Obama recently gave a rallying speech to his troops in which he mentioned the Baucus plan. The Lightbringer was booed by his minions. But he brought the crowd round again by promising to "call out" the Republicans.
Over on TPM right now, the big news is Carrie Prejean (un-PC beauty queen), Joe Wilson (impolite Republican congressman) and Michelle Bachmann (batshit insane Republican congressdemon). Josh has mentioned Mad Michelle twice in the same day.
On Daily Kos, the front-page stories include a stop-the-presses expose of Why Fox News Is Bad.
On DU, one of the major anti-Clinton fruitcakes devotes his most recent post to the topic of Why Rush Limbaugh Is Bad. (I must admit that Rush really has been particularly awful lately, even by Rushian standards.)
Think Progress is assailing some asinine things said by Fred Barnes on Fox. Are you surprised to learn that Fred Barnes said something asinine on Fox?
RAW Story has an exclusive report on a new reason Why Joe Wilson Is Bad.
Huffington Post features stories on Why Orly Taitz And A Particularly Unhinged Teabagger Named Mark Williams Are Bad.
Obama is fortunate in his enemies. If the Republicans were not so wacky, we'd have nothing to talk about except Obama. And that would be depressing. Suggested 2012 re-election slogan: "SURE, HE FAILED -- BUT AT LEAST HE'S NOT NUTS!"
21 comments:
That leftwing blogs are focusing on these right-wing idiots (I don't think they're are nuts - just deeply stupid (Wilson, Bachmann, et al) or deeply cynical (Limbaugh, Beck, et al)) shows how bankrupt they are. Obama is not going to be helped by these "enemies" because aside from Beck and Limbaugh, most Americans - particularly independents - don't know who these people are (Bachmann, Barnes) or don't care (Wilson). They are watching the president and people who actually have the power to make their lives better or miserable, like Baucus and/or Pelosi and Reid.
I think most people in this country are a lot more sensible than the political elite on the left or right gives them credit for. They know whose extreme on both ends and usually disregard them, or watch them for entertainment value alone. But, they are not going to cut Obama and the administration slack for pursuing blatantly ruinous policies simply because there are some wild-eyed doofuses making fools of themselves on the other side.
By the way - "teabaggers" - et tu, Joe? Smearing an entire movement of people who are scared of the monstrous debt our government is foisting on us generation after generation with a skanky name because of a few loons who are picked up by the media doesn't sound like you.
Classic "spotlight fallacy," my new favorite term, in that you impute the qualities of a few people who get the most media attention to an entire group.
It's not as simple as you say though. Any attention to the One is met with sarcasm, race card, or calls of craziness no matter the issue.
For example, the birther issue isn't crazy, but the people who have been brought to the forefront by the MSM are crazy. This is intentional. The real issues is one of transparency. Good luck with that now that MSM has polluted the discussion.
And any talk of not liking the One's healthcare proposal or anything else is met with the race card. Democrat liberals really do see everyone else as racist crazies. When you call them out as the real racist using race to shut down the discussion, they laugh with incredulity.
No matter the issue, the MSM and the Democrat liberals will twist it. It's not the crazies that are to blame. There are enough crazies on both sides (just look at the Bush years).
So I'm afraid I have to disagree with you on this one. It's the people who pinpoint the crazies that are to blame. Not the right wing. In fact, the right wing wants nothing to do with the birther issue just to name one.
Mr X, you're reaching. And I am a "Democrat Liberal."
The Obots are the ones who ran from the "liberal" label. I embrace it.
I will say finally that the Teabagger references in all blogs, media, etc does offend me. It clearly is a reference to a sexual act and one that everybody assumes gay guys just love and do it regularly. It started as a slur and it continues. Why not just call them faggots and go right for the punch line.
I teabag all the time. I'm tired of being associated with those protesters. I am protesting in my own way, in my own home and I'll defend my right to protest until my very last breath. In some states, I can be arrested for this protesting. Is that what we're heading toward? Nancy says that blood will be spilled? I remember hearing that from Donna Brazille.
For example, the birther issue isn't crazy
Yes it is.
It's whack-a-doodle-doo
"By the way - "teabaggers" - et tu, Joe? Smearing an entire movement of people who are scared of the monstrous debt our government is foisting on us generation after generation with a skanky name because of a few loons who are picked up by the media doesn't sound like you."
Where were these people in the Bush years when the surplus disappeared and the deficit exploded. They didn't seem to fear future generations destiny when Bush gave the fat cats a tax break. How many times they demanded transparency and respect for the Constitution and our Civil Rights and the independence of Judiciary from Bush and Cheney?
beeta
"By the way - "teabaggers" - et tu, Joe? Smearing an entire movement of people who are scared of the monstrous debt our government is foisting on us generation after generation with a skanky name because of a few loons who are picked up by the media doesn't sound like you."
Anonymous,
Those who spotlight, name or otherwise reference proggy bloggers who serve i.e., lick the laps of the Oligarchy (we know which ones, and no, I don't believe our host feasts at this loin-laden table of over-class wannabes) are a colossal waste of time. Yes, they are at the very least asinine distractions but play a necessary, vital role in perpetuating the delusional fantasy of a functional, two-party democracy. (On its race to the bottom, I might add.)
'Teabaggers'? As if there aren't a host of hillbillies in the *Democratic* party base, it is the Democrats mistake to not unite them. Maddow can shrill away with glee about their ridiculousness, as is her job to distract. But, as you correctly note, most of them are scared, albeit clueless when it comes to understanding the distinctions between socialism vs. fascism - but when we are all ground down to frogs legs w/o jobs, healthcare and homes, those t.b.'ers may be the only footsoldiers left standing. "Bahahaha", said the sheep. "What's for dinner?"...
Ok, youse guys just had to drag us hillbillies into the argument. Could we call them tea-cuppers and ridgerunners, please? I don't want to offend any ethnic group.
"Where were these people in the Bush years when the surplus disappeared and the deficit exploded. They didn't seem to fear future generations destiny when Bush gave the fat cats a tax break . . . "
As someone who associates herself with much of the substantive anger of the "teaparty" movement, I was absolutely speaking out and protesting against the excesses of the Bush years. I marched in anti-Iraq war protests, littered my congresspeoples' inboxes - mail, phone and fax - with messages against both Bush and how the Democrats were not fighting him.
Many of the people who are now in the "tea party" movement did the same.
Remember - the power of the internet and social media to organize was still in preliminary development thru much of the Bush years. It's power is only now being fully realized to bring people of like mind together.
So, beeta - just because you didn't see or hear of us agitating mightily during the Bush years (although I don't know how you missed any of it) doesn't mean it wasn't happening. But, movements that weren't picked up by the MSM back then were treated as if they didn't exist.
Or, maybe you are just assuming - like many people who believe what they are told by the media - that all of the people in the "tea party" movement are right wing republicans and so, of course, didn't protest Bush policies. Facile, facile, facile analysis. Not only is there a lot of overlap in the groups, but there were a small, but significant number of rightwingers who did protest loudly against Bush's fiscal behavior. Glenn Beck was one of the loudest, in fact. Michael Savage - who is a hateful human being in almost every way - was another who couldn't stand Bush and went after him with more vehemence and eloquence that Pelosi ever has.
Obama's not failing. He's getting exactly the results that his actions would likely elicit. He's only failing if he's desiring a different result.
@Glennmcgee:
For what it's worth, I first heard the expression 'teabagging' not as something associated with homosexuals, but rather an act that would, for example, be done to some poor schlub who passed out drunk with his mouth open, by his friends who would also perhaps take pictures of said teabagging for future amusement. It never occured to me until the last few months that it could be considered a homosexual act. What is inherently homosexual about getting a sack in the mouth? It's like saying "Don't use the word blowjob, it's derisive to homosexual men"
Hoarseface, you'd have to let me show you the difference.
Maureen Reed is running against Michele Bachmann.
Please donate here:
http://maureenreedforcongress.com/
Anon,
I fully understand that there are plenty of people mad as hell at our Government(and both parties) and have every right to be(I am one of them), however, the anger coming out of the tea parties and the marches and rallies organized by the Right(as one would expect) is channeled and manipulated toward imaginary enemies or causes(the liberals, death panels, marxists). I have heard from more than one person that if Democrats(assuming that Democrats were behaving accourding to their princples which most are not at the moment) could channel this anger toward it's true cause, they could gain a sizeble constituency.
Furthemore, let's not forget that during Bush's first term (after 9/11)no one could utter a word against Bush and not be called Un-American or some other nonsense. It wasn't till his second term (after DOJ and the Wiretapping scandles and the 3000 plus dead American soldjers) that anyone dared to question him. The point is that there were always liberals who saw Bushco for what it was, but there were not many conservatives untill late in his second term.
BTW, Bill Moyers had a good program last night. His guest said something that summerizes what I am trying to say here(something to the effect that)
The two party system in America does not operate as two competing parties. Instead one party gains control for a period of time and the other party essentially sits the term out. In the mean time differences within the controlling party's factions come to surface usually late in the period and then the other party takes over and the same thing happens and then it's time to rally the troops for the next election and on and on.
beeta
Sorry, Anon, but you are not going to the same protests I am then. The one's I've attended as well as the townhalls I've been to, many in my hometown of Seattle - hardly a rightwing hotbed - have NOT been organized by any rightist organization, and are filled with smart, eloquent committed people, many of whom identify as liberal Democrats.
Anon,
Yes you are right, we are not talking about the same thing at all.
I am talking about the kind of protesters that the MSM has been covering:
I want my country back=What is this Kenyian N****r doing acting like president
I want Gov out of my Medicare=Don't take any money out of my pocket and give it to those lazy former welfare queens
Liberals are commies and Un-American= You mean to tell me that Capitalism and free markets are not the best thing since slice bread and the boogyman was always right here pretending to be for freedom and Librety and family values, ohhh no.... you have to pry that delusion out of my cold lifeless hands
I don't want illegal aliens anywhere near my tax dollars= I don't want to pay the real price for anything if I can pay an illegal to do do it for less, but how can I justify that if I admit that they are not cockroaches but human beings that deserve to see a doctor if they become ill or injured
so, no, if you went to town hall meetings where you discussed actual policy issues, I am not talking about you.
beeta
"And I am a "Democrat Liberal.""
So you voted for Obama is what you're saying? You're still a Democrat?
The town halls happened in order to flush out enough GOP crazies to have for TV spin ...Now that Bush is out of office nearly a year, Obama NEEDS the GOP wackadoodles stat. As you say, if it was just Barry on stage it would be awkward for the Left. They would also be unhappy with no one to bash. the Dem town halls provided them with both
If you are talking to me......... Iam not sure! And Bob, Amsterdam. My husbd is Dutch! Beeta
People. Click "Name/URL" and choose a NYM. It gets tedious to see two or more "anonymous" arguing with each other. And no, adding your name at the end of a long-ass post is not the same.
"I am talking about the kind of protesters that the MSM has been covering"
That is as far as I read, anonymous #whatever. I agree with anonymous #getaclue who pointed out the term "spotlight fallacy."
I was thinking about this earlier today. It infuriates me just as much to see the leftwing call a demonstration of tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, "fringe" (do they not remember being called fringe themselves?!) as it does to hear rightwingers call Obama demonstrators "patriotic" who used to call Bush protesters "terrorists" or "bums" or "socialists."
So, anonymous #whatever, stick it up your tightend. There is no "that kind" of protester to turn your nose up at, and if you FALL FOR whatever the media is spotlighting for their own narrative purposes, you are beyond the pale of any Bush moron that ever lived, because supposedly we've been through this. We saw it in action. We were there and saw the media distortion. So now suddenly they're reliable? Hardly.
Joseph, this is an awesome topic.
Yes, Zerobama is benefiting mightily from all these distractions (the "you lie!" one being the most eye-gouging DULL of the century).
I have to weigh in on not tarring the demonstrators as "teabaggers" ---even tho their own term, Tea Party, is about as original and accurate as the ubiquitous "Third Party." I would've said "spare me" if I were in on their branding, heh. I do find teabaggers an offensive way to mock them, though.
I would clarify that I come to this conclusion after it was impressed upon me that calling Ann Coulter "Mann Coulter" is offensive to an entire community.
I feel fairly certain that you will understand this is not an attack on you to express this...altho an overzealous nanny over at the ninnyshins banned me for explaining the same thing when one of their two regulars used child molestation terms to mock one of these tea partiers.
Alas, if our country were into literary allusions instead we might mock Tea Partiers with terms from another famous Tea Party. The rightwingers could be the "Mad Hatters"---the long-dormant middle of the roaders would of course be dormice, the PUMAs would be "Alices" and that leaves the March Hares open for any other segments...
Post a Comment