporate liberal media.” BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Fucking moron isn’t even trying these days.
This is me being surprised.
The Truth said,
April 22, 2008 at 1:38
This is all whistling in the dark. Leftists won’t say it out loud, but they must be thinking - Good Lord, if we can’t beat the Republicans under these circumstances, when will we?
Hillary Clinton probably can’t win the nomination, and if she does, all her mendacity and nasty ambition will galvanize voters against her.
Barack Obama belongs to an openly anti-American church and is married to an openly anti-American wife.
I look forward to reading the astonished and enraged posts by leftists everywhere when McCain is elected President.
D.N. Nation said,
April 22, 2008 at 1:42
Ugh. Nadroids and wingnut clowns.
Being right means having to put up with a lot. I don’t wish it on anyone (though certainly hope it for everyone).
OneMan said,
April 22, 2008 at 1:52
Being
rightself-righteous means having to put up with a lot.Fixed.
Homosexuals are aids monkeys said,
April 22, 2008 at 1:58
Barack Obama is anti-American slime and Hillary Clinton is a self-serving opportunist with socialist ambitions. Neither one of whom will be good for America or Western Civilization. Take heed from this Canadian. Socialism does not work. My country is in ruins and is only begining to be fixed thanks to the Conservative leadership of our great Prime Minister Stephen Harper. But unfortunately, there are not enough Conservatives in the Canadian Parliament to make some much needed socially Conservative and free market reforms even though Stephen Harper wishes to do so. Do not let your country become like mine, Western Civilization depends upon America.
Closeted homosexual who fucks monkeys said,
April 22, 2008 at 2:01
Bonzo, darling — pass the lube.
D.N. Nation said,
April 22, 2008 at 2:02
Again, convictions run deep. Evil is worth fighting.
Closeted homosexual who fucks monkeys said,
April 22, 2008 at 2:03
Oh, Jesus, Bonzo — every single fucking time you come back from Stephen Harper’s house you have crabs! Pass the Kwell.
Closeted homosexual who fucks monkeys said,
April 22, 2008 at 2:05
Oh, no, Bonzo — not the clap, too?!?!?
Thank God for socialized medicine.
Teh Real Truth said,
April 22, 2008 at 2:06
This is all whistling in the dark. The anti-liberty fascists won’t say it out loud, but they must be thinking - Good Lord, if we can’t beat Ron Paul under these circumstances, when will we?
I look forward to reading the astonished and enraged posts by dirty socialist statists everywhere when Ron Paul is elected President.
Homosexuals are aids monkeys said,
April 22, 2008 at 2:07
The fact is, I am a heterosexual Canadian who enjoys heterosexual American movies like Heartbreak Ridge and Top Gun.
PeeJ said,
April 22, 2008 at 2:11
Western Civilization: Depends for America.
Western Civilization deep-ends on America.
What do you think of western civilization Mr. Ghandi? : “I think that would be a good idea!”
and so on and so forth
pedestrian said,
April 22, 2008 at 2:11
Hmm…. Stephen Harper reference + socialized medicine + closeted monkey fucker + chimp named after Ronald Reagan’s best friend = __________________________
I’m going with Mark Steyn.
steve evfuture said,
April 22, 2008 at 2:12
Is that a joke or do you really think that Top Gun is a heterosexual movie? Watch that locker room scene again, dude.
Patkin said,
April 22, 2008 at 2:22
locker room scene?
Everyone knows that movie is about Tom Cruise and Val Kilmer trying to fuck each other.
Tim (The Other One) said,
April 22, 2008 at 2:32
The fact is, the jets are cool but the gayometer is pinned.
Snowwy said,
April 22, 2008 at 2:37
D.N. Nation,
I’ll ask the same question that gets asked of many wingnut trolls here, because although I do not think of you as a troll you are frequently (dare I say constantly) guilty of the same “sins” as they.
What is your purpose for commenting here about Nader? Is it to persuade others to your point of view? Is it to blow off steam at whatever convenient target presents itself? If the former, understand that you are encouraging no one who did not already share your views to reconsider.
In point of fact, you’ve already significantly hurt your standing with people who do. Like me. I saw through Nader’s BS back then, but you don’t see me haranguing those who voted for him, easy as that would be. Why? Because being right isn’t the point. Convincing people to stand with the coalition is.
I was having a conversation just the other day about the inanity of modern leftist protestors. They’re blowing off steam, taking the excuse to act like assholes. What they are not is effective. And political protest without an eye toward the goal of the protest is pointless.
Much like your ranting here against past Nader voters. Do you understand?
Twisted_Colour said,
April 22, 2008 at 2:39
Memo to Clinton and Obama supporters: your candidates’ differences are vastly smaller than their similarities.
I’m too lazy to read comments (115 at the mo’) but I’m betting there’s a whole lot of obamaniacs who are pissed off because you said he has a small dick.
Rugged in Montana said,
April 22, 2008 at 2:54
What the……..I’m a star on the Great Orange Satan?
the_millionaire_lebowski said,
April 22, 2008 at 2:59
Your candidate sucks.
oldbohunk said,
April 22, 2008 at 3:01
differences are vastly smaller than their similarities. Righto Frank. Both are too conservative for me but they’re what we’re stuck with. Nader types should run for office at the local level and build from that point.
Jennifer said,
April 22, 2008 at 3:02
Memo to Clinton and Obama supporters: your candidates’ differences are vastly smaller than their similarities.
I’m too lazy to read comments (115 at the mo’) but I’m betting there’s a whole lot of obamaniacs who are pissed off because you said he has a small dick.
The fuck you say.
The fact is, the reason Obama doesn’t wear a flag pin is because he’s got the American flag tattooed on his big black cock.
What could possibly be more patriotic than that? Imagine the self-sacrifice involved with having the American flag tattooed onto your cock. No man who does not truly love America would subject himself to such an ordeal.
oldbohunk said,
April 22, 2008 at 3:14
Jennifer said No man who does not truly love America would subject himself to such an ordeal.
Absolutely right on. Let’s ask the right wing whackos to do a little self-sacrificing and find out how far they’re willing to go in the name of patriotism.
D.N. Nation said,
April 22, 2008 at 3:17
Snowwy- All I ask is
1) “I’m sorry.”
2) “I promise I won’t be enticed again.”
Two things. Not hard. Haven’t gotten either.
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
April 22, 2008 at 3:20
All we are saying, is give peace a chance.
MarktheSpark said,
April 22, 2008 at 3:29
Yes, Ralph Nader not only deliberately threw the ‘00 election to Bush (nothing to do w/ the Supreme Court! Look over here! There’s a bright shiny object).
He’s single-handedly responsible for the Demo. “opposition” approving Bush’s War de Jour (Iran coming soon!), The Patriot Act, Bankruptcy Bill, refusal to fully investigate the DoJ scandals, 4th Amendment banned wiretapping, Katrina non-response, etc. How? Why? Well, the Demos were so upset that anyone would dare oppose them from the “Left” when they have all the respect & love for the Left that SHIllary does that they charged further right just to spite those nasty DFH’s (dirty fuckin’ hippies) who believe in outmoded ideas like Habeus Corpus, the Nuremberg Principles, busting up monopolies, etc.
Gore showed his true Progressivism by choosing a Veep like Holy Likud Joe LIEberman, who promised to hunt down Marilyn Manson for causing the Columbine massacre and never met a war he didn’t like (oops! unless, like Vietnam, he was young enough to serve in it, & it wasn’t directed at those evil hook-nosed Ay-rab Semites). While Nader’s an irrelevant distraction now, (& truth to tell, was in 2000 as well, we just gotta get in our symbolic 10 minutes of Hate against Goldm– Nader. And since we voted LIEberman to be VP, we’re always & indelibly morally superior to you grungy DFH’s!
Homosexuals are aids monkeys said,
April 22, 2008 at 3:31
Why is it that you leftists hate President Bush? Is it because you hate Western Civilization which he is standing up for?
Is it because you want to live under sharia law?
Or is it because you just don’t have a fucking clue as to who the enemy is?
I’ve had this same conversation with many of my ignorant countrymen and they have yet to give me a satisfactory answer as to their hatred.
If it wasn’t for the likes of President Bush and a few other brave Western leaders than our Civilization would be finished.
My country already foolishly lets in mohammedian immigrants while they persecute patriots like Mark Steyn who dare tell the truth about Islam and the state of our Western Culture.
The Canadian Commision on “Human Rights” are a bunch of traitors, especially that Quiesling Warman. I hope my country brings back capital punishment if only to hang those fifth columnists.
Jim said,
April 22, 2008 at 3:34
I’d be more convinced to vote for him if he had followed Oliver Reed’s example.
MarktheSpark said,
April 22, 2008 at 3:35
Oh, yeh, & despite anything I said above, T. Frank rocks! Even before “WWRong w/ Kansas”, there was his kick-ass periodical the Baffler.
Nonetheless, Hillary voted for BushCo war, & though I’m not entranced by Obama I don’t know if they make a big enough clothespin for me to shut off my nose while voting for Clinton Inc. Esp. since she has nothing but contempt for those Commies at MoveOn who dare to question the wisdom of our endless, righteous war against EastAsia
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
April 22, 2008 at 3:36
For FSM’s sake.
It’s a bad day when a Sadly, No! thread depresses me as much as a Monday at teh Borg.
MarktheSpark said,
April 22, 2008 at 3:38
Hey “aids monkey”, hoep you’s over in Iraqistan killin’ some o dem brown pipple for our syvilisation! I hear da littel wuns is easyest to off! Sum frends o mine in the Murines n plaec kalled Hadeetha said when they blue off the 2 or 3 yeer olds headses they hardlee even fought back. Gud lukk my frend!
Homosexuals are aids monkeys said,
April 22, 2008 at 3:39
Our war against “east asia” as you call it is righteous you self-hating prick. These savages murdered 3000 of your fellow counrymen and my fellow westerners on 9/11 and you dare to question the righteousness of this war! You and your leftist ilk should all move to Saudi Arabia since your’re just dying to live under sharia law as is evidenced by your opposition to your own country’s efforts.
LA Confidential Pantload said,
April 22, 2008 at 3:41
Folks, I know it sucks serious balls, but Poopdeck Pappy’s gonna be President Poopdeck Pappy come January ‘09. If there is one thing that the leadership of the Democratic Party likes to do, it’s lose. DLC/DNC/AC-DC/fuck-all will bitch about thanksralph, 527s, supremes, and whatthefuckever, but when push comes to shove, will hit the canvas with a speed that will make the late Sonny Liston smile down upon them….,
mikey said,
April 22, 2008 at 3:46
I’m thinkin the same thing as Thunder.
This is just ugly. It’s like left blogostan has colon cancer.
I’ll be really glad when Pennsylvania’s over.
And I’ll be REALLY glad when Hillary withdraws. And that sounds like more fun than I suspect it will be.
And I’ll be HELLA glad to see John “crazier than a staked dog” McCain debate Barack Obama.
No. I’m SALIVATING for that.
Hoo lordy. That’s gonna be good on about twelve levels…
mikey
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
April 22, 2008 at 3:46
Please don’t waste time responding to ‘monkey’, it is merely our relentless parody troll. Thrives on attention, doesn’t really care about anybody else.
It might as well be a rethuglican.
Joe Max said,
April 22, 2008 at 3:48
What I had in mind was divesting them of their silly fantasies before it’s too late. Already this country has been fucked over so badly that it’ll never recover until after I’m dead (but I have a kid to think about.) And I see so many of the “I’ll never vote for Hitlery/OmabaX no matter what, because I have principles!” knocking around here and elsewhere, selling the same rancid “there’s no difference” between ObamaX/Hitlery and Grandpa McCain, when they know damn good and well it’s bullshit. It’s the same mode of absolutist thinking that’s gotten us into this mess.
A lot of them are Naderites who refuse to repudiate their previous 2000 vote and admit that they made a bad choice, probably out of plain old human vanity – nobody likes to admit they were wrong. However, this reluctance to face reality is driving them to simply repeat their mistake yet again when the stakes are so terribly high. Now they can’t even pretend the stakes aren’t terribly high.
I’m not going to rake anyone over the coals who says, “I voted for Nader in 2000 but boy, under the circumstances that was a big mistake.” (Specifically if they lived in a swing state.) Perhaps they can be forgiven for not realizing how dire the consequences of their choice would be. I say to them, “I’m glad you woke up. Let’s not do that again, shall we?”
But still preaching the same idiocy of “there’s no difference at all between the Dems and the Rethugs” after going through the last eight years? That’s not idealistic, that’s not just delusional, it’s suicidal. They won’t listen to reason, or accept evidence that’s as obvious as getting hit with a shit-encrusted cinder block in the face: we have to put the Democratic candidate into the White House with not just a win, but a popular landslide. Perhaps these people can be embarrassed into not embarrassing themselves next time around. I’m willing to try anything at this point.
Having a true DFH president is going to have to wait a generation or two now. It sucks, but think of the children.
Homosexuals are aids monkeys said,
April 22, 2008 at 3:51
Your’re the one whose a fucking parody thunder. A parody of a westerner because you are a fucking joke. You live in the greatest civilization in the history of the world and yet you’re rooting for the islamo-fascists to win!
Are you that fucking eager to live under sharia law asshole?!
You fucking coward. Hiding behind your self righteous liberal philosophy. You think that if you just try to be understanding then the terrorists won’t kill you. Sorry but thats not the way the real world works asswipe.
You are a pathetic exuse for a human being.
Left_Wing_Fox said,
April 22, 2008 at 3:53
The Canadian Commision on “Human Rights” are a bunch of traitors, especially that Quiesling Warman. I hope my country brings back capital punishment if only to hang those fifth columnists.
Do it yourself.
Coward.