The Left v. Obama Aide, Not Yet A Flamewar

Steve Hildebrand’s piece in Huffington Post is just the sort of thing to get the blogging juices going. As a former deputy director of the Obama campaign, he delivers a blunt message to the left: Sit tight. Everything will be alright.

This is not a time for the left wing of our Party to draw conclusions about the Cabinet and White House appointments that President-Elect Obama is making. Some believe the appointments generally aren’t progressive enough. Having worked with former Senator Obama for the last two years, I can tell you, that isn’t the way he thinks and it’s not likely the way he will lead. The problems I mentioned above and the many I didn’t, suggest that our president surround himself with the most qualified people to address these challenges. After all, he was elected to be the president of all the people – not just those on the left.

This turns out to be the kind of message that calms nobody’s nerves, especially since the criticism of Obama from the left has hardly been that loud. But now the volume increases: David Sirota responds by suggesting that Hildebrand is just telling the dirty hippies to “STFU.” Jane Hamsher says Hildebrand is “hectoring, finger wagging.” Atrios says he will sacrifice some “magic ponies” for good liberal policy. Tim Fernholz over at Tapped argues that this is not an attack at all on the left, but rather a “fairly conventional dog-whistle.” Dog whistle or a warning shot across the bow? All we know is that people are paying attention.

Related Topics: Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Pete Souza / The White House via Getty Images

    Political Picures of the Week, May 18-25

    TIME’s photo editors bring you the best pictures of the past week from the Beltway and beyond.

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    From left: AP; ABACAUSA

    The Phony War: Obama and Romney Are Debating Character, Not Policy

    More than five months from Election Day, the back-and-forth about Mitt Romney’s record at Bain already feels played out. Unfortunately, there’s good reason to expect the campaign continues in this vein indefinitely. Neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney are terribly interested in dwelling on policy platforms. Romney’s plan to slash spending and keep taxes low on the wealthy isn’t especially popular, at least not at any level of detail beyond a blithe promise to shrink the deficit. Meanwhile, Obama’s signature first-term achievements, like health care, the stimulus and Wall Street reform, are all unpopular or tricky to sell. (The Dodd-Frank bill is the most popular of these, but hyping it means offending wealthy donors.) So what we’re getting instead is a superficial duel about character–and, worse, one that’s based on the largely false premise that the better man can better “manage” the economy back to health.

  • ymmartin

    Or maybe those on the far left just need something to scream and shout about. I consider myself to be liberal. Very liberal in fact, but if I’ve learned anything about the liberal political establishment is that they do not know when to STFU. They make noise for the sake of making noise, and they do not have the consistency or strength in audience they way the wingnuts on the right do to be making so much noise.

    Obama hasn’t even been sworn in. Appointments mean nothing until the man takes the reigns and lays out his plan and issues orders. Then we’ll see who in his administration follows orders or will have to be dropped faster than a Bush WMD lie.

  • Matt

    The upcoming clash between left-wing firebrands and the startlingly pragmatic and non-ideological Obama administration will be fierce. Should be fun to watch play out in the media…

    http://www.political-buzz.com/

  • JJ

    Nah. Sirota and a few others are worried. But overall, the blogosphere is keeping its torches and pitchforks at rest. On the Richter scale it’s barely a one and a half…

  • Paul-no not that one

    ymmartin, who in the heck is the “liberal political establishment”?
    And when, over say the last 16 years, should this creature have STFU?

  • JJ

    Sorry, mixed metaphor…

  • sgwhiteinfla

    This turns out to be the kind of message that calms nobody’s nerves, especially since the criticism of Obama from the left has hardly been that loud.

    So Scherer do you think maybe you could write a article repudiating the jack azzes that keep claiming the “angry libruls” are mad at Obama? I mean you did just admit that its a false meme right?

  • Paul-no not that one

    I think this Hildebrand kind of stuff is not for the “left’s” consumption, this is to make the Beltway feel reassured and comfortable.

  • kathy

    I agree with Hildebrand here, but it might have been better to let someone else point it out. Obama’s going to keep his promises as much as he can, and for the most part they are not left-wing promises. But I trust most of the left can figure that out without needing to be told. Obama’s been carefully laying the groundwork for choices that will please the left. Gates followed by Shinseki, for example. Obama didn’t pay attention to everybody that was concerned during the primary or the general, and he won’t go lurching around now, either.

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    This represents a nice opportunity to kvetch about labelling in the first place. Opposing torture and demanding transparency and accountability are NOT leftist positions. The liberal blogosphere has represntatives with a wide variety of views and plenty of room for disagreement among them. What they don’t have is patience for people who are willing to tell them what they are thinking or describe them in the third person without addressing who they are as individuals.

    I personally don’t care if Obama appoints any self-identified ‘progressives’ to his cabinet but if he doen’t take a firm stand against rendition and torture and ‘preemptive warfare’ that targets innocents then I’m indeed going to be PO’ed.

  • Casey Morris

    Oh, it’s a flame war, my young friend.

    Steve Hildebrand has that unique feel for saying exactly the wrong thing at exactly the wrong time. It was absolutely dog whistle for STFU.

    What’s far more annoying, however, is that he buying into and spreading a right wing meme: That somehow The Left is actually united enough to be unglued about something all at the same time. In case he hadn’t noticed, it generally takes an actual, you know, WAR, to get the left fully united. Iraq, Vietnam, Gore 2000…

    A pretend war against President Elect Most Popular Guy Ever in the first thirty seconds of his yet to be administration is just that, A Pretend War. A story made up out of whole cloth by the bored vacuum of nutbags on the right who see any dissent as, well, something ILLEGAL. Or in this case, at least really, really, really, really serious. And should be treated as such by really serious people.

    Steve Hildebrand got punked by the Right. And then stepped in it on the Left. And now he will be treated like my dog’s chewtoy.Until boredom sets in and we find another chewtoy.

    I see Jane Hamsher and Kos are nominating Caroline Kennedy for next chewtoy for the bizarre reason that she is or is not qualified to be Senator while also has the last name of Kennedy. Or Schlossberg. Or something about “monarchy” that has no bearing whatsoever on reality, her Constitutional qualifications to be Senator, or on the work that she has quietly been doing in New York on education, civics and arts issues for years and years. Here in New York, we love it when folks from other states tell us who should be our Senator. That’s going to be super popular. Yes, I predict that piefight/flamewar/chewtoy-nomination is about to erupt into a big old “STFU if you don’t live in New York” and “especially STFU if you don’t know jacksh!t about the $100 million fundraising issue that whoever the next Senator from New York is going to have come 2010. And 2012.”

    Piefight/flamewar/chewtoy watch continues.

    I’m making more popcorn. Can someone please pour KT a glass of wine?

    Thanks.

  • Casey Morris

    I’m reposting this, because I forgot how screwed the formatting is and how it makes everything unreadable. And my readability needs all the help it can get.

    Oh, it’s a flame war, my young friend.
    _
    Steve Hildebrand has that unique feel for saying exactly the wrong thing at exactly the wrong time. It was absolutely dog whistle for STFU.
    _
    What’s far more annoying, however, is that he buying into and spreading a right wing meme: That somehow The Left is actually united enough to be unglued about something all at the same time. In case he hadn’t noticed, it generally takes an actual, you know, WAR, to get the left fully united. Iraq, Vietnam, Gore 2000…
    _
    A pretend war against President Elect Most Popular Guy Ever in the first thirty seconds of his yet to be administration is just that, A Pretend War. A story made up out of whole cloth by the bored vacuum of nutbags on the right who see any dissent as, well, something ILLEGAL. Or in this case, at least really, really, really, really serious. And should be treated as such by really serious people.
    _
    Steve Hildebrand got punked by the Right. And then stepped in it on the Left. And now he will be treated like my dog’s chewtoy. Until boredom sets in and the hunt begins for another chewtoy.
    _
    I see Jane Hamsher and Kos are nominating Caroline Kennedy for next chewtoy for the bizarre reason that she is or is not qualified to be Senator while also has the last name of Kennedy. Or Schlossberg. Or something about “monarchy” that has no bearing whatsoever on reality, her Constitutional qualifications to be Senator, or on the work that she has quietly been doing in New York on education, civics and arts issues for years and years.
    _
    Here in New York, we love it when folks from other states tell us who should be our Senator. That’s going to be super popular.
    _
    Yes, I predict that piefight/flamewar/chewtoy-nomination is about to erupt into a big old “STFU if you don’t live in New York” and “especially STFU if you don’t know jacksh!t about the $100 million fundraising issue that whoever the next Senator from New York is going to have come 2010. And 2012.”
    _
    Piefight/flamewar/chewtoy watch continues.
    _
    I’m making more popcorn. Can someone please pour KT a glass of wine?
    _
    Thanks.

  • Paul-no not that one

    ” Here in New York, we love it when folks from other states tell us who should be our Senator. That’s going to be super popular.”
    .
    Ha- What makes NY exempt?

  • sgwhiteinfla

    kathy
    .
    What exactly is wrong with evaluating Obama’s Cabinet nominees? According to the folks around John Brenan it actually helped to keep him from getting nominated to a post in Obama’s cabinet and in my opinion, that was and is a very good thing. But the truth is none of the “diry hippies” have even been making a lot of noise about Obama’s cabinet. Thats why none of these concern troll stories EVER point out the supposed librul who is so up in arms. They quote Chris Hays from the Nation because he said he wants a progressive in the cabinet. Is that really earth shattering? Its not like he is saying “Obama fooled us all, we must over throw him!” He, like most liberals/progressives states his case pretty clearly and calmly as to why he thinks there should be a progressive or 5 in Obama’s cabinet and why many of them would be better for the country that the people Obama has picked so far. Just about the only real deal hissy fit by the left has been over Lieberman and even that was directed more at Harry Reid than it was aimed at Obama. Its like the media are pushing two story lines now
    .
    1. The country is Center Right
    .
    2. The liberals/progressives are unreasonable, irrational and angry and therefore they should not be acknowledged nor listened to.
    .
    And the sorriest thing is that its working. You have Democrats walking around right now ready to apologize for having a liberal ideology or being behind liberal issues. And you have Democrats saying that other Democrats should STFU when they aren’t even talking. Its the best propaganda I have seen in a LONG time I just hope its effectiveness wears off sooner rather than later.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    Casey Morris
    .
    There won’t be a flame war about Caroline Kennedy because the people who are criticizing her being appointed are making thoughtful, in depth cases for WHY she shouldn’t be appointed. It isn’t just because she is a Kennedy. Its because if she gets appointed now she is going to have to run again in two years and she needs to raise as you said the 100 million. Wouldn’t it be better for her to take the next two years to raise the money and get the people aquainted with her rather than doing some on the job learning and trying to raise money at the same time? Neither Jane nor Kos said she SHOULDN’T be a Senator, they just said she shouldn’t be appointed as Senator and I tend to agree. But for the people that don’t agree they will need to state clearly what her qualifications are such that she won’t be a liablility for the next two years and that she is strong enough to take the attacks. She didn’t seem particularly comfortable in the public this year and so I would be happy to hear about what would make her a good Senator also.

  • Jim, Foolish Literalist

    As someone, I think Jane Hamsher, pointed out, Hildebrand is swinging at a strawman with the Lieberman/DLC torch of “the left wing of our party”. Who, exactly, is this Left Wing he heard saying mean things about Obama in his closet or under his bed last night? Even Scherer acknowledges that the grumblings (and I’ve been grumbling a bit myself) have been muted. It was a poorly written and poorly thought out piece that didn’t say much of anything, and either Hildebrand or the editors at HuffPo decided to emphasize the poorest wording in the piece.
    **
    @ymmartin: I, too, am curious as to the exact identity of this “liberal political establishment” that has been troubling your ‘very liberal’ self.
    **
    I’ve been away awhile. Is this ridiculous wordpress system here to stay? Is that the real reason AMC left?

  • wvng

    I rather prefer the analyzes that say Obama is seeking to redefine the center as progressive: ARE WE READING THE SAME ARTICLE?
    .
    I also appreciate publius’ take on the whole thing as “essentially a giant Kabuki theater” and finds it “a bit amusing to see all the conservative schadenfreude about progressive whining about Obama.” Don’t Throw Me In The Briar Patch.

  • pghdemocrat

    Hildebrand has a point here. His STFU is justified but it also shows he needs a bit of an education in the personalities of his party. The Left love to critique everything and anyone. It is what makes them part of the left. Yes, it does seem like a natural choice to smack them around a little when the jump the gun and cry wolf on Obama not making waht they consider the best decisions based on their handbook, but that gets you no where fast. You need to learn how to filter out the noice and I don’t know if Hildebrand did this to the best of his ability.

    I am not as convinced as others that the Democratic Party is as strong as it appears and the Republican Party is falling apart. This election became one of individuals not parties. There are now Obama Democrats and those democrats may not align with the rest of the party’s ideals and candidates the way the DNC would like. Democrats still have a lot of work to do to gain the type of stronghold the Republicans have regarding the (blind) loyalty of their members. honestly, because of the reasons most people choose the Democratic Party, I don’t think it is possible. There will always be serious questioning within the party. i actually kind of like it that way, but it must be very difficult when you are trying to lead.

  • Joe Bftsplk

    Man, that was easy. MS turns out the lights, throws a stink bomb, and instantly everyone’s going all meta arguing with each other about whether liberals are arguing with each other.
    .
    MS, how about a post about Republicans’ disagreements, which are far more substantive and, you know, real? As well as interesting to us schadenfreude fans.
    .
    Although in that vein, I’d be pleased to think that R’s infighting is considerably less consequential for the next few election cycles.

  • gysgt213

    First I want to commend Michael for actually naming the blogs he is talking about and providing links. This is something the MSM seems loathed to do. Instead they (the MSM) hide behind “those blogs on the left” lefty blogs and obscure blogs or the left to hide the fact their own lazy reporting is helping to create a controversy that does not yet exist. But which they are hoping will be born even if they have father it.
    .
    As for Hillebrand he needs to STFU because if he thinks for a minute there will be blind loyalty he’s in for a very rude and crude awaking. He may even get his feelings hurt.

  • queencersei

    Obama hasn’t even been sworn in yet. People need to step back and take a deep breath. There is no telling how he or his staff will perform until they are in their jobs with some time behind them. What ever happened to giving someone the benefit of the doubt?

  • Casey Morris

    P-NNTO
    -
    I think we have something of a reputation for outspoken rudeness. Not me of course. I’m sure it’s the other New Yorkers.
    _

  • sgwhiteinfla

    queencersei
    .
    Ever wonder why people have resumes? Its so employers can theoretically project how they will perform in the future based on what they have done in the past. To not vet the people in Obama’s Cabinet to me wouldn’t be the benefit of the doubt, but instead rank hypocrisy. We would ALL have been fact checking every name floated if John McCain had won a month ago. And many of us would have been complaining LOUDLY if he named people we didn’t agree with. So because Obama won does that mean we just follow him blindly like we scorned the Republicans for doing with Bush? I am sorry but I am not built that way. If John McCain had won I truly doubt the majority of regulars on Swampland would be saying “lets give him the benefit of the doubt” so I won’t be saying it for Barack Obama either. Now I won’t engage in hysterics over rumors of who he MIGHT name, but after he names someone to a post I think its just being a responsible citizen to try to find out about that person and how their knowledge and experience will help lead whichever post they are assigned. Thats just how I feel about it.

  • kathy

    sgwhite – nothing’s wrong with evaluating Obama’s nominees. But I do think he’s doing that too, and I’ve no reason at the moment to think that I know more about any of these people than Obama and his vetters do.
    .
    Every now and then a story in the news is something I know about directly, or I’m even quoted in the news. The story practically never gets the whole thing right. Have you had that experience too? So I take with a little grain of salt what we hear about these people, especially when their motives are impugned.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Funny Casey, here in Minnesota we opt for softspoken rudeness. Not me of course. I’m not softspoken.
    .
    Is anyone really taking this “no complaining about Obama” seriously? It’s all just game playing by the media.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    kathy
    .
    The main reason that I advocate speaking out is precisely because so many news stories get things wrong. Just like the “critics call it torture” or “Brennan says he was against rendition” or “the leftys wanted Lieberman to be punished because of his speech at the RNC”. There are so many false stories out there that many times its incumbent on people to correct them. And then you have situations like the Brennan situation where no MSM journalists are reporting anything about his background other than what HE is telling them. Again to me thats a time to speak out. There is a diarist on kos who is critiquing all of the potential Ag Secretary choices. Well I don’t know much about all that, so for me what they are doing is a great service because I honestly wouldn’t have a clue whether the person was for subsidies or not, or for stronger regulation or not, with out the diaries I read on kos. Now the one thing people like Scherer won’t cover is when the left are actually happy about appointments like they were with the Susan Rice appointment, the Napolitano appointment, the Richardson appointment, and for the most part the Gen Jones appointment. But you will NEVER hear about that. Its all a game right now and the media folks are trying to beat liberals and progressives into submission so they will stop critiquing the choices and they are using any criticism to try to turn the party on itself. We have been clammoring for accountability for 8 years. I plan on helping that along a little bit.

  • Joe Bftsplk

    So, sgw, you’re saying the news headline should be “People Actually Paying Attention!”?
    I’ll buy into that.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    The idi@t Hildebrand seems to be saying there are no competent liberals in the land. Who is it that got us into the mess we are in now m@ron?

  • Casey Morris

    sgwhiteinfla

    I disagree that the argument is either thoughtful or respectful of why she shouldn’t be appointed. Thee are some very important issues that are unique to this selection in NY that haven’t been anywhere in Jane’s argument, or Kos’ or Atrios “me, too” for that matter.
    _

    The only issue that Jane raised is that this smacks of nepotism, dynasty and because she is a Kennedy doesn’t make her qualified. We can do better.
    _
    Well, to begin with, her qualifications are Constitutional, thus destroying any idiotic, and I mean idiotic comparisons to monarchy.
    _
    Here’s why I, as a New Yorker, would be thrilled to have her be our Senator: She was born and raised in New York. She lived in our state all of her live. While she may be known for shunning the spotlight, she has worked quietly and studiously behind the scenes for years here in New York on a number of issues that I care deeply about. Primarily, public education. She has worked for years, not, just on any number of national Arts commissions and councils, she has worked to develop programs that integrate the arts into public schools. I’m one of those crazy people that believes that the arts is essential to any education that involves actual thinking. I also believe that education in the arts and humanities leads to a more humane world. Those are priorities I can respect.
    _
    I like and respect her political choices. While some people work in and need the spotlight, Mrs. Schlossberg never has. She just works hard, and humbly, and quietly. Getting the job done.
    -
    Did you know that she’s also a graduate of Harvard, and has her JD from Columbia. She’s also a current member in good standing in both the NY and DC Bar Associations. For more, I’ll quote from Wikipedia:

    Kennedy is an attorney, editor, writer and member of the New York and Washington, D.C. bars. She is one of the founders of the Profiles in Courage Award, given annually since 1990 to a person who exemplifies the type of courage examined in her father’s Pulitzer Prize-winning book of the same name. The award is generally given to elected officials who, acting in accord with their conscience, risk their careers by pursuing a larger vision of the national, state or local interest in opposition to popular opinion or powerful pressures from their constituents. In May 2002, she presented an unprecedented Profiles in Courage Award to representatives of the NYPD, the New York City Fire Department, and the military as representatives of all of the people who acted to save the lives of others during the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.[4]
    -
    From 2002 to 2004, Kennedy worked as chief executive for the Office of Strategic Partnerships for the New York City Department of Education. During this time, she helped raise more than $65 million for the city’s public schools. [5] She currently serves as the Vice Chair of The Fund for Public Schools, a public-private partnership founded in 2002 to attract private funding for public schools in New York City. [6]
    -
    In addition, Kennedy is currently President of the Kennedy Library Foundation,[3] a director of both the Commission on Presidential Debates and the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and Honorary Chairman of the American Ballet Theatre. She is also an adviser to the Harvard Institute of Politics, a living memorial to her father.
    _
    Further, there’s her authorship on civil liberties and co authorship of four other books:

    Kennedy and Ellen Alderman have written two books together on civil liberties:
    In Our Defense: The Bill of Rights In Action (1990) and
    The Right to Privacy (1995)
    On her own, she has edited these New York Times best-selling volumes:
    A Patriot’s Handbook
    The Best-Loved Poems of Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis
    A Family of Poems: My Favorite Poetry for Children
    Profiles in Courage for Our Time

    _
    You need more? Okay, here’s the political reality in NY: Who do you want instead? Kirsten Gillibrand? She’d be great, but I talked to her yesterday at brunch and while honored, she didn’t seem to terribly enthused. She has small, baby type children. Who were just getting over being sick yesterday, and she had to be a brunch instead of home with her kids. And as someone who worked their ass off to help get her elected, we aren’t giving her up. Her opponent was self-funded to the tune of $7 million. We raised five million, and it was hard. And should Kirsten be appointed, we would lose this seat to the Republicans. It’s a +4 Republican registered district, spanning parts of TEN counties in NY. No democrats can raise enough to keep this seat, and frankly, it’s Kirsten’s revolutionary tranparency and constiutent services based style that has helped her keep the seat.
    _
    Oh, and those that say they oppose dynasty and want Kirsten, can also STFU, because she THIRD generation politics here in NY. People on the outside just don’t know it because of her name. So what other unknowns do you propose who are both qualified and can raise $100 million two years from now? And will also not result in a new loss of Democratic seat anywhere in the state? See, this is where I have a problem with folks outside of NY voicing opinion on the situation they seem to know truly nothing about. And by folks, I mean specifically, Jane. There are spectacular political realities that Jane (and kos as well for that matter) failed to put in her supposedly “thoughtful” argument. And it was incredibly ignorant and disrespectful of Caroline Kennedy’s accomplishments.
    _
    Jane’s essay wasn’t thoughtful or researched. It was unserious anti-elitist for anti-elitist’s sake crap.
    _
    Here’s what my guess it: Someone had the idea that Caroline Kennedy could do a very good job at holding that seat and raising money for, likely candidate, David Paterson to run for it when THE DEMOCRATS are ready for it in 2010, or 2012. I doubt if she sees it as a “career” move.
    _
    Paterson has his hands full right now with our budget crisis. And Caroline has likely graciously agreed to serve. Because her life has been one of public service. She has truly embodied the idea that those whom much has been given, much is expected. The failure to appreciate that aspect of her life is appalling, and Jane’s lame attempt to deride Caroline Kennedy for not being the right kind of Democrat or democrat is ill-serving. Caroline speaking out against the war in 2002 and 2003? Really? Was anyone in doubt as to where Teddy stood? Did anyone with an actual brain think Caroline stood anywhere else? Please.
    _
    Jane can feel free to come and live in New York, or study the issues here, or research Ms. Kennedy herself, or put forward a better idea. Any of those things would be thoughtful. Her essay was not. Let’s stop treating it as though it was.
    _
    I agree with all of her political stances, her values on education (my top issue right now), and better qualified than at least three-quarters of the folks who are there now.
    -
    Caroline Kennedy for NY’s Junior Senator? I’d be goddamn honored and grateful if she’d take the job.

  • Friar Tuck

    Totally unscientific contribution:

    I talked to Caroline Kennedy once, long ago. She rocked my world. I bet she’s still got some of that going on.

  • cincinnatus est exterminata!

    “Opposing torture and demanding transparency and accountability are NOT leftist positions.”
    .
    They are to the establishment media. It explains Klein’s knee jerk opposition to FISA criticism and other issues. It’s one of the reasons the Democrat Party establishment will always fight harder against their own than the Republicans or Broder et all will not be kind..this is why Hillebrand wrote it. Detroit’s been selling us gas guzzlers that self destruct by the time they hit 100,000 and they’re going under. The establishment media has been selling us dogmatic Reagan era centrism for about the same time and they’re both going under. One makes me worry, the other makes me smile.
    .
    As I type this, they’re discussing what Bill Kristol said on CNN. The media doesn’t deserve to survive.
    .
    The establishment media = the US auto industry

  • sgwhiteinfla

    Casey Morris
    .
    Here are the points I think Jane Hamsher made
    .

    We have absolutely no idea if she’s qualified, or whether she can take the heat of being a Kennedy in public life. She’s certainly shown no appetite for it in the past. She’ll have a target on her back and if she can’t take it, if she crumbles, she will become a rallying point that the right will easily organize around.
    .
    The woman has never run for office in her life. We have no idea how she’d fare on the campaign trail, or how well she could stand up to the electoral process.
    .
    The new Senate is going to face incredible challenges in the upcoming session, and we’re lucky this year that it will be infused with some much-needed new blood. It’s not a place for anyone to be wearing political training wheels. If Caroline Kennedy aspires to that lofty perch, let her run for something first — her name recognition, political connections and ability to fund raise should make it a cake walk. It could be a tough year for Democrats in 2010. It would be good to have her in the game.

    .
    Now I know you live in NY so you feel like that entitles you to have an opinion and it should exclude others from having an opinion but as a Senator Caroline Kennedy would be representing the rest of us too to a certain extent, especially when important issues like health care come up. So I feel like we have just as much of a reason to critique her as anybody and so does Jane Hamsher. The concerns she raises are valid and we are talking about a Senator serving during one of the most perilous times in our nations history. To me that should give people pause when you are talking about naming someone to the Senate who has never held elected office of any kind before. And the truth is if Caroline Kennedy had the exact same resume but her last name was Green some how ill bet you might have the same concerns too. And that was the exact point that Hamsher was trying to make. If its just about impressive resumes then maybe Gov. Paterson should name Paul Krugman to the Senate instead.
    .

  • Paul-no not that one

    “Here’s what my guess it: Someone had the idea that Caroline Kennedy could do a very good job at holding that seat and raising money for, likely candidate, David Paterson to run for it when THE DEMOCRATS are ready for it in 2010, or 2012. I doubt if she sees it as a “career” move.”
    .
    I think that’s a very interesting thought. It also seems to address some of the issues that SG highlights at 5:00PM.

  • trifecta

    This is a good moment to complain about the media. This is who this is directed at btw. It’s a dog whistle to the media that team Obama won’t be eating granola.
    .
    It’s quite pathetic though. Universal health care, end Iraq, invest in green tech, all liberal ideas that are now mainstream. I don’t care too much that centrists are implementing them. I am though sick and freaking tired of members of the Gang of Broder getting the vapors for 20 years before conventional wisdom hits reality.
    .
    Did I mention that I was sick and tired of it? I was also sick and tired of war coverage circa 2005 and after or so. The talking heads would talk about “serious” people. Joe Klein loved that phrase. We would have debates between people who still supported the war, and those who originally did but changed their minds, because those were the “serious” people.
    .
    Grow the F up chattering classes.

  • Paul-no not that one

    “Hildebrand did appear to concede some turf to critics who are pointing out that his piece seemed to suggest that “the left wing of our party” is somehow at odds with Obama’s desire to be “pragmatic” and holds priorities that are somehow at odds with Obama’s big-ticket agenda items.

    “The one thing I left out, which goes without saying, is that working on health care, getting out of the war in Iraq, fixing the economy … those are very progressive ideals,” Hildebrand clarified.

    http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/12/post_7.php

  • Paul-no not that one

    A bunch of nothing is what all this has been.

  • cincinnatus est exterminata!

    The meme hit the Tweety Show today. It’s in the mainstream now. Good job media!

  • gysgt213

    Well the talking heads have been itching for a fight between the left and Obama.

  • gysgt213

    By the way the recession is the bloggers fault now too. Only instead of using “ill informed” or “far left” now blogs are “new mediaJust so you know.
    .
    The premise behind David Carr’s New York Times column this morning, in which Carr muddily hypothesizes that the speed of new-media information transmission has accelerated the current economic downturn.
    .
    http://www.wordyard.com/2008/12/08/carr-diagnoses-the-economy/

  • http://elvisberg.wordpress.com Elvis Elvisberg

    As to hat trifecta said– Cynthia Tucker noted, late in 2006, that “every serious Democrat” in the Senate voted for the invasion of Iraq.
    -
    “Serious” = politically correct = wrong. It’s pretty much that simple.

  • bitterpill8

    I need to see Pres elect Obama in office for a while – say six months – before I make judgements. I would have liked Joseph Stiglitz to have had a position and I want to see how the judicial nomination process works. Just remember, everyone is going to be up for re-election. If my DFH background is of no use to this incoming admin then I will feel free to respond accordingly. But the economy is in a mess, and I am prepared to give Obama lots of leeway. It is important to protect our workers; and that is a priority. But I know one thing: there is very little to differentiate between the Republicans and “centrist” Democrats.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    PNNTO
    .
    It appears that Hildebrand conceded that David Sirota’s criticism of his piece was entirely valid. Thanks for that TPM link

  • palininatowel

    Meanwhile, Michael Steele, seeking the RNC chairmanship, commits ritual, political hara-kiri by telling the religious right and far-right conservatives to go f*** themselves if they think they can win without people who aren’t white and ultra-conservative:
    .

    “They have been beating me upside the head with it and let me give it to you straight on: Wake up people. I mean what are you going to do? Are you going to kick these folks out of the party? I have watched this party self disintegrate for the last four or five years. I’ve watched this party isolate itself from itself.”

    .
    Nice knowing you, Mike. As if being one the lone Republican African-Americans wasn’t lonely enough…

  • palininatowel

    That Sirota piece was unbelievable.
    .
    It’s the first time I’ve read anything by him that didn’t plug his book or some previous work of genius he had penned.
    .
    Call Nostradamus. The end is nigh…

  • middlegirl

    This idea that the “Left” has a consensus on Obama is strictly a MSM meme. The “Left” voices that were referenced (again, thank you Michael for actually including specific names) don’t speak for me. So far, I’m loving Obama choices but maybe that’s because I am pragmatic and non-ideological and I am willing to see how Obama’s choices play out before I get my panties in a bunch.

    As for Hildebrand, much ado about nothing. Addiction all around. Addiction to divisive memes from the MSM, addiction to bunched panties from a few people on the left.

    Casey Morris, you are my kind of practical thinker. I resonate completely whith what you are saying about Caroline Kennedy. I think she would be great.

    From a Jersey girl

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    It’s funny how the centrist cult likes to pretend they are not ideological.

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    I think this Hildebrand kind of stuff is not for the “left’s” consumption, this is to make the Beltway feel reassured and comfortable
    .
    Msg 7 by NNTO, but I agree. At least let’s wait ’til he’s inaugurated, and some bills have passed.
    .
    Like atrios says, calm the eff down. Especially you crazy press people.
    .

  • Jim, Foolish Literalist

    Greg Sargent asked Hildebrand if he could clarify who this nasty nasty “left wing of our party” is. He couldn’t, but he stands by his sweeping, meaningless generality.
    *
    When I pointed out that he seemed to be exaggerating or oversimplifying the nature of the “left’s” quarrel with Obama, without naming those lefty critics, Hildebrand responded: “There is a lot of sniping out there…it’s constant.”
    *
    I still think this was just a poorly thought-out, pointless bit of nothing. Maybe some friends of his were kvetching and he felt the need to strike back and picked the wrong (i.e., public) forum to do it. And now, as Cincy pointed out, Tweety and Broder and the rest have a name to hang their “growing rift between Obama and his base” stories on.

  • wvng

    middlegirl and “bunched panties from a few people on the left.” Consider this the new PUMA craze. The msm media likes to obsess about crazies and dissension on the left, even if there are only two of em, and they like to party with crazies on the right and pretend they are mainstream. Nothing to see here As PNNTO said: “A bunch of nothing is what all this has been.”
    .
    In deference to KT, who seems to enjoy keeping in touch with the Swamp even when she is on vacation, I am not saying all the media, or even most of the media, are complicit. But the chattering classes live for this.

  • Casey Morris

    SG

    I take your point that to some extent, each of the US Senators represents all of us, but this is not an issue of legislation or wondering where she would stand on the issues that matter to Democrats. That has been vetted. No Lieberman democrat here. So what exactly is the problem?
    _
    She’s delicate? Wow, it’s hard to imagine jane making this argument about a man. Any man. But even if it’s not sexist, it’s still stupid. And uninformed. Here’s a comparison: I had no appetite for having children before the age of forty. Once I decided to jump in, I loved it and committed to it and am good at it (so far). Ferociously good.
    _
    Here’s a supremely dumb comment of Jane’s, especially if you live in the political climate of New York:

    She’ll have a target on her back and if she can’t take it, if she crumbles, she will become a rallying point that the right will easily organize around.

    First, why should I accept the premise of Jane’s argument that she’ll have a target on her back? You really think that the Senate will transform Caroline into Hillary? I don’t think so. Even the Senate didn’t transform Hillary into an organizing point for Republicans. They worked with her on any number of issues and they respected her. Jane needs to review Hillary’s Senate history and the comments of her Republican colleagues.

    If she crumbles? Again, I’m not sure how you make this into a statement that is not sexist, but I haven’t seen anything that makes me likely to accept the premise of the argument. She’s survived her father’s assassination, her Uncle’s assassination, the public life of her family, the multiple tragedy of her only brother’s death, et cetera. Things that would make mose people crumble. Have you seen her crumble yet? I haven’t. I have seen her lead an exemplary life of quiet dignity, humility and deep committment to public service.
    -
    Caroine Kennedy wearing political training wheels? Seriously? Do you think that’s why Obama had her on his two person Veep search team? Because she a neophyte? Do you think that’s why Harvard has her at the School of Government? Have you ever heard her speak on civics? Political training wheels? I’m trying to search my brains for a stupider remark I’ve heard recently, but I can’t think of one.Caroline Kennedy is not 25. She’s in her fifties, having lived her whole life involved in politics. Her whole life. Over fifty years of in and around the corridors of power. Over fifty years of experience. Political training wheels? Really? Do you really agree with that statement? Just because Ms. Kennedy doesn’t carry out her work with bluster, doesn’t make it non-existent.
    _
    Jane’s “what if” scenarios defy both gravity and gravitas. They lack substance and evidence on which to base any such premise. They are strawmen. To create a premise that she can’t handle the spotlight because she has shown no appetite for running for office in the past is an enormous leap of non-existent. Certainly, unlike many, many other Senators, Ms. Kennedy knows EXACTLY what she is in for. Oddly, this is being viewed as some sort of legacy appoinment. As is she’s never been involved in politics in her life. In point of fact, the only thing she hasn’t done in politics is run for elected office. And who’s to say she will come 2010.
    _

    Which brings me to another issue: I don’t remember ANYONE, I mean one single Democrat who did anything other than give FULL THROATED SUPPORT to Jean Carnahan after her husband died in the plane crash. Do you?
    -
    Mike Bloomberg never held elected office, and he’s a very good mayor of New York. Very good. Understands the city well. Gets people to work together. Seemed to hold up just fine stepping into the fray of the post 9/11 NY. Certainly better than the hysterical ghoul of Rudy Guiliani, who thought suspending democracy was the solution to terrorism in New York.
    -
    What makes Jane think that experience in running for elected office is a qualification for this appointment. It isn’t. The Constitution of United States and the laws of NY give us exact guidance as to what makes someone qualified to hold this office. And Ms. Kennedy is qualified. So, for that matter, is The Shrill One. And I wouldn’t mind The Shrill One being appointed, although, he actually would be wearing political training wheels, since he hasn’t the law degree, or the civics background, or the political background that Ms Kennedy brings to the table, but he brings some interesting other things instead. However, he, like just about every other Democrat in NY right other than Bill Clinton and Caroline Kennedy, have a $100 million dollar problem, that neither you nor Jane has provided a solution to.
    -
    Again, one needs to accept the premise of Jane’s arguments in the first place, and I don’t. And even if I did, they would still be utterly uninformed. And that pisses me off. It’s one thing to invite yourself into a family argument under the guise of the family being a part of the neighborhood you live in. It’s another thing to invite yourself into the family argument and not know what the hell you are talking about. At all. And you also don’t have any ideas for solving the family argument. Other than various sorts or unhelpful namecalling of the participants.
    -
    So again, I’m asking, if not Caroline, then who, and why and how do you manage the multiple political realities as I have outlined them. See, SG, it’s not YOU having an opinion that pisses me off. You are interested in more information, thoughtful ideas, interesting debate. What Jane did wasn’t any of those things. it was destructive. And it was destructive to Democrats. It was poisoning the well. Not the well where she gets HER water. She poisoned someone else’s well. If Caroline Kennedy were to become the Jr. Senator from NY, she’ll vote the the left would want her to vote. So really, what’s the point of this exercise? Again, it’s anti-elitism for the sake of anti-elitism. Caroline Kennedy is not George Bush. Or Jeb Bush. Or even Judd Gregg for that matter. She’s managed to be low profile in the highest profile family in the country, and to have a career of public service that’s been deicated to getting the private sector involved in contrubuting to public service. That’s a pretty remarkable set of political skills.
    _
    Never having run for elected office if not a disqualification from holding office on a temporary basis. Any office, including that of the President of the United States. Nixon could have picked anyone as Vice-President, and they would have become President. The founding father understood this when they crafted the Constitution. The founding father didn’t think it was a problem. I have to wonder why Jane thinks she understands governance better or has greater wisdom when it comes to the Constitution than they.
    _
    And for all of Jane and company’s cursing at the darkness, I have yet to see the candle lighting begin in earnest. The problems in this appointment are multiple and complex, both in the short and long run. And I have yet to see, hear or read any criticism of the potential appointment of Caroline Kennedy which either takes these issues fully into account, or offers a better alternative. That part pisses me off the most.

  • wvng

    In the meantime, in the world of things that actually matter, Half of mortgage modifications re-defaulting within 6 months. As Chris in Paris said: “This is really bad news in every imaginable way for this economy.”

  • Casey Morris

    I think this Hildebrand kind of stuff is not for the “left’s” consumption, this is to make the Beltway feel reassured and comfortable

    Like I said, punked by the right into responding to the nonsense meme, then steps in it on the left. Now, a chewtoy. You have to wonder why he felt the need to respond. Too much time on the cocktail weenie circuit?
    _
    This is the sort of thing that if you only talk to the same five people, and those five people keep telling you that the Wizard of Oz is real, pretty soon you start telling people to be looking out for the Very Serious Threat of attack from pissed of green people, when the rest of the universe knows perfectly well that there is no Wizard of Oz, and then you wind up looking like a pretty silly fellow.
    _
    I think this is what happens when you spend too much time in DC. All of this nonsense seems real, because it’s all the villagers want to gossip about.
    -
    Seems like some new version of “The Real Housewives of …”, only it’s “The Real Media of Washington DC”. All catfights, all the time, all made up gossip, all fully vapid and part of our disturbingly stupid media discourse.

  • bryanfromhouston

    The idea that Obama got elected by the left is an MSM meme. It permits them to sell advertising as people will tune in for conflict. Folks are tired of watching their TVs to see that some panel and the current occupant of 1600 Penn has finally figured out that we are in a recession. In some way, it is the self-serving part of the MSM, and thankfully, with assistance from Greenwald at Salon, I am now able to see how the stories, posts, and memes are developed to further their own interests….not uphold some higher journalistic ethics. Those are so long gone. Everything must be scrutinized especially a story about a meme….all Hildebrand said in a nuthshell was that Obama was appointing who he thought was best. The policy and decisions have not even yet been conveyed to the public or the media which by the way is sick of covering the lamest of lame ducks and fearful that if they can’t get the ratings up, GM auto workers won’t be the only ones in the employment line in the near future.

  • destor23

    Thanks for pointing out the truth here — the left has not been rough on Obama.

  • constantweader

    Barack Obama didn’t pay any attention to his critics during the campaign, and he won’t pay any attention to us now. Steve Hildebrand’s attack on the left (and it was an attack) at the very moment Barack Obama was doing things that pleased the left — nominating the stoic, heroic General Shinseki; rolling out a humungous jobs program; standing up for Chicago union workers — appears to be an Obama-approved tactic.

    Hildebrand’s attack was not only insulting to thoughtful Americans, it’s a dangerous echo of the Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld et al. strategy of marginalizing and/or snuffing one’s critics. The insufferable Wolfowitz’ treatment of General Shinseki was of the same nature as Hildebrand’s treatment of “liberal whiners.” Democracy depends upon vociforous media and alert citizens. Hildebrand, like the Bushies, would instead have us voluntarily surrender our First Amendment freedoms. We should just trust him, he says, because he’s a liberal; we should just trust Obama. That’s not democracy; that’s pristine dictatorship.

    I’ve been reading the blogs and many commenters agree with Hildebrand. Those who criticize Obama’s betrayals of campaign promises and righty nominees are called “traitors” and “sickos” and “screamers” and so on. Obama has a huge following of what I would call Obamanazies, people who vilify anyone who speaks an unlaudatory word. Hildebrand, perhaps with Obama’s blessing or backing, is encouraging these fanatics.

    Against a gang like that, and against Obama’s resolve to play Chicago-style politics, critics are tilting at windmills. But we have a duty to tilt away. And until Steve Hildebrand and gang literally muzzle us (which is looking more like a possibility), we’ll keep at it. We’re patriots.

    The Constant Weader at http://www.RealityChex.com

  • gysgt213

    Wonder why the Tribune went bankrupty today? I can’t figure it out.
    .
    Tribune Co. petitioned for Chapter 11 bankruptcy today, and in its bankruptcy filing listed many key financial details, including who it owes money to.
    .
    Among them are the amounts it still owes to former top executives of Times Mirror—no Tribune executives are listed on the filing—the parent company of the Los Angeles Times that Tribune (ill-advisedly) bought in 2000.
    .
    In each case, the nature of these executives’ claims are identified as retirement and deferred compensation. The specific amounts owed:
    .
    To Mark Willes, the last CEO of Times Mirror, who served from 1995 until the Chandler family sold the company out from under him:
    $11.2 million. (!)
    .
    To Robert Erburu, CEO of Times Mirror from 1992 to 1995:
    $4.4 million.
    .
    To Raymond Jansen, publisher of Newsday from 1994 to 2004:
    $2.8 million.
    .
    To Horst Bergmann, former executive vice-president of Times Mirror:
    $2.7 million.
    .
    The filing stated that Tribune had $7.6 billion in total assets and just under $13.0 billion in total liabilities.
    .
    When the Tribune deal was completed last year, it left Tribune with … $13.0 billion in debt. that the company’s made such little progress in getting rid of that debt despite all manner of staff cuts and asset sales helps explain why Sam Zell did what he did today.
    .
    http://www.businessweek.com/innovate/FineOnMedia/archives/2008/12/former_tribune.html

  • http://pourmecoffee.blogspot.com pourmecoffee

    Fighting with avatars. So ridiculous. Post-election conflict deficit disorder.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Two pages of comments instead of one long thread? How queer.

  • gysgt213

    This blog keeps getting worse. I didn’t think that was possible. But here we are.

  • gysgt213
  • henqiguai

    re: PNNTO #”7″
    Yeah, and they apparently re-set the numbering to 1 as well. And gysgt213, it can always get worse; consider, they can take away the little bit of formatting still available, and not allow cut & paste.
    My concern, after having only recently ‘discovered’ Swampland, is that it goes the way of the old NPR “Talk of the Nation” forums (‘fora’ ? Has anybody resolved the issue of the plural form of ‘forum’ ???)

  • Paul-no not that one

    It’s somehow fitting that the magazine that gave Powerline “blog of the year” would have their own devolve so quickly.

  • gysgt213

    I think Sponge Bob and Patrick have taken over the running of this blog.

  • Paul-no not that one

    KT knows when to head for the hills, I’ll give her that.

  • Andy from MA

    I’m inclined to let Obama start governing before passing judgment on his alledged tone deafness to the progressives.
    .
    On Caroline Kennedy for US senate, it’s a better idea than Bill Clinton. Her appointment will make a republican challenge extremely difficult. Who from the GOP would challenge her?
    I think she’s as qualified as any one else I’ve heard mentioned, so far.
    .
    High Sheriff please fix this pagination problem.

  • Casey Morris

    Fer cryin’ out loud, is there a hamster on a wheel powering this blog or what?
    _
    Jeebus, I’ve seen stone tablets and chisels that are more modern than this thing.

  • Andy from MA

    Casey Morris, you’re exaggerating…there’s no way that you’re that old. Otherwise we would have ridden on the same dinosaur to school everyday. I’d have remembered you, too!

  • kathy

    Casey, sgwhite:
    The simple truth is there is no Democrat in this country that Democrats of my generation would rather vote for than Caroline Kennedy. Irrational as it is, the name still has magic for us. I agree that she’s well qualified, but even if she were not she would rake in tremendous support. Jane is perhaps too young to know this. You all go ask any Democrat you know who was born before 1950, maybe 1955, and ask them how they feel about Caroline Kennedy.

  • James, Los Angeles

    Awright. Late to the party once again.
    .
    1) Anybody should feel free to comment about Obama’s picks at any time. Anybody should feel free to either like them, or not. This is America. We get to make any comments we want about stuff.
    .
    2) Obama’s peeps should feel free to tell people to STFU. That doesn’t mean people *will,* but they should feel free to say it.
    .
    3) It is self-evident to all but the most dim person that objecting to American policies of torture and warrentless spying isn’t a “left-wing” position. One would think that ALL Americans would object to that.
    .
    4) Just as the Congress critters who voted in favor of the MCA are not fit to hold public office, those CIA people who participated in, and/or defended torture and illegal rendition are not fit to serve in government. Okay? NOT FIT TO SERVE.
    .
    5) It is incumbent upon all Americans to raise holy hell when someone floats a person who is NOT FIT TO SERVE. And that’s what us American citizens were doing with Brennan. Don’t like it? TS.
    .
    6) The MSM (with a couple of exceptions) are just itching to gin up some controversy to opine about. They are getting bored with all these elegant nominations like General Shinseki. The right is starting to complain about all the admiration among DC elite with Obama’s picks so far. The MSM is starting to get worried about the high approval Obama is getting. So they just eat this up with a spoon.
    .
    OT: What’s with the 2-page comment thread, which isn’t even numbered correctly? Trying to bump up the page views? It’s lame, Michael. Please tell the High Sheriffs.

  • vwcat

    I am a proud progressive but, the behavior by some of them and the way they treated Mr. Hildebrand makes ashamed of being one.
    These people are just out of control and acting way over the line.
    They are basing everything on assumptions and rumors and what Obama might do instead of facts.
    The man has not been sworn in yet and they are acting like a bunch of immature brats.
    After talking about the boorish behavior of the far rightwing for years what do they do over nothing? Act just like the very people they criticized.
    They are no better and I am very tempted to reject my progressive pride and become an indie.

  • Andy from MA

    Kathy,

    I agree with you 100% on Ms Kennedy. Big surprise I know, but I fall into that demographic. Not the 1950 one.

  • gysgt213

    Can some one tell where in god’s name is going on here. WTF is up with numbering. Listen High F###ups, running a blog is not rocket science. I can send my 14 year old over if help is needed. Just blink or some crap.

  • vwcat

    The rants and angry nastiness is in good form in the comments on Huffpo. They have been raging for days. First at Hildebrand and then at people who have written about the nastiness towards Hildebrand by the posters.
    It’s like one big angry rage.

  • Casey Morris

    Kathy,

    I think there is some of that, though, um, Jane is actually older than I am. The issues for me are politically practical ones. How do we get someone who’s with me on the issues, especially passionate about the ones I am passionate about, how do we solve the $100 million problem, and avoid any net loss for Democrats on a local, state or national level, and if needed, buy time to raise up the stature of another Democrat who can run for Governor and have Paterson run for Senate?
    -
    Caroline Kennedy solves all of those problems really nicely. Eliot Spitzer created one hell of a political problem in terms of planning for the continuing leadership of the Democratic party in New York. He was also a really crappy Governor and David Paterson is tremendous. Hillary Clinton was always envisioned as moving on, but we need more time to develop a deeper bench. I think this is a move that does that.
    -
    The bench and the money are real issues here. Unless you want Senator Rudy Guiliani. In which case, put Jane in charge of the appointment immediately.

  • Paul-no not that one

    What EXACTLY are you talking about vwcat? “These people are just out of control and acting way over the line.”
    I know there must be a lot of them to aggravate you so, please show a few examples.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    kathy
    .
    Jane Hamsher acknowledges the popularity of Caroline Kennedy. Her objections are about whether she is qualified and how effective she might be. If you go back to the other page which I know is asking a lot you will see where I highlighted Jane’s quote that she would welcome Caroline Kennedy if she waited two years and ran after she got herself elected somewhere else to build up her resume. My point is she made a solid case for why that should happen instead of Caroline Kennedy being appointed to the Senate right now. So its not like she was just pulling something out of her azz, and it does smack of nepotism. But hey I guess nobody is upset about the other cases of nepotism in Congress including the perception that Joe Biden’s seat is being held for his son so why should she expect anybody to think of Caroline’s appointment as anything more than a popularity contest?

  • wvng

    vwcat: “These people are just out of control and acting way over the line.” There really aren’t that many acting out, and none out of control. This is no different than the msm and the PUMAs. Seek and yee shall find.
    .
    kathy, same demo (53), same reaction. Maybe not entirely rational, but a whole lot better than this: EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson: There’s ‘not a clean-cut division’ between religion and science.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    vwcat
    .
    You do realize that Hildebrand has already admitted that he effed up right? Go to talkingpointsmemo.com and they have it whwere he acknowledged that he shouldn’t have tried to make it seem like the “left” wasn’t interested in solving the important problems of our times. He should have just left it alone. As it is he now looks like a right wing hack and his post is definitely being used by the wingnuts to try to show how crazy the left is.

  • gysgt213

    And our Great Leader Busheeeed agrees with Johnson.

  • gysgt213

    “He should have just left it alone. As it is he now looks like a right wing hack and his post is definitely being used by the wingnuts to try to show how crazy the left is.”
    .
    He still hasn’t explained to me at least what his point was. He didn’t clear is post with the Obama campl, his words. And he was trying to be specific, his words. Well than STFU. What are you talking.

  • James, Los Angeles

    .
    There is always, *always* a few whacked ones on HuffPo threads. Every thread. On both sides of the spectrum. No need for concern on the Hildebrand thread, IMHO.
    .

  • sgwhiteinfla

    gysgt
    .
    Notice he didn’t write that tripe on his own blog. He used HuffPo, one of the biggest blogs on the net to air his missive. Again I say he was just trying to get some attention.

  • Paul-no not that one

    “Again I say he was just trying to get some attention.”
    .
    In that case…Victory!

  • Paul-no not that one

    “Again I say he was just trying to get some attention.”
    .
    In that case… Victory!

  • Paul-no not that one

    Ooops not sure how I pulled that off. Sorry.

  • Cliff

    So I just read this whole thread, all two pages, and I still have barely any idea why people are arguing. Am I doing it wrong?
    .
    (I know the High Sheriffs are, that’s for damn sure.)
    .
    (But at least I can cuss now.)

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    If the centrist cult wants a war with the Left, game on.

blog comments powered by Disqus