Dudebro dupes


Riverdaughter has a pretty good post up that starts with a review of a blogtalkradio broadcast of Virtually Speaking with Susie Madrak and Matt Stoller:

But anyway, the good stuff ended right about there. Matt says he was conflicted in 2008 but all I remember from Matt Stoller at that time was that he resembled so many of the people who were *trying* (not too hard) to be neutral but really, really, REALLY wanted Obama to win like the voice over narrator of the anti-Nader Anonymous video. I suspect that Obama totally made Matt cry sometimes. Then Matt goes on to say the State Department is messed up, which reminds me of all of the “Hillaryland at the State Department” articles we see in the Washington Post and New York Times whenever the electorate starts having buyer’s remorse over Obama. Then he complained that she didn’t apologize over her Iraq War Vote. Yes, Matt, Hillary Clinton, the senator from fricking New York was the primary reason the Iraq War Resolution passed even though she specifically strongly urged Bush to let the UN weapons inspectors do their jobs and only go to war as a last resort. Then there was a gratuitous slap from Susie about PUMA, which I don’t think either of them really understood. While there were plenty of PUMAs who were all about Hillary and plenty of the rest of us who hoped desperately that the party would come to its senses before the convention, PUMA was actually a movement that came to life after 18,000,000 votes were trashed at the RBC meeting in May 2008.

Then RD moves on to discuss the “Clever Young Men of the Blogosphere” aka “Dudebro Nation.”

I wonder if these young, hipster Dudebros will ever figure out the extent to which they were manipulated into supporting Obama. Obama received a gazillion dollars from Wall Street and other special interests and that money was well spent on a marketing campaign that made Obama the “must-have” accessory for twenty and thirty-somethings.

These are people who choose their clothing, cars, entertainments, homes, hairstyles, and the food they eat based on what is fashionable and trendy.

These guys have been groomed to be consumers their whole lives, and Obama hired experts at mass manipulation who knew exactly what buttons to push. Young people in particular are susceptible to these techniques, but nobody is completely immune.

Obama’s handlers made winning over the netroots a key part of their strategy. They knew the LSM was in the bag for Obama because his big money backers (i.e his true constituency”)own the media.

But Left Blogistan had proven during the reign of George the Lesser that they were capable of acting as an alternate medium for disseminating news and information.

The Obama campaign hired some experts at crowd psychology and manipulation:

Crowd manipulation is the intentional use of techniques based on the principles of crowd psychology to engage, control, or influence the desires of a crowd in order to direct its behavior toward a specific action. This practice is common to politics and business and can facilitate the approval or disapproval or indifference to a person, policy, or product.

So the first thing they did was come up with a psychological profile of lefty bloggers. Bloggers tend to be male, white, tech-savvy, and above average in education and income. They’ve playing video games and using computers since before they were potty-trained.

But they aren’t nearly as smart and sophisticated as they think they are. Obama’s manipulators crafted an image of Obama as some political messiah who was going to change the world. Then they hijacked the cherished ideal of the blogosphere as a grassroots organizing tool and let the bloggers convince themselves they were part of a historic movement.

In reality it was all astroturf and everything including the font on campaign signs was tightly controlled from on high. Remember the 1984 and Obama Girl clips that went viral?

Supposedly they were created by Obama supporters acting completely independent of the Obama campaign. Take a look at them (they are posted at the top and bottom of this post.) They’re not your typical homemade YouTube video of some guy with a minicam recording his drunk buddies doing something stupid.

The videos were made by professionals. The guys who made Obama girl not only took the time and effort to produce it but they even paid Amber Lee Ettinger $1000 to perform in it. Who spends that much money just to post a video on YouTube?

We all remember the Great Purge of 2008 when the supporters of Hillary Clinton were literally driven away from blogs they had frequented for years. That was no accident or coincidence, it was a deliberate strategy. The manipulators needed a “them” and we were it.

How good were the manipulators? They not only achieved their goals but to this day the Dudebros don’t realize they were manipulated. Unfortunately for the nation the Obama campaign wasn’t selling Pet Rocks or Hula Hoops.



This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

154 Responses to Dudebro dupes

  1. myiq2xu says:

    I wrote this before I went to bed last night. It doesn’t sound as disjointed and rambling as I thought it did. I was so tired I felt like I was slurring my words as I typed.

    • Mary says:

      You did good.

      But it wasn’t just dudebros. It included many dudettes, too, who thought Obama was the newest, smartest shiny thing. I could name names, but I think we all know who jumped on the bandwagon and helped trash Hillary.

      • Lola-at-Large says:

        Yeah, but those dudettes were just piggybacking on the dudebro bandwagon, like they always do, groupies of groupies that they are. Seriously, when is the last time young women started or drove a real trend, one that was eventually labeled “cool” by the mainstream, that didn’t feature some hot young dude to sweeten the pot (a la Twilight/Gray’s Anatomy)? Hardly ever. Dudes drive cool trends. It is what it is.

        When a woman amasses enough attention to gets her hands on the “cool” bullhorn, she gets trashed. Just ask Lindsey Lohan, Paris Hilton, or Brittany Spears.

    • JeanLouise says:

      It was right on target. We can’t let them forget that they foisted this incompetent boob on us with their misogyny, race-baiting and support for illegal election practices during the nomination process.

    • djmm says:

      It is an excellent post,as is RD’s. But I especially appreciate your reminder about the “Crush on Obama” video. I thought it no accident that the “Crush on Obama” video was directly aimed at male progressive bloggers. Most of the rest of us hardly knew who Senator Obama was at that time. I note that they paid too separate girls: who to look like she was singing and one who actually did the singing. Both are pretty women, but I guess they thought the one they filmed would be considered “hotter” by their target audience.

      djmm

  2. votermom says:

    If you’re going to pull out 2008 videos, I’m going to have to post this, which still makes me laugh:

  3. votermom says:

    Look at the BO pic Reuters used for this story. LOL.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/13/us-usa-debt-idUSTRE7646S620110713

    (Reuters) – Moody’s Investors Service jolted White House debt talks on Wednesday with a warning that the United States may lose its top credit rating in the coming weeks, piling pressure on Washington to lift its debt ceiling.

    The announcement by Moody’s, the first among the major rating agencies to place the United States’ AAA rating on review for a possible downgrade, came minutes after President Barack Obama and congressional leaders began negotiating for the fourth straight day of deficit talks.

    The president and lawmakers, who met for nearly two hours on Wednesday, are trying to agree on a deal to reduce the deficit. Republicans demand steep spending cuts in return for supporting an increase in the $14.3 trillion borrowing limit.

    Obama abruptly ended a tense budget meeting with Republican leaders by walking out of the room, a Republican aide familiar with the talks said.

    • votermom says:

      This is dedicated to all the d00dbr0s (Hi Stephen Marche!) from our caller BarryH.O.

      Just walk away, Renee

    • jjmtacoma says:

      He really shouldn’t make faces like that, it will get stuck. Just ask my mom.

    • myiq2xu says:

      I don’t think Obama expected anything like this. He seems baffled and frustrated because the Republicans won’t do what he wants.

      “They aren’t supposed to defy me like that. I’m the President! What’s wrong with them? They’re treating me like I’m Joe Biden!””

      • votermom says:

        Waaah! I farted and they said it was stinky!!

      • WMCB says:

        He’s never had to negotiate before. He’s never had to do the hard work, even as a legislator. In Chicago, his political godfathers had others do the grunt work on a bill, sometimes for years, and then once it was all hashed out they handed it to Obama to slap his name on and step into the spotlight for his close-up, Mr. Demille.

        Even as a community organizer, his job was not to DO anything. His job was to get people pissed off enough to go yell at SOMEONE ELSE to do something.

        The few “legislative accomplishments” that the Obots claimed for him were a farce. He never did that work. Others did. Remember during the HCR debate, when he got pissy and complained that the House Dems were going to “destroy my presidency”? By trying to push for what the people who put them in office wanted?

        See, it is the job of others to do the icky stuff, then hand him a fait accompli to take credit for. Everyone is supposed to be a supporting role for Obama, including the House, the Senate, and all of govt. Co-equal branches? What a laugh. They are supporting actors not doing their damn job!

        If Eric Cantor had a brain, when Obama sniffed at him that he would “go to the American people”, Cantor would have replied, “Mr. President, this is the People’s House of Representatives. You are looking at the representation of the will of the American People since 2010.” Then leak that to the press.

        • yttik says:

          I found, “this may bring my presidency down,” to be far more inspiring words than the lecture about peas, band aids, and capsizing boats.

        • votermom says:

          this may bring my presidency down

          Now that’s how to bring hope to America!!!!

      • He honestly thought the “skies would open and the light would come down…” and all would know that he was right.

  4. WMCB says:

    It’s not disjointed, myiq, it’s excellent.

    One of the things, to me, that marked it as a marketing campaign was that the focus was not merely on painting Obama in the best light (that’s pretty normal for a political campaign.)

    It was aimed at carefully researching and keying in on the psychological quirks of the netroots and the Dudebro Nation, and encouraging them to feel superior. It wasn’t really about Obama being superior, it was about how you became one of the enlightened, one of the cool, one of the post-racial, one of the not-those-old-tired-others, one of the important.

    That’s how carefully crafted marketing works – it’s not really about how good the beer tastes, or whether it’s good beer, it’s about look what kind of person you will be if you buy this beer. See the cool people who will be your companions if you drink this beer? See those people over there? They don’t drink this beer, and they never get the hot chicks, and their clothes are tacky. You don’t want to be one of them, do you?

    The dudebro nation don’t want to believe they were played, because they think they would have been smart enough to pick up on a campaign that lied to them about the candidate. They are so savvy, after all! Reality-based, and all that.

    NO, you fucking idiots, the campaign wasn’t really about selling you Obama. It was about selling you a seductive vision of yourself.

    And you completely fell for it. We didn’t. Maybe because we already know who we are.

    • votermom says:

      WMCB, this is exactly what it was.

      • WMCB says:

        Yup. Can’t you just see the conversations on how to do it?

        Operative #1: Well, we can paint the candidate in this light….

        Operative #2: Nah, that won’t work. These people are a fairly skeptical bunch. They’ll see right through that. They’re almost expecting politicians to let them down. If all we have is his record and experience, we’re gonna get creamed, because they’ll be pragmatic. There’s the black thing, but still….

        Highly paid propaganda and marketing guru: Gentlemen, gentlemen, you don’t understand. We don’t plan to just sell them Obama. We plan to sell them themselves.

        • myiq2xu says:

          They had the Obots thinking “Someday I’ll be telling my grandkids how I helped elect St. Obama and they’ll be amazed and impressed. It will be like being one of the original twelve disciples.”

        • WMCB says:

          Indeed. I paved the way for the messiah. I Hopenchanged the world. Me.

    • Can we have a bumper sticker or T-Shirt of this?
      “NO, you fucking idiots, the campaign wasn’t really about selling you Obama. It was about selling you a seductive vision of yourself.

      And you completely fell for it. We didn’t. Maybe because we already know who we are.”

      Excellent!

      • imustprotest says:

        Excellent comments and spot on. Obama’s the perfect leader for the Narcissist Generation. Remember Time magazine’s “Person of the Year” cover a couple of years ago…….A MIRROR! Time’s “Person of the Year” was……YOU!

      • angienc says:

        How about paraphrasing it to:

        You are not the ones we’ve been waiting for.

        GAH! Of all the stupid propaganda out of the Obama campaign that stupid “We are the ones” line is the one that really pissed me off the most because the Obots thought it was SO erudite when really, it just exposed their sociopathic & narcissistic tendencies.

    • Mimi says:

      If you ever talk to these little dudes (and dudettes) it seems that their entire sense of identity is their superiority in everything. I think it stems from being given everything their entire lives and never having earned anything, never been disappointed, or gone without. They are also ingrates and self entitled. They go crazy is told they are wrong or that they cannot have a new doodad. Some recent graduates are truly upset that they are not finding $75,000 starting salary jobs. Their parents are going to be stuck with them for a good long while.

      • ralphb says:

        This is the “trophy for showing up” self esteem generation. Might not have been a good idea for some people.

        • angienc says:

          Fab way of expressing it: the “trophy for showing up” self-esteem generation.

          They really, really do all think they are special little snowflakes based on nothing but their mommy & daddy’s say-so.

        • ralphb says:

          Heh. They really were a bunch of silly spoiled children. I don’t think you would be susceptible to Dick’s propaganda otherwise.

        • Valhalla says:

          The Validation Generation.

    • Three Wickets says:

      The other key thing about the Madison Avenue types and the Wall Street types who engineered and financed this marketing campaign for Obama is the white guilt factor, which naturally goes hand in hand with all the race-baiting. The reality is that people of color are scandalously rare in the halls of Madison Avenue and Wall Street even today. And I’m not talking about diversity in the executive suites and boardrooms, I’m talking about staff at all levels. There is some more diversity at the big mainstream media outlets, but not much more than at the large multinational corporations. So all these leaders of our creative class (Richard Florida’s term, not mine) working together with the leaders of our political class drive this massive campaign to elect our historic first African American Potus, regardless of his relative inexperience and preparedness, expertly marketing him to the dudebro and dudette nation. Then they sit back feeling good about themselves while selected Potus bails out their banks, corporations, industries with taxpayer money and long-term debt which same dudebros/dudettes will be burdened with for the rest of their lives. Meanwhile, there isn’t evidence of more diversity at these creative class companies and organizations, little or no evidence of improved race relations in the nation, plenty of evidence of deeper economic struggles among working class and minority populations. Do these creative class marketers and masters of the universe care…hell no. They got their bailouts and champagne bonuses, and again they get to feel good about themselves for selecting a black president. The hypocrisy and cynicism make me want to vomit.

      • WMCB says:

        Quite frankly, FOX has a a much, much, MUCH more diverse lineup than any of the major networks. It’s true.

        When I finally took off the partisan blinders and began to timidly watch the dreaded FOX on occasion, mostly because they were overall slightly fairer to Hillary, I remember being shocked and surprised at all the female and black and hispanic faces I saw. It honestly threw me for a loop, since I was so unaccustomed to seeing that from watching MSNBC and CNN and ABC and CBS for years.

        Their new business channel is the same way. It’s true that FOX has its other issues, but it’s a fact that they have the most diverse lineup over the breadth of their programming. Hands down.

      • Pips says:

        Spot on 3W!

        “Feeling good about themselves”, exactly – and not worrying that this will probably not only be the first black president, but the last for many years to come, as I predict the reasoning will go something like “Tried that. Didn’t work out too well.”

        How I wish those focusing so much on skin colour had taken notice of Martin Luther King’s “I have a dream” speech. But that wasn’t what Obama’s handlers were about – quite the contrary.

        And hey, can we lump the Hollywood crowd in with these people?

  5. myiq2xu says:

    I knew I had fallen down the rabbit hole when they played the race card on the Big Dawg.

    When I first heard it I laughed. “Bill Clinton a racist? Are you fucking kidding me?” I simply could not believe that ANYONE would take that accusation seriously.

    Even the Republicans never accused Bill of racism, and they accused of everything including the kitchen sink.

    Obots? They believed it (or pretended to)

    • WMCB says:

      They believed it (or pretended to) because they’d already been sold on the seductive vision of who THEY were.

      This is why the Obots became so nasty, so willing to believe insane things, why their furious reactions to criticisms of his campaign or him were so out of proportion to reality.

      No one could attack Obama, because it was a challenge, not to how they saw a political candidate, but to how they perceived themselves. It became an existential threat to THEM to tear down the illusion of Obama, and they responded just like humans always do when faced with an existential threat – viciously.

      It’s very understandable if you comprehend precisely how they were manipulated.

      • Mimi says:

        Perfectly explained. It isn’t about him but their own self identity and delusions.

        • myiq2xu says:

          Sadly, they see themselves as the good guys and think they have a monopoly on virtue.

        • WMCB says:

          Yes, they do think they have a monopoly on virtue. It’s funny that since I have taken to cruising conservative blogs to take the pulse of the other side of the electorate, I often see comments along the lines of “I think most liberals mean well, and want to help people. I just think their plans won’t work, and have never worked, and they don’t seem to fucking comprehend that.” It’s not all commenters by any means, but it pops up fairly frequently, and the person making the comment is generally not savaged unduly – many even agree.

          It is much rarer that I see a similar comment made on liberal blogs about conservative voters. And if it is, almost the entire tribe shuts the person down vehemently. It’s like it is a necessity to believe that not only is the other side wrong, but irredeemably evil. It’s not just that their policies will cause granny to starve, but that they actively want granny to starve, or at the very least don’t give a shit if she does. That’s simply not true.

        • votermom says:

          It’s like it is a necessity to believe that not only is the other side wrong, but irredeemably evil.

          There are so many blogs I had to stop reading, for my own equanimity, precisely because of this. Ad flipping hominem every single day.

          • myiq2xu says:

            When I was a senior in college I took a class called “Simulated Supreme Court Decision Making” What we did was get the briefs from cases that were then currently before the court and then argue them in class. At that time there was a big Affirmative Action case pending.

            I was one of the few liberals in class so I ended up arguing one side of almost every case. There were several conservative guys in the class as well. We argued with each other a lot. A LOT

            Sometimes we would argue in class and then go to a bar and keep arguing over a beer or six. But we never got angry or called each other names. They were bright, articulate and as well educated as I was. They were not bigoted or racist. They weren’t rich and they weren’t particularly religious.

            We had good times together, but they didn’t change my mind and I didn’t change theirs.

    • They actually believed it miq. No pretense. Because they had no collective recollection of what real racism looks like.

      These are the Harvard-ites (and posers) that were trained to see every form of inequality as some sort of “racism.” In doing so… they reach a point where they wouldn’t recognize real discrimination if it slapped them in the face.

  6. gumsnapper says:

    Except that that strategy won’t work in ’12. A new product has to appear. Obama is so 2008 and no longer cool.

    I’m noticing that on the pro-O blogs like Salon or with the O cheerleaders like Matthews, they can’t tout his achievements or focus on the economy so the new ploy is to focus on those crazy Republicans. That is and will be the strategy. Not how good our guy is but how bad the other guys/girls are. That’s all they have.

    • Mary says:

      Well said. But it won’t work anymore—the public isn’t listening this time.

      • ralphb says:

        Not only is it not working, I think a large number of people are taking whatever the media says and reversing it in an attempt to find some truth.

        • Mary says:

          I LOVE that!! I know it’s what I do: listen to figure out what they’re NOT saying by CHOOSING to say what they say.

          Started to make me a little crazy, so I just took NBC/MSNBC off my favorites list. Also eliminated the so-called A-list progressive blogs from same. Rather read thinkers HERE than even bother wading through the tribal crap anymore.

          Made a helluva difference in my blood pressure and my mental health.

          Like WMCB says, freeing oneself from the tribal crap is quite liberating!!

        • Lola-at-Large says:

          This is true. The general public is being quite rejectionist all over the place, not just with media. That’s what’s driving this divide between what the public wants, and what hedge-funded Washington insists we “MUST DO.” If Wall Street wants it, fuck that shit, too. If an economist is saying something, the public gets behind the exact opposite.

          And this should be expected after going on 10 years of hyperventilating bullshit from our politicians, media, and so-called professional class. Eventually, the public figures it out, at least enough to fuck everything Washington, Wall Street, and whoever else wants. It’s so bad it’s even influencing our opinions about science & climate change. And the only thing that is going to stop it is for the power structure to back the hell up and down. ‘Cause we’ve got pitchforks and we will use them.

    • myiq2xu says:

      Ad campaigns are most effective with new products because people haven’t formed an opinion yet.

      “Try new Piss Cola, it’s got extra whizz!”

      But after people try it the product has to sell itself or people won’t buy it again.

      Remember those Coke and Pepsi ads in the 70’s and 80’s? They weren’t trying to tell people how wonderful their product was.

      They were telling people how wonderful (hip, cool, groovy, whatever) they would be if they drank coke/pepsi

      I don’t understand why they even have different brands of cigarettes. They should just have two kinds – regular and menthol. If a smoker can’t get their regular brand they will smoke anything. After a few hours they’re checking ashtrays for a butt with a drag or two left on it.

      I smoked exactly one cigarette in my life. I was in an army club drinking and my buddy talked me into trying one.

      Afterwards he said “Wow, I never saw anyone turn green before. You left a trail of puke all the way to the latrine”

      • ralphb says:

        Dick sure has got extra whizz!

      • Mary says:

        Total marketing, paid for by the very Wall Street guys who wanted him in office for their own purposes.

        I gotta go to Netflix and download Mad Men—never watche it.

    • With all due respect… some of the Republican field is crazy. Michele Bachmann, for instance, is no Sarah Palin:

      http://syd4.blogspot.com/2011/07/michele-bachman-is-no-sarah-palin.html

      And… much as I’d like to vote for a women in 2012… I’mm gonna have to draw the line somewhere.

      Good thing for the country… Palin is talking like she *will* run!

      • votermom says:

        I really don’t think she’ll get the nomination; she’s a congressional rep. The GOP isn’t that unrealistic.

        • Hope you are right, V-mom.

        • WMCB says:

          Nah. She won’t get the nomination. She has a core base of fundies that love her, but most on the conservative blogs, even those who like her in a general sort of way, and may be even supporting her in a half-hearted kind of way because the other options aren’t all that, think she would be radioactive in the end. She’ll flame out.

          Plus there are a LOT more small-govt libertarian types in the grassroots GOP than there used to be. They won’t vote for her.

  7. Mr. Mike says:

    Looks like GE’s investment in MSNBC has paid hansom dividends, Chris Matthews going all tingle leg over Obama was an unexpected bonus.

    OT:

    That GTFO graphic in the left column or that other one where the red white and blue O is melting, somebody should redo them so they print out as a personal check back ground. That way when you get the “gimmie” letter from your local Democrat with the prepaid envelope you can send it back with one of them with the amount zero and a message on the memo line to the effect they’ll get money when Obama goes.

  8. ralphb says:

    Really great post! It couldn’t be truer.

  9. yttik says:

    A big part of that dudebro and dudette attitude, was not respecting your elders, and by “elders” I mean anybody with any experience at all. There was a concentrated effort to sell the idea that your parents, (and people like the Clintons,) had done it all wrong and that you knew more than them. It’s kind of like what they do with children’s advertising, they convince kids that they want the crappy plastic toy or the shiny box of cereal and the only reason their parents are saying “no” is because they aren’t cool. That way kids are convinced to dismiss everything you say and to forget that you yourself have already experienced the disappointment that comes from buying packages of flying sea monkeys and pet rocks.

    • WMCB says:

      yttik, I would not want to return the days of dismissing all youth concerns, but it has become ridiculous and is a blight on society. Our entire culture is youth-obsessed, and it was only a matter of time until that spilled over into politics. So we had grown-assed senators and reps making decisions about who is best to lead a country in deep shit, based on the opinions of their 14-year-olds.

      Look, young people can be very smart. And they can have insight. I raised 4, and they surprised me all the time. But no, they do NOT have the breadth of life experience that informs their elders. There is a reason why every society on the face of the earth (until ours recently) has placed more weight (not ALL the weight, but more) on the opinions of the elders.

      Yeah, that little fantasy of how beautiful society would be if we just got rid of all those old pokey adults? There’s a name for it. It’s called The Lord of The Flies.

      Now get off my lawn.

      • yttik says:

        Get off my lawn indeed, LOL.

        Something else that goes along with that dudebro attitude is wanting something for nothing and believing they are entitled to it. You don’t have to actually accomplish anything to get a Nobel Peace Prize, you get one just because you are you and therefore worthy. Kind of like we give everyone trophies these day just for participation.

        It took years to teach my kids that they actually have to practice if they want to be a rock star, you don’t just get the celebrity without putting in the effort. Obama and his minions came along and proved me wrong.

      • ralphb says:

        The Cambodian genocide was largely carried out by children under the Khmer Rouge of Pol Pot. That’s something we shouldn’t forget.

      • glennmcgahee says:

        A study was done that showed the reasoning area of the brain is not fully developed until a person is 25 years old. They shouldn’t be driving.
        http://www.mycentraljersey.com/article/20081226/OPINION02/812260302/If-brain-matures-25-why-drinking-age-only-21-

    • Lola-at-Large says:

      That dynamic among the young has been growing for sometime, and it’s a function of the changes in our educational system. Our youth reject anything “didactic,” and take offense at anything that tries to inform them without making them feel “cool.” Because self-esteem is the name of the game in public education, even if a kid has good reason to feel bad or ashamed. http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/2c00b91e-a849-11e0-9f50-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1RfOM5ZuL

      • myiq2xu says:

        When I was a kid my family thought self-esteem was bad for you. If they suspected you had any they would not rest until it was gone.

      • angienc says:

        It is the complete lack of “shame” that is a major problem with these kids today. (God I feel old saying that — but it is gd true!)

        • Lola-at-Large says:

          Well, we mean something different we say it, because there has been an actual concerted effort to eliminate shame as a mechanism, just because it was abused in some cases. Because child abuse survivors felt shamed, and rape victims felt shamed, and a whole bunch of other people who, unlike the parties cited above, have jumped on the Cult of True Victimhood bandwagon without actually being victims of anything more than other people’s internal judgment, we’ve decided the very useful tool of shaming needs to be eliminated. It’s working great. Can’t you tell?

      • DeniseVB says:

        Being a kid was hard enough in the 50-60’s …. and according to the “new rulez”, my fat sister would have been removed from our large, dysfunctional, but somewhat happy family, and sent to a foster home 😦 Today, at 60, she’s fabulous, thin and wins her age group in marathons and bike races. I hate her 😛

        • myiq2xu says:

          I remember Roseanne said “I think if you’re fat you should just be fat and shut up. And if you’re skinny then fuck you!

  10. votermom says:

    OT: This is a bit ridiculous. Donald Rumsfield flies commercial and gets a TSA patdown.

    TSA trying so hard to show that it doesn’t discriminate just proves to me that the pat-downs are all for show– even the most anti-Rummy critic (and I come close to being that) would have to admit that Rummy is not going to be hi-jacking an airplane.

    http://www.tmz.com/2011/07/13/donald-rumsfeld-tsa-airport-security-patdown-screening-gun-bomb-weapon/

    • ralphb says:

      If Rumsfeld wanted an airplane, he’d just buy one. We know for sure they’re largely for show since they don’t work when they have really been challenged in tests, or just by accident.

    • yttik says:

      That is all for show. Good grief, Rumsfield?

      I really think part of the problem is those TSA workers don’t get paid a whole lot and they’re only picking on the weak and vulnerable. I mean, it’s human nature, you’re not going to strip search the scary biker guy looking terrorist, you select the older woman in a wheelchair and the toddlers, so you don’t risk getting hurt.

      I’ve been selected for extra screening so many times and I swear it’s because I look friendly and appear harmless.There’s no other explanation for it. If i looked like I might spit and bite, they’d probably just wave me through.

    • Lola-at-Large says:

      Nah, he’ll just coordinate the theft of the billions of dollars loaded into the baggage area of that plane.

  11. I am in moderation today. Not sure why….

    Great post, as usual, miq.

  12. ralphb says:

    From Legal Insurrection

    Huge Obama birthday fundraiser day after debt ceiling deadline

    Maybe this is why he picked the arbitrary August 2 deadline to increase the debt ceiling.

    He doesn’t want to miss his August 3 birthday fundraiser by having to spend time at work dealing with the likes of Eric Cantor. Hey, there are priorities and then there are priorities.

    Which means that on August 3, the very day Obama says he may decide not to send out social security checks, Obama gladly will be pocketing checks from campaign donors.

    Somehow this sounds about right.

    • Mary says:

      Ugh. And for a donation of $35,000 you TOO can attend.

      Betcha Oprah will be there. And Gail. And Whoopee.

      The Southside residents can’t afford it.

    • WMCB says:

      I have heard rumors that TX governor Rick Perry may pick August 3rd to step into the race. He’s a showboater, so it would be really hilarious if Obama got a big ol’ Texan (a real one, not a fake one like Bush – Perry grew up dirt poor on a south TX farm and wears his boots like he was born in them) stomping all over Bambi’s birthday parade, announcing, “Hey, America, y’all want some jobs? We’ve been making plenty down here – now let me tell ya how it’s done…”

      I’m not a big Perry fan, but I’d get some popcorn and thoroughly enjoy that spectacle.

      • DeniseVB says:

        Perry could also yell from the back of a pick-up “Ya’ll, guess who inherited a Bush economy too? ”

        Would be fun!

        • WMCB says:

          Yep. As I said, I don’t particularly care for Perry, though I don’t despise him. But as much as I’d MUCH rather they pick Sarah as the GOP nominee, Perry could kick Obama’s ass as well.

          I can see the sound bytes now: “You know, it’s funny, but I inherited an economy from George Bush too……”

          I’ve been predicting for a few months now that if Sarah isn’t in, then the ticket will be Perry/Rubio. Wanna bet? 😀

        • ralphb says:

          I wouldn’t bet against a Perry/Rubio ticket. I really don’t like Perry and he’s had precious little to do with how well the economy has done here but it’s a great talking point for a political run.

          He’ll need Rubio because he doesn’t do well with hispanics, outside of TX. Bush did much better that way than Perry is doing.

        • WMCB says:

          Ralph you are right. In a campaign, the fine points of how much Perry really had to do with it will not matter. They can try, but it doesn’t reduce to a sound byte. Perry would hammer Obama on jobs.

          It will simply be a matter of “Look at my results vs. his results. Any questions?”

    • Karma says:

      I know optics is a four letter word to some (remembering a great rant Myiq linked to http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/2010/07/fuck-your-goddamned-optics.html) but the Obama admin is blind to it. They fail in some huge way with each and every situation they are in.

      Maybe it is better they always leave that flank open because it does reveal them to be cold hearted. But it seems more likely that the admin genuinely doesn’t care how their actions look…..because their flowery words said something different.

      Those Obots were trained well to point to the flowery words of his books and website as proof….I guess they hope history will do the same.

    • votermom says:

      I think his plan is that at his bday bash he wants to claim the great moral victory of having been able to send out checks to granny despite the efforts of the eviiiil GOP.

  13. Mary says:

    Michael Goodwin comment:

    Obama’s 2012 campaign theme will be “Elect me because you’re too dumb to understand how smart I am. ”

    ROLFMAO

  14. Mary says:

    Latest Harry Reid comment:

    Now calling for Eric Cantor to be removed from the debt ceiling meetings because he’s “too childish.”

    GAWD. Are these people 12 years old?

    • WMCB says:

      The word is that Obama basically demanded to negotiate only with Boehner. Boehner told him NO, we’re putting Cantor at the table. So now they are trying to get the media to push Cantor out.

      I think that it’s not that Boehner is a pushover on policy, but that his manner is humbler and more low-key in his manner. I think that perhaps the R’s have discovered that for some reason, Cantor gets under the narcissist’s skin. They may be saying the same things, but Boehner is like your friendly bartender, and Cantor is the sharp Jewish accountant in manner. Obama doesn’t like him, and his peevishness shows more against Cantor.

      If the R’s are smart, they will have sharp-edged, pointy-headed little Cantor up in Obama’s grille with his little accountant glasses for ALL negotiations. Push his buttons, make him show his ass.

      • WMCB says:

        Yep. Reid, Schumer, they are all over the news now bashing Cantor. It’s not because he is worse on the deals he offers than Boehner is.

        It’s that they are terrified that if he’s the R’s negotiator, Obama is going to at some point lose his shit entirely in public. The Dems are scrambling to protect their narcissist president from being pushed into going batshit.

        • imustprotest says:

          I’ve been waiting for the eventual Obama meltdown. As you said though, I’ve been figuring his handlers know what they’re dealing with and will protect and deflect and never allow the meltdown to happen in public.

        • angienc says:

          I think plenty of meltdowns have happened already, but the press doesn’t cover them.

          “Can’t I just eat my waffles?!?!”

        • Lola-at-Large says:

          Well it is July. People tend to lose their shit if they’re going to between July & August.

      • votermom says:

        I think that perhaps the R’s have discovered that for some reason, Cantor gets under the narcissist’s skin. They may be saying the same things, but Boehner is like your friendly bartender, and Cantor is the sharp Jewish accountant in manner.

        There’s your reason right there. Dick’s still smarting from Bibi’s public spanking; no way is he going to lose more face in front of his rapidly shrinking ME fanbase.

      • ralphb says:

        Cantor has his own power base in the House and it’s about as big as Boehner’s. As long as he wants to be in the negotiations, he’ll be there.

  15. myiq2xu says:

    Here is part of the Anglachel quote that RD left out of her post:

    This is why people like Josh have flocked to the net. They can continue being big and important on the basis of their opinions and clever arguments and not on their ability to, you know, hold down a job. The way in which the rest of the world putters along very well without them and could not care less what their grand pronouncements are is inherently threatening to what makes them tick. It reinforces their deep fear that they are irrelevant and incompetant.

    • Three Wickets says:

      Basically they have the emotional maturity of 14 year old boys. But they make clever arguments and they write well. Solipsists like that have always been around, they just have a bigger megaphone these days. Andrew Sullivan and Bill Maher are good examples of the type. Selfish and self-absorbed to the core.

      • Mary says:

        New term for them: TRIBAL PIMPS.

        (Stolen from another blog, I admit).

        Major meltdown over at Digby’s place…..namecalling, spittin, outrage, betrayal. (see comments)

        (And yes, Digby was one of those tribal pimps)

        • angienc says:

          GAH! Where were all those asshats in 2008 when we TOLD them what Obama was? Oh yeah, calling us racists.

        • Lola-at-Large says:

          What post?

        • Lola-at-Large says:

          Found it! I love this:

          “Now, now, Alan, you wouldn’t want Al S. to swing by and accuse you of being a Rat Fucker by pointing out that the Democratic Party is what the GOP used to be 15 to 20 years ago. No criticism, no matter how valid, is permissible of the Democratic Party or its leader. Ever.”

  16. DeniseVB says:

    Ladies and Gentlemen, let’s give it up for Jay Carney and the Journolisters !!!! 😀 couldn’t resist…..

  17. Mary says:

    Oh wow.

    Latest Gallup Generic Presidential Poll (July7-July10):

    Any Republican 47%
    Obama 39%

    By EIGHT points.

  18. ralphb says:

    Video: Newsweek reporter laughs off O’Donnell criticism over Palin cover story

    Appearing on “Fox & Friends” this morning, Newsweek’s Peter Boyer said of his profile: “I don’t think it was necessarily a positive article, it was sort of a straight article. And I think, you know, relatively speaking, maybe that comes across as being positive.”

    Boyer also sarcastically referred to “that great journalist Lawrence O’Donnell.”

    Regarding allegations Newsweek made a “deal” with Palin for a puff piece, Boyer said: “It’s outrageous that [O’Donnell] would suggest that we made a deal with Sarah Palin… We don’t make deals. I don’t make deals. I wrote a story that treated her like what she is — in fact, a nationally significant politician.”

    This is refreshing for a change.

    • angienc says:

      I bet Lawrence O’Donnell didn’t have any problems with Esquire’s bj piece on Obama.

    • DeniseVB says:

      I especially liked the bottom line:

      “Boyer gets to the heart of O’Donnell’s real objection, which is that a fair treatment of Palin leaves her looking more positive than not, even if she’s not everyone’s cup of tea on policy. Apparently over at Leaning Forward Central, that’s an unacceptable outcome.”

      I was a 35 year subscriber to Newsweek, until the Obama slobberfest and adorations began to appear almost weekly in my mailbox. I cancelled and told them if I want misinformation, I’ll stick to wikipedia and save bunches of money.

      You’d think a longtime subscriber would have meant something to them ? Maybe Tina’s finally getting around to reading old emails 😀

  19. WMCB says:

    LOL! There is a new name circulating for the boob:

    POUTUS

  20. swanspirit says:

    The dudes and dudettes wanted an apology from Hillary ?? I want an apology on their bloody knees from every damned one of them that voted for the incompetent in chief , especially the “progressive liberal pagan feminists “

  21. ralphb says:

    Thank you to Jake Tapper

    Which Is Worse? Default or Voting to Raise the Debt Ceiling Again in 2012?: Today’s Qs for O’s WH – 7/14/2011

    He trys his best to pin him down that this is for political reasons and not economic ones.

    • ralphb says:

      From AoS.

      Remember, Obama didn’t walk out and vow to default the country into ruin over the substance of what a deal might look like.

      He walked out over Cantor’s suggestion that they do a short-term deal to give them time to continue negotiating.

      That is what Obama threatened to destroy the credit rating of America over — over having to continue debating this to find some kind of compromise.

      The Tyrant King wants this issue behind him, so he can get back to fundraisin’ and campaignin’.

    • votermom says:

      That was pretty good. I wonder if Carney will ever answer his questions again.

    • WMCB says:

      I don’t know how I missed that you had already posted this. I reposted below.

  22. 1539days says:

    myiq,

    I have to disagree with you about the Obama Girl video. I think the youtube channel “barelypolitical” and its creator Mark Douglas made this video as a parody about Obama obsession, much like the SNL debate sketch where the media was stroking Obama and declaring him the winner after the first thing he said.

    The video was shot in an office building, a few NYC locations and a lot of green screen. It’s really not any better made than the music video parodies they do now, like a recent one with Amber Lee Ettinger playing Jennifer Lopez.

    Maybe they’re a guerilla marketing arm of David Axelrod, but it doesn’t seem that way to me.

    • yttik says:

      I always thought it was a parody too, but then again, I thought most of the pro Obama stuff I was hearing was a parody. Remember the painting of the shirtless light bringer rising out of the river with all the unicorns? I about fell over when I realized that was the artist’s genuine sentiment.

    • myiq2xu says:

      That’s a nice theory but there’s one little problem with it – when they made it there was no Obama Obsession yet. Most people had barely heard of Dick in early 2007 and he was running a distant third in polls

      • 1539days says:

        By May, Oprah Winfrey had endorsed Dick. The video followed a few weeks later. I would argue It’s a case of being ahead of the curve, either as a satarist or an Obot.

  23. angienc says:

    OMFG. If I had any respect left for Pelosi, I’d have lost it after her comparison of the POUTUS (h/t WMCB) to Job!

  24. WMCB says:

    Jake Tapper appears to have found his journalistic gonads. First, he nailed Carney to the wall over Obama’s obviously political reasons for refusing the short-term debt ceiling raise Cantor offered (he does not wish to have that as an issue again during campaign season.)

    http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2011/07/which-is-worse-default-or-voting-to-raise-the-debt-ceiling-again-in-2012-todays-qs-for-os-wh-7142011.html

    Read the whole thing – Carney stuttering away is hilarious. But here’s an excerpt:

    TAPPER: The worst-case scenario here is a default, right?

    CARNEY: That is a bad scenario. I’m not sure — I mean —

    TAPPER: Is it worse —

    CARNEY: You know, there are things you could anticipate. But I — yes.

    TAPPER: Is it worse than voting on the debt ceiling again next year?

    CARNEY: The uncertainty created by regular votes on whether or not, for the first time — you know, and if you think it’s — there’s — there are political —

    Now, he is actually posting the latest news that the WH flat lied last year when they denied actively excluding FOX from a TARP roundtable with the press. FOIA documents just received prove it:

    At the time, Treasury officials claimed that there was no “plot” to exclude Fox News. In a January 2010 New Yorker magazine story, then-press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporter Ken Auletta: “This started over at Treasury, and when it got to the White House it was fixed.”

    That does not seem to be an accurate claim, given the paper trail. Indeed, it seems that Treasury Department officials wanted to include Fox News and the White House didn’t want the cable outlet included.

    At 10:33 a.m. that morning Treasury Department official Jenni Lecompte emailed other Treasury officials with a plan for Feinberg to grant interviews to ABC, CBS, NBC and NPR. Treasury official Andrew Williams asked for time to fit in CNN and Bloomberg.

    Lecompte emailed White House official Dag Vega at 11:10 a.m. noting that Treasury was trying to add more interviews for Feinberg to the schedule. She asked: “If we did do Fox in the mix, is that an issue? (understand you would not but if we do is that a problem on your end?)”

    Vega wrote to her: “we’d prefer if you skip Fox please.

    Most transparent, free-access president EVAH, dontcha know. No stage-managed propaganda at all.

    http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2011/07/october-2009-email-from-white-house-undermines-claim-there-was-no-attempt-to-exclude-fox-news-from-i.html

    • They excluded FOX. And who knows who else?

      The disturbing part of that is… they really thought that Democrats, by and large, would think what they did in censuring the media … was “cool.”

      As I recall, the Lefty blogger boys sort of promulgated this idea that any media outlet that leans Right in any way deserves to be excluded. The average American, however, did not quite see it that way. (Not even those of us who grew to hate FOX during the Clinton and Bush years.)

      The most “transparent president evah” has surrounded himself with a rabble that believes in flat out censorship… (ie. https://crayfisher.wordpress.com/2011/07/11/the-marketplace-of-ideas/ )

      So, now O’Donnell want to alienate Newsweek for daring to publish ONE fair Palin piece? One has to ask… how many supposedly “favorable” pieces were scrubbed by the pubescent minded media boiz in 2008? And by the girls too (like Couric) in an attempt to “fit in?”

      The plot thickens. I hope the truth continues to leak out.

  25. WMCB says:

    LMAO!!!! NBC employees are pissed that Comcast’s insurance does not do as much to meet their obvious and widespread need for mental health treatment. From the NY Post:

    Their new bosses are driving NBC staffers crazy. Since Comcast took over the network from General Electric earlier this year, some staffers are complaining that their new health insurance doesn’t offer the same level of benefits for psychotherapy.

    Geez, you’d think that with Olbermann gone, they’d have gone into surplus in the mental health kitty.

    Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/therapy_deficit_5I8969J9jWaj8Z0cBJcdRK#ixzz1S7gtKYsu

  26. DandyTiger says:

    Whoa, good post dude. Like HONK or something.

  27. You are on a roll, miq. Just tweeted your last post. And I will blog about it in the AM.

    Too tired to be coherant now ;~)

Comments are closed.