Inside the mind of an Obot turned OWSer

From christofpierson at Tragic Farce:

Middle of the Road Rage

I’m really, really not interested in the “Who’s better/more progressive/more electable/ more presidential: Hillary or Barack?” debate. From my perspective, this is irrelevant to present realities, no matter how endlessly fascinating the question may be for some. It honestly never was a useful discussion for any leftist, ever, even while it was was relevant.

But it is eye-opening to experience the violence of feeling ready to erupt among the Clinton refugees and, I tip my hat to them, sincerely: it does make me realize that I, like probably every former Obama supporter, no matter how hot or cold they were for their choice, had blinders on during those primaries.

Some Hillary people are wrong to the point of pathological about the nature of those blinders. If you read this person’s comment you should be able to see what I mean in the first paragraph. I don’t want to “go there” here, but I will say that speculating on the appeal of something or someone for another person and mistaking that speculation for “truth” or “psychological insight” is always a frivolous luxury that is utterly devoid of nutritional value at best and, at worst, self-poisoning.

But that doesn’t cancel out the fact that Obama supporters were blind, specifically to the travesties of primary political tactics the Obama team allegedly played, which the commenter alluded to in the snippet above. We were blind to them, many of us, because we did not care about the process, only about the end of it. Did the Democrats rig the primaries for Team Obama? I don’t know, but I’m inclined to believe, given what I know of the thoroughly corrupt electoral system, that they certainly could have. That is the way politics is played in the US of A. If the rules won’t elect your guy or girl, brute force will always do the trick, and campaign operatives are always devising ever cleverer ways of smashing the rules for victory’s sake. I usually hate to hear commentators dropping the brainless “both parties are guilty” line, but in this case, it’s absolutely true. Republicans happen to be more psychopathic about it, but Democrats clearly have noticed that in the American electoral system, psychopathy is solid strategy.

What is really clear to me now after my experience of yesterday is that Hillary Clinton supporters like my new friends are probably a bellwether for “the Democrats’” chances in 2012. (Why this crowd is resistant or downright hostile to OWS is a bit of a mystery that is useful to think about, and I intend to think about it more. Is it, perhaps, that they’re too close to the middle of the road to make out much beyond the yellow lines?) My friend is exaggerating and plain wrong when she (I’ll assume) says that the primaries caused “a tsunami” of change among “everyone else,” by which she presumably means non-Democrats as well. The fact is, only die-hard Clinton supporters were changed by what they witnessed in primary season. Clinton die-hards should make peace with that fact. And they should test to see what their own blinders prevent them from seeing. But, frankly, they should be proud of being in the avant gard of the clued-in.

So many juicy targets, where do I begin?

I long ago made my peace with the fact that most of the country doesn’t care about what happened in 2008. I will never make peace with what happened in 2008.

If Hillary were president and did all the same things that Obama has done, I would not be happy about it. But I would be willing to give her the benefit of the doubt because she earned my trust. Barack Obama has earned my distrust.

That doesn’t mean I would suddenly like Obamacare. It would still stink, as would the continuation of the Bush policies on war and civil liberties. But I don’t believe Hillary would do exactly what Obama has done. If you disagree, prove me wrong.

I lost my blinders in 2008. In losing them I came to realize several things, including the fact that the Democratic party was not my friend, and that individual Republicans were not my enemy.

As for why I am “resistant or downright hostile to OWS” the answer is simple. It is an astroturf covered veal pen for progressives. Its purpose is to distract and deflect attention away from Barack Obama and the Democrats, while ensuring they are ineffective and incapable of being a threat to same.

I am not a fan of banks or billionaires. I am outraged at what has taken place, including the financial meltdown, the housing bust, the growing gap between the rich and everyone else, and the persistent failure of our government to do anything about it.

But OWS is not the answer.

Let’s assume OWS succeeds beyond it’s supporters wildest dreams. The entire corrupt system is gone. What would that look like?

No government. No money. No economic system other than barter and trade. Starvation, war and disease. The four horsemen of the Apocalypse riding back and forth across the land.

What’s that? You don’t want to destroy the whole thing, just reform it?

Okay, then you need to embrace politics, not shun them. And you need to make your peace with the fact that YOU WILL NEVER ACHIEVE CONSENSUS.

Oh, you can get consensus on some issues, but we already have that. We all agree that rape and murder are bad things. Nobody wants to starve or die from contaminated food. We all love mom, apple pie and baseball.

But there are a bunch of smart, well-informed people out there who see all the same things that we do but who draw different conclusions. Where we want more government, they want less, and vice versa.

Whether you reform the current system or create a new one, you have to deal with that fact. Some of the brightest minds that ever lived have spent millennia trying to come up with a system that accommodated diverse opinions. They tried everything from democracy to dictatorship to no government at all.

They finally came up with the current system. It’s got lots of faults, but it works better than anything else ever invented. If you think you have a better idea, I’m all ears.

This entry was posted in Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Hillary Clinton, Occupy Wall Street, OWS, Politics and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

109 Responses to Inside the mind of an Obot turned OWSer

  1. crawdad says:

    I will never make peace with what happened in 2008.

    True story

    • I don’t blame any of you for that sentiment. I understand it thoroughly because of what happened in 2000, not mention a bunch of other cheesy elections, some between Democrats.

      • myiq2xu says:

        A common misperception is that we are mad because Hillary lost. That is not true.

        If she had lost fair and square that would be one thing, even with the media putting their thumb on the scale. But she beat Obama and the DNC stole it from her and us.

        That doesn’t mean we would like Obama if he won fair – there is a reason we didn’t support him in the first place.

        Part of that reason was his obnoxious supporters. Pretty much everyone here was chased off other blogs by Obama supporters. I was chased off Buffoon Juice.

        • I’ve dealt with those obnoxious supporters myself. But to be fair, you guys ain’t exactly sweethearts in this battle either. Oh, I know you’re going to blame it on their starting it first. That’s what they all say.

        • Lulu says:

          I was chased out of my local Democratic party. Now there isn’t one because no one will give them any money locally. They ran all of the old dogs off who paid for everything. The national and state arms of the Dems will not share as it all goes to Obama. 2010 saw almost every single Democratic office holder loose here. Everything from judges, JP’s, state reps, tax assessor, you name it. We have two left on city council who are technically non-partisan but that is it. So yes process is important. If it is rigged it kills the party because it is no longer democratic but more like a organized crime family. The only people around here willing to work for Obama’s re-election want to be paid. And no one is donating except to Republicans.

        • myiq2xu says:

          But to be fair, you guys ain’t exactly sweethearts in this battle either.

          Show me a blog started by former Obama supporters that were chased off their old blog by Hillary supporters.

        • gxm17 says:

          …And then we were stalked and harassed on the pro-Hillary blogs by Obama supporters.

          FWIW, cristof, I got kicked off a non-political blog for calling Obama a “Chicago thug.” I do not visit pro-Obama sites and yet I’ve had to put up with their misogynistic spew on pro-Hillary sites for coming up on four years now. Suddenly ObamaNation seems to want to start a “dialog” after spending the last four years calling us nine yards of MFer.

          U. F. B.

        • Completely true.

          I will never forget. Or forgive. It’s over between me and the Obamacrat party.

          If the Dems ever see clear to hold honest primaries and choose more than a front man, I may consider returning.

        • Lola-at-Large says:

          “People will forget what you said. People will forget what you did. But people will never forget how you made them feel.”

          ~ Maya Angelou

          She also said:

          ““The first time someone shows you who they are, believe them.”

          Pretty sure both apply to the BO-HRC scenario of 2008.

  2. HELENK says:

    When will the obots get it. It was more than about Hillary not getting the nomination? The rules committee murdered the vote. They basically said to at that time the Hillary voters screw you, your vote does not count. What happens when there is another primary and the voters want one person and the rules committee wants another? Will it be another screw you your vote does not count, we can put who ever we choose not who you the voter chooses.
    The dems chose the worst enemy of this country in my lifetime, and put him in the place to do the most harm, and he does it every chance he gets.

    As for the owies, just what do a bunch of people who seem not to have been toilet trained and think they should have the world just because they were born have to offer?
    They have cost cities who are supported by taxes millions in unnecessary costs to clean up after them and protect the citizens from them. For what? Just what have they done to help fix any problem?

    • elliesmom says:

      Wherever the “left” congregates – Grant Park, the National Mall, Zuccotti Park, they leave a mountain of trash behind them. The “right” brings its own trash bags. It’s a metaphor. While I am certainly left of center, I’m also a lifetime member of the Girl Scouts where “leaving it cleaner than you found it” is a basic tenet. But when I pointed out what pigs people were at the Stewart/Colbert rally, I learned that the Girl Scouts are a fascist organization.

  3. elliesmom says:

    Many people, including CP and Van Jones, have suggested that the OWS group and the Tea Party should get together for a “meeting of the minds”. While both groups might be able to agree on what our problems are, their proposed solutions are 180 degrees apart. But I think it might be interesting to put representatives of each movement in the same room for awhile and see who emerges with a plan. Dreams aren’t worth much more than entertainment unless you can make them come true.

  4. kc says:

    Well said, myiq. No, they don’t get it–maybe when it happens to them but that takes abit of self awareness that I haven’t seen from many of the bots.

    The Rules committee of ’08 was like a branding iron on most of us and the burn is always there.

  5. DeniseVB says:

    Not sure about the Obots, but I’ve met many Dems turned Tea Party. Those were really fun rallies 😉 I think we’re called the 81% labeled ABO now.

  6. Interesting, myiq. Thanks for this.

    Just want to say for the moment, no one knows how a Hillary presidency would have been different. I was reading this morning, though, a quote from 2007, I believe, in which she said her main goal would have been to move to the center and get both parties working together. A “centrist coalition” she called it. She also called for a bipartisan commission to study Social Security’s long-term solvency.
    We’re really talking a matter of inches between Clinton’s promises and Obama’s actions. It’s not the differences between them that really outraged you all, it seems to me, but the way the electoral system screwed you. Isn’t that right? There really is no point in rehashing to the Obama vs. Hillary debate. Those two people are utterly irrelevant. The real issue is that the system is broken probably beyond repair.

    • myiq2xu says:

      Arguing Hillary vs. Obama is an argument that can never be settled because even if Hillary replaced Obama next year the circumstances would be different.

      It’s like an argument over two head coaches. There is only so much a coach can do – they call plays but they don’t play the game, and they are limited by the players they have to work with.

      But some coaches win wherever they go.

    • elliesmom says:

      While I agree that the system is broken, I don’t believe that it’s beyond repair. But as a nation, we have become used to throwing things out when they break instead of fixing them. So we have people who have to have a new car every three years with cash for their “clunker” and landfills full of broken toasters. Something you value should be worth fixing. Perhaps, another difference between the Tea Party and OWS.

      • myiq2xu says:

        If it is beyond repair, what’s that leave?

        A constitutional convention? Civil war?

        • elliesmom says:

          I live in a town that’s small enough that we still have town meetings where every registered voter can stand in line to be heard and gets to vote. Some years they take on a marathon quality where important decisions get made by the last people standing after 4or more nights of wrangling over minutia. And you can go home one night thinking that an issue is settled only to have a different crowd show up the next night and vote “to reconsider”. I’m a town meeting junkie and last spring I said “uncle” when it continued on into the second week. The OWS people who think we can run a country the size of this one by general assemblies and “consensus” are out of their minds, obot or not. I’m not sure what they expect the world a la OWS to look like practically, but 9000 people pushes the limits of horizontal leadership.

          • myiq2xu says:

            When I first read about “horizontal leadership” and “consensus method” and how OWS had no leaders I knew what I was reading was bullshit.

            And that told me that everything else I was reading about OWS was bullshit too.

        • This is the nature of the times we live in. We don’t yet know what that leaves. But it seems to me what we’ll see is fewer and fewer people putting their trust in electoral politics to do anything but maintain an unsustainable status quo. And that will of necessity force something to come to a head. The American Dream is over. The petroeconomy is dying. The income gap is widening and the middle class is shrinking. None of this is sustainable. It is going to come to a head. We’re living in a time of crisis. I hope the people can rouse themselves to recreate and recommit to democracy because I’m afraid the alternative is going to look a lot more like fascism, to use an overused but here apt term. I’m not the only one saying this. This is not my pet theory. These are the frightening facts that we really do need to face before it’s too late.

        • When I first read about “horizontal leadership” and “consensus method” and how OWS had no leaders I knew what I was reading was bullshit.

          And that told me that everything else I was reading about OWS was bullshit too.

          Comment of the week. Nailed it.

      • Just to be clear, did you vote for Hillary and are you now a member of the tea party, elliesmom?

        • elliesmom says:

          No, I don’t belong to the Tea Party. I just admire that they put their money where their mouths are. If the left really supported environmentalism, they wouldn’t leave a trail of trash behind themselves everywhere they go. If the left really supported women, they’d run Bill Maher off the air. But my politics are not the same as the Tea Party’s. I’m just embarrassed by the behavior of the people who purport to support my views.

          I not only voted for Hillary, I actively worked on her campaign. I also worked for Martha Coakley. I’ll vote for Elizabeth Warren, but I’m not campaigning for her. She’s as batshit crazy as Michele Bachmann, just on the other side of the political scale. But she would be another woman in the senate so she’ll get my vote.

        • elliesmom says:

          My full response to you seems to be stuck somewhere, No, I don’t belong to the Tea Party. I’m a liberal voter. Not “progressive”. Liberal. Yes, I campaigned in 6 states for Hillary Clinton.

        • Thanks. Are you from New England? Have you heard the Jefferson quote about the ideal size of republics?

          “It must be acknowledged that the term “republic” is of very vague application in every language… Were I to assign to this term a precise and definite idea, I would say purely and simply it means a government by its citizens in mass, acting directly and personally according to rules established by the majority; and that every other government is more or less republican in proportion as it has in its composition more or less of this ingredient of direct action of the citizens. Such a government is evidently restrained to very narrow limits of space and population. I doubt if it would be practicable beyond the extent of a New England township.”

        • elliesmom says:

          Thanks for rescuing the “long form”.

        • elliesmom says:

          Yup, I live in a small New England mill town. It’s the kind of place where you don’t have to lock your door. Neighbors talk politics over the backyard fence. Just the kind of place that Jefferson was talking about. It doesn’t scale up well. If OWS believes that we need to tear our system of government down, I’d like to know what they plan on substituting for it. Are we going to become a continent of city-states? With weekly meetings on the town green? Or are we going to “From each according to his abilities. To each according to his needs”? Cause what I think “you need” and what you think you need might be very different.

        • “… and are you now a member of the tea party”

          McCarthy much?

    • Well, if “no one” knows how a Clinton presidency would have been different. Then call me “no one.”

      Hillary has many, many legislators in Washington by the balls. This is a fact. They owe her. (And, dare I say, her husband too.)

      Not only is Hillary clear on what she wants out of the presidency. But she also has the collateral to get it. Mr. Pretendent… not so much.

      Obama is a puppet and that’s all. He knows not what he wants OR how to make it happen. We got screwed. Plain and simple.

  7. DeniseVB says:


  8. Lulu says:

    I think that OWS, Obama Democrats, and many young people do not understand or respect process. Law, government, civilization, engineering, medicine, and on and on are based upon process. Manners and etiquette are process. Banking, contracts, human interaction is process. Many young people do not understand it and the reasons behind it. They do not like it because they are not good at it. Obama has shown that he is not good at it in Washington but is in Chicago. The 2008 Democratic primaries, caucuses, and nomination did not follow process and showed contempt for it. It is now biting them.

    • I’m just curious how you would describe your politics, Lulu.

    • Speaking of banking contracts and process, did you notice this news today?

      Massachusetts AG Lawsuit: Five Major U.S. Banks Accused Of Deceptive Foreclosure Practices

      The lawsuit, filed against Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citibank, Ally Financial and the Mortgage Electronic Registration System in Suffolk Superior Court, targets banks’ using fraudulent paperwork in the foreclosure process, foreclosing without actually holding the mortgage, corrupting the local land recording system and failing to uphold promises of loan modifications.

      Until now, Coakley had participated in settlement negotiations led by Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller and the Obama administration. The talks kicked off last fall when it came to light banks were using phony documents and forged signatures — a process dubbed “robo-signing” — to foreclose on thousands of borrowers.

      New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden became outspoken critics of the talks this summer, insisting Miller sought too narrow a settlement that would release the banks from liability for too much wrongdoing. Miller’s focus has been robo-signing and mistreatment of struggling homeowners seeking modifications, but not potential fraud in the way loans were given to borrowers or sold to investors, or in the way banks use MERS to shuffle mortgage documents. The settlement would not encompass the 50 percent of all home mortgages owned by government-backed mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, according to sources close to the talks.

      The deal sought by Miller would force the five banks to reform they way they service mortgages and to fork over $25 billion worth of help for homeowners, mostly in the form of principal reductions and modifications. Some who already lost their homes would be eligible for small restitution payments.

  9. HELENK says:

    I brought this link up from downstairs. Too me it says a lot.
    The first time I saw the owies carrying the GD communist flag in front of Independence Hall, where I used to take my kids to learn part of the history of this country, I knew they were worth nothing.
    My late husband was in Korea, I have friends that were at the frozen chosen and I know people who gave up everything to escape from communism.
    They are now admitting it was a part of the backtrack plan to undermine the country.

    • Lulu says:

      Notice that she says they have to “make” Obama do what he really wants to do. Who came up with this drivel. POtUS does not have to be made to do anything. They do what they see fit. Is he some kind of prisoner or something. Who kidnapped him? And the King of the Crony Capitalists is a Marxist? Please.

  10. yttik says:

    Quite simply, after the bullying and abuse from Obots in 2008, I’ve decided that if this is the Dem party, I’d rather have Republicans in charge. Watching the same kind of bullying tactics from OWS, has only reaffirmed my decision.

    For those of you who don’t think the OWSies are bullies, just look at all the sexual assaults, the throwing bottles at cops, forcing their way onto community colleges and interfering with people’s educations, screaming in town hall meetings at people who are SUPPORTIVE of them, crapping on cop cars and doorsteps, and smashing windows out of obscure bank branches.

    “We are the 99%, Beeitch” is not democracy.

  11. By the way, myiq, in the interest of politeness and, more to the point, of accuracy, would you please not refer to me as an Obot? I am not now, nor have I ever been so easily labeled. As tempting and deliciously easy as it is for us to be lazy about language, I would appreciate more rigor from you and others in this forum about that. Please, let’s try to raise our standards for discourse between each other, at least.

    I’m not a veteran of those gaseous primary wars between Clinton people and Obama people. Please don’t drag me down to that level. And please do yourselves a favor: don’t go back down there either. Thanks. .

    • elliesmom says:

      If you’re still going to vote for Obama in 2012, you’re an Obot.

    • myiq2xu says:

      Actually, “Obot” is one of the politer terms we use.

      I’ll take your request under advisement. This is a completely new situation. We normally consider Obots Obama supporters to be trolls and ban them.

      • Well… this one’s awfully concerned about the political orientation of us former Dems/ Hillary supporters. He’s skating on thin ice, if you ask me.

      • As I say, I’m not an Obama supporter, and I’m only here because this thread is about me. And I am curious about the fallout of Election 2008 on Hillary voters because I’m interested in the question of what’s going on with the people of America. I’m very used to being disappointed by politicians, which I think every American can relate to. It’s what politicians do for a living, disappoint people. I’m used to coming up against a system that simply does not do one single thing I want it to do. Ever. Maybe that’s a slight exaggeration. But let’s just take the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for an example. Or climate change. Or stimulus. I am convinced that the government simply can’t do anything I elect my reps and Senators and presidents, etc., to do, because it has a radically different agenda from mine, one that is bought and paid for. Why won’t this government close the gap between the superrich and everyone else? A supermajority believes they should. A supermajority believes in strengthening SS. A supermajority didn’t want the war in Iraq. Why isn’t there a supermajority in this Congress reflecting any of that? It’s because the system is not of the people, by the people, least of all FOR the people. It’s for the owners of the people.

        Anyway, having cute names for your enemies is degrading to you. Very reminiscent of the jejeune culture on DU. (Having enemies whose views are two inches away from you is degrading to you as well, but that’s another story.)

    • elliesmom, tamerlane over on Smart’s site brought it to a head for me. I was leaning in that direction, but tamerlane’s questions about it provoked me to be clear in my mind: There’s no good reason to vote for Obama. I’m still trying to figure out if there’s a good reason to vote in this corrupt electoral process or not.

    • gxm17 says:

      Dood, you dragged out the race card over at JWS this morning. When playing cards, that’s called a “tell.”

      • Another game metaphor. This, I think, is part of what’s wrong with the system. It’s always reduced to winning or losing. Citizens United vs. citizens sniping at each other.

        • gxm17 says:

          A “tell” isn’t about winning or losing. It’s about unknowingly revealing that which you are trying to hide. I’m just pointing out that your fly is open and you have a note taped to your back that says “kick me.”

          But, please, ignore me and carry on. This is all quite entertaining.

        • Mary says:

          A non-answer over-simplification, if you ask me.

          If you’re playing a race card, you’re not a calm mediator.

          Nice try, though.

        • Mary says:

          (That was to christof, not gxm)

        • gxm, If you say so. But you actually are talking about this discussion as though it were a game with a winner or loser on the other side. I’m not approaching it that way. I don’t approach discussions that way unless I think someone is trying to make a federal case with me about something and I think they’re wrong and somehow war breaks out between us. That kind of discussion can be fun but it’s not really anything more than entertainment. It would be good if more people tried to restrict discussions to substance. We all complain about how the media does a shitty job of covering substance. How are we doing among ourselves? I think we all need to raise our game, so to speak, which I think entails working to find common ground. If all political discussions are reduced to circle jerks with our friends and sniping matches with our “enemies,” it’s no wonder our politics doesn’t work. And we’re talking about just politics between people who fucking agree with each other for the most part! This is an insane situation!

          • crawdad says:

            Hey dude, buy a clue.

            I’m sure you’re really smart and well educated and stuff, but you really need to get off your high horse.

            Everybody at this blog saw through Obama way before you did.

            We don’t need any lectures from you.

  12. HELENK says:

    Backtrack not doing too good in former Hillary country. Because so far he has sucked as a president not because of the 2008 theft

    • Mary says:

      Gallup is now showing him with an approval rating LOWER than Jimmy Carter’s at the same stage.

      Ruh roh.

  13. parentofed says:

    When I recall me in early 2008 donating money and time to the Dems, I’m stunned how different I am.

    “Republicans happen to be more psychopathic…” This is how I’ve changed. In 2008 I would have accepted that statement w/o question. No longer. This is simply partisan hackery.

    One thing that’s changed for me is looking back before the revolutionary 60s. I’m over 60, and cringe when I see how carelessly I tossed aside my culture and values over a bunch of lefty college friends, professors, catchy slogans, and rocking music. Perhaps that’s a simplification, but I’ve realized I’m no socialist.

    Did you see that news clip – I think it was NBC – on Reggie Love leaving Obama and they described the Obama family as an old-fashioned happy 50s one with good values? A**holes. This is what the 60s leaders of Ayers, Fonda, etc mocked as false and destructive.

  14. 1539days says:

    I didn’t see anyone Occupy the voting booth yet.

  15. “Hillary has a lot of balls. She keeps them in jars in her trophy case.”

    Yessir, she does.

  16. glennmcgahee says:

    Spent all morning reading that piece and now finds him over hear. He was so surprised that so many remember 2008. And that we hold a grudge. I’m holdin that grudge until I hear some apologies roll in. We will NEVER forget it.

  17. Zaladonis says:

    Obots were the worst but I have been treated very shabbily by some Hillary supporters as well. 2008 really did open up a box of snakes among non-Republicans and the underbrush is still lousy with mad vipers.

  18. 1539days says:

    “Don’t blame Obama, blame the system.”

    • “If there’s nuance, you’re being had.”

      That is some classic American thinking there, all right. 😉

    • Helen, did you want to share this paragraph in particular with your friends here?:

      <<Phony laughter. This offense does not involve words, but it is closely enough related to warrant mention. Mostly the practice of liberals, it expresses smugness. Every false tee-hee announces, "Aren't I marvelously subtle in my superior appreciation of whatever!" Hillary Clinton is a master of this technique. A giveaway of phony laughter is that what triggers it is not funny. Here’s an egregious example: I recently heard the host of the National Public Radio show say the word Republican — not as a punchline to anything, but simply in passing. No sooner had he uttered the word than a noisy, self-satisfied tittering swept through the liberal audience.>>

      Read more:

  19. HELENK says:

    no wonder we are getting historic santa ana winds and hell is about to freeze over

    huffpo is unhappy with backtrack

  20. Rocky Hussein Squirrel says:

    “Tragic Farce” says it all.

  21. Three Wickets says:

    Nice post myiq. Most of the Owsers are Obots imo, as in 90 percent or more of them. The rest are a smattering of paulites, confluence/corrente types, and anarchists (most of whom were prolly once obots). Same koolaid rituals and unicorns.

    I think big banks should be broken up, bondholders should take bigger haircuts, housing/student debts need deeper refinancing, multinational corps need to put up or shut up on investments in domestic jobs, growth, etc. Obama has been wimpy on all fronts, and Dodd-Frank is becoming a joke. Hillary would have fought harder for working people than the creative class on these issues and more. Obama is not much more than a public relations mascot.

  22. Pingback: DemocraticUnderground and the Fracturing of the Democratic Grass Roots, Part I « Tragic Farce

  23. Jeffhas says:

    I just got to this thread today… and was enthralled that christof actually came to defend/illuminate his positions.

    I too have been disappointed by Politicians all of my adult life – including the 25+ years I’ve been a Democrat…

    Here’s the problem for me with regard to ‘Hillary’s loss’:

    The Democratic Primary of 2008 had multiple levels of ‘screw you’ written all over it.

    – The Democratic Party does not count Primary votes as One Person/One Vote; they use proportional balloting to give minorities and the poor MORE credit/votes… Thus, when Hillary would win a primary, Obama would ‘win’ a disproportionate amount of Delegates or actually get more Delegates than Hillary.

    – Florida and Michigan were only TWO of the FIVE states that had early primaries, but the DNC did not see fit in punishing those other states – or treating Florida and Michigan as they did those other rogue states and count their votes in full.

    – Even though Obama took his name off the ballot in Michigan, the DNC Rulez committee GAVE him votes/delegates as though he were on the ballot BASED ON LOCAL POLLING of that state.

    – The Superdelegates were told in no uncertain terms that if they did not vote for Obama, the Democratic Party could kiss the AA vote goodbye – for good (see Donna Brazille “there will be blood in the streets”)

    – Usually at the Party convention, there is a full floor vote – but at the 2008 Convention, no such vote was allowed by Obama and the DNC…. they were worried the Superdelegates and the Public might see just how close the primary was – and that Hillary actually won the popular vote. They forced Clinton into calling the floor vote…. they rubbed her nose in it – and her supporters as well.

    There are many more examples that could be given…

    Any of these things is unthinkable/untenable in a fair election – especially if you care about the ENTIRE party…. (see Donna Brazille again “we don’t need you anymore, we have a new coalition”).

    THIS is why it’s not like every other politician that has disappointed me. They threw my vote away – they had rules devised to count my vote as LESS than someone else’s, then they just gave him more delegates anyway.

    You need to understand, I’m not disappointed in Obama – that was bound to happen… I’m ‘disappointed’ in the Party I gave 25 years of my life and my lifetime of votes to…. ‘disappointed’ is a grand understatement.

    You want to know why we are different then every other person who’s been disenchanted with a politician? – Why we’re holding out after four years? Why we won’t rest until this guy is gone? – because the Dems zipped down their sheep’s clothing…. and those wolves cannot be run out of The Party as long as he’s it’s leader.

    You may say the whole system is broke – but as MYIQ stated, it’s the best system we’ve seen so far in this civilized world… I just think the Dem Party is more broken then the rest of it…. Republicans wouldn’t dare treat their own constituents like we got treated.

    This wasn’t ‘Hillary’s Loss’, this was Democratic Party Treachery…. this was the ‘Dems Loss’.

Comments are closed.