The Week That Was

Majority, super: The number of votes required to paralyze the Senate.

Corruption, New Jersey,
Two mayors, two state lawmakers, several rabbis and a slew of others arrested for

Cheese Food, Homogenized, Processed and Individually Wrapped

The new metaphor replacing “sausage” as the description of legislation as it emerges from commitee and winds its way through the Congress.

Funny, poor attempt to be:

Reporters posing as bad comedians. Or vice versa.

The Borgen Project has some good information on the cost of addressing global poverty (www.borgenproject.org).
It only takes $30 billion annually to end world hunger!
Yet… we are spending $550 billion annually on the defense budget.

The Karl Rove article was a good, if underreported, hit. Not an eye opener, though.

I know, it’s horrendous. I’ve seen a couple of earlier installments, and I knew before clicking on your link that this is what you were referring to. Unfunny people who think they’re hilarious — one of the banes of our existence. It’s tragic what’s happened to the Washington Post.

B*rgen Project, nuking from orbit: “It’s the only way to be sure!”

Oooh, is this one “moderated” too?

Journalists, Inside-the-beltway
.
Inventing all the facts necessary to manufacture racial controversy covered by

The sausage factor appears to be in high gear leading up to the summer vacation recess…

vacation was supposed to be struck-through. It looked OK in preview…
underline
strikethrough
bold
italics
3 out of 4…?

How could anyone either take them seriously or find them funny?
.
Sorry I just realized the obvious answer to that one: no one does.
.
Seriously, the HRC “Mad B—h” one was great. What a daring and original suggestion for a powerful woman politician. No doubt it had absolutely nothing to do with her gender. It was all about her hysteria, ruthless ambition and frequent rage-filled outbursts. Because that’s what her tenure has been all about, right? It’s not like she’s been flying under the radar or anything. It’s not like she’s unfailingly on message and respectful to everyone else on the President’s foreign policy team. It’s not like she’s been criticized for being too ready to delegate her authority and not putting her own stamp on foreign policy.

Nope, Just 2 out of 4. Karen!!1!! Call the Sheriffs!!111!!

Resistance is futile.

PennyMac
subtopics: IPO, PMT, Kurland, Stanford, Countrywide, bad mortgages, buying, Countrywide, subprime cleanup, Countrywide, mortgage investment trust, cashing in, Countrywide, did we mention already?

PennyMac (PMT): started trading publicly this week with IPO. Mortgage investment trust that buys bad mortgage below market and reworks them for a profit. Led by former Countrywide executives.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/32219013/site/14081545
http://www.cnbc.com/id/32203855/site/14081545
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1199169679&play=1
early story by Jane Wells – http://www.cnbc.com/id/28540870/site/14081545

Project, The Borgen

Funding. See ice cube’s chance in hell.

Jobs, New
subtopics: San Diego, construction, military, not Steve, not kidding, really

Real ones spotted in San Diego, thanks to military construction. Not found anywhere else in USA.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/32221520

Putin, Vladimir
subtopics: whale, Beluga, tag, GPS, BRIC, USSR, new, global domination, “I’ll be baaaack”, Palin, watched by, image, macho, “I’m King of the World!”, ocean, wetsuit

Attached a satellite tag to a Beluga whale for scientific research.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/08/01/2642975.htm

Perfume
subtopics: Fort Worth, it’s a gas, mass hysteria, hospital, victims, story really stinks

Thirty-four people hospitalized over alleged gas leak, caused by perfume.
http://www.star-telegram.com/topstories/story/1511194.html

Democracy:
~
Let David Sirota offer a variation on it’s definition:

“Health Care Tyranny by 13 Obstructionists”
~
“These lawmakers, hailing mostly from small states and rural areas, together represent only 13 million people, meaning those speaking for just 4 percent of America are maneuvering to impose their health care will on the other 96 percent of us.
~
Census figures show that the poverty rates are far higher and per capita incomes far lower in the 13 legislators’ specific districts than in the nation as a whole. Put another way, these politicians represent exactly the kinds of districts whose constituents would most benefit from universal health care. So why are they leading the fight to stop—rather than pass—reform?
~
Because when tyranny mixes with legalized bribery, constituents’ economic concerns stop mattering.
~
Thanks to our undemocratic system and our corrupt campaign finance laws, the health care industry doesn’t have to fight a 50-state battle. It can simply buy a tiny group of congresspeople, which is what it’s done. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, health interests have given these 13 members of Congress $12 million in campaign contributions—a massive sum further enhanced by geography.
~
Remember, politicians trade favors for re-election support—and the best way to ensure re-election is to raise money for TV airtime (read: commercials). In rural America, that airtime is comparatively cheap because the audience is relatively small. Thus, campaign contributions to rural politicians like these 13 buy more commercials—and, consequently, more political loyalty.
~
The end result is an amplifier of tyranny: Precisely because the undemocratic system unduly empowers legislators from sparsely populated (and hence cheap) media markets, industry cash can more easily purchase tyrannical obstruction from those same legislators. In this case, that means congresspeople blocking health care reform that would most help their own voters.
~
Of course, there is talk of circumventing the 13 obstructionists and forcing a vote of the full Congress that cannot be filibustered. Inside the Washington palace, the media court jesters and political aides-de-camp have reacted to such plans by raising predictable charges of improper procedure, poor manners, bad etiquette and other Versailles transgressions.
~
But the real crime would be letting the tyrants block that vote, trample democracy and kill health care reform in the process.”
~
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090730_health_care_tyranny/

BTW, am I the only who’s noticed the shift in The Krug’s tone towards Obama over the last month or so? Where he was once his greatest critic, he now seems incapable of holding him even partly accountable for this mess.

He’s an economist so he was critical of Obama’s policies which helped to maintain the Wall Street edifice, in all it’s perfidy. In the case of obstructing real health care reform, perhaps he sees that Obama is about the last person on the scene who’s responsible for “this mess.”

Project, The Borgen

To be used to pay for Universal Health Care[tm] through reconciliation process.
Note: may include alleged donations made by TIME reporters but no confirmations yet. Money allegedly raised through garage sale of clothing and accessories including designer dresses, shoes, deep forest green sweaters, bow ties, suits, pearls with clutch marks, rosaries, and riding crop.

The Borgen Project has some good info on the cost of addressing global poverty.

$30 billion: Annual shortfall to end world hunger.
$550 billion: U.S. Defense budget.

Well, no doubt we disagree about the degree of Obama’s respons. for said mess. My pt. was that Krug’s tone (look at what he’s written over the last few weeks) has clearly changed. Of course, we can flash way back to the primaries:
~
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/17/opinion/17krugman.html?_r=1
~
But even shortly over a month ago, he seemed to disagree with your frame, that Obama would be the last person to be held accountable:
~
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/26/opinion/26krugman.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

These 2 clowns would do well to leave the comedy to comedians and attempt to write stories holding the government to account. But that’s asking a little to much from inside the beltway villagers.

Looks like single payer will have a chance to take it to the floor. I watched this today and Weiner has a neat simple chart.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/liberals-will-get-single-payer-vote-on-house-floor-2009-07-31.html

Will somebody PLEASE write them a check for $30 billion?

Hate posting anything from Halp, but he has the goods on the Prog. Change Campaign Comm. targeting Ben Nelson and his pathetic reaction:
~
http://thepage.time.com/2009/07/31/not-so-gentle-ben-part-ii-2/

Perhaps Krugman has realized that prostelgzing is a lot easier than actually governing and perhaps in his recognition that politics is a multi-team sport he has decided to cut Obama some slack. Obviously, it’s easy to say Obama is bad because he’s not doing things as a progressive would do them, but I think Krugman is taking solace from the fact that Obama is doing what he said he would do. Walking the walk even though the media, the GOP and his own damn party are constantly trying to throw crap in the way. Keeping his word is important considering we just spent eight years being lied to about everything, even things that didn’t matter. The Bush administration acknowledged openly and with pride that they deliberately created one alternate reality after another.

Obama, on the other hand, is not the great dictator and his approach, while sometimes frustrating, is better than the “my way or the highway ” approach of the Bush doctrine. Now, in hindsight we can all see that despite working well to the dismay of Liberals for a number of years, it eventually did fail and when rank and file Republicans stopped listening to the “Great Decider” he turned into a pretty pitiful figure.

The reality is that Congress is a co-equal branch of government, yet we get mad because the President treats them with the respect their constitutionally due. Then we get mad when Obama doesn’t let Congress roll him, with requests for evidence against Bush they know full well he can’t provide without weakening his own branch of government.

Sometimes I feel like that idiot screaming on you tube for the world to leave Brittany alone. I just hope my fellow commenters understand what this man is up against. This is no ordinary President and no ordinary time. Our future prosperity depends on keeping those inhabitants of the alternate universe from the seats of power while we regroup.

I know even imagining the country returning Republicans led by birthers to the seats of power sounds beyond absurd, but it ain’t. Obama wants to put the country back on the right track and restore sanity to our governing strategy after thirty years of Conservative delusion, Republicans and their messianic devotion to all things Reagan will say and do absolutely anything to keep that from happening. If history has taught me anything its that extremists all have the same fatal flaw — And in time all will go one step too far! But in the mean time, I hope the secret service is gearing up, that Democrats stop laughing this crap off and that we all keep the big picture in mind because stupid like breathing can be a reflexive and involuntary function in Americans.

Dear Borgen Project dudes:
We get it. The US defense budget is ridiculous. It is beyond ridiculous. It would solve many problems if we reduced it.

Driving us insane over the matter earns you no friends.

The John Birther Society is making the GOP look a bit nutty.

I sometimes think we apply willful ignorance and short term memory far too much. In that I mean we all here realize that Presidents actually have no formal legal standing outside of the infamous executive orders, veto power, and short-term military actions.
.
IE: It is not like Obama can just execute whatever he wants into law. Now, his predacessor bullied and circumvented things to “git ‘er done”, but as a whole we rejected that approach as a country (eventually). Now that someone who shares some of our concepts on what direction the country should be going does not mean we can embrace the tactics of those we disagreed with in the past just because it would be more convenient or expediant.
.
Obama is a pragmatic dreamer. If anyone though he was otherwise, they (saw) heard what they wanted to hear. He makes that very sentiment clear in the first chapter of his book how various people and groups see different things in him and map their own ambitions onto his persona. Being a rational pragmatist sounded oh so good during the campaign because of what the previous administration brought to the table, excessive idealogue based absolutism. If the former administration had been “reasonable” by any account, it is quite likely that Obama would not have even won the Democratic primary, let alone the White House.
.
We got what we asked (voted) for. He hasn’t changed his spots. There is no reason for us to complain (yet) just because we took off our striped glasses and found out he’s not an agressive tiger after, just a laid back panther.

I have to agree. I wrote similar sentiments in my response above. Obama has not changed. If anything, people are almost expecting him to use the same tactics from the Bush administration, just towards different ends, their own. It wasn’t ok when the Republicans were doing it, and it would not be ok if the Democrats did either. Yes, that means getting things done is harder, but when has that ever not been true?

I’d say they have no impact with respect to influencing how the GOP looks. If you take into account just the last few years of Bush, Cheney, Palin, Michele Bachman, Limbaugh, Steele, & Fox News …. the Birther thing is like a grain of sand compared to a beach as far as what makes the GOP look nutty. (and not just a bit .. more like full retard, and there’s no coming back from that )

Shorter Prog. Change Campaign Comm.
“Bleep us? No, Bleep you!”

Senator Nelson’s response was pretty funny. Trying to intimidate Howard Dean isn’t exactly a smart strategy.

Not sure if this is our weekend open thread but this made me happy-

Franken not being very Senatorial with the ever obnoxious T Boone Pickens.

http://www.minnpost.com/cynthiadizikes/2009/07/31/10621/politico_franken_confronts_t_boone_pickens

And now the WAPO has pulled it.

I cannot wait for Howie Kurtz’s online chat Monday where he will a) pretend it never happened or b) say it was even handed and people are just too darn sensitive and can’t laugh at themselves.

see also Milbank, Dana,

Simultaneous proof of journalistic and comedic ineptitude by

Barack Hussein Obama……………………………….Check 13289
1 Pennsylvania Ave
Washington DC 25431

Pay to the order of Borgen Project__| $30,000,000,000.00
The Sum of__Thirty Billion and 00/100__Dollars

325078790:0094618511:13289

Everyone take a gander over to Glenzilla today. I just want to know how we can trust any news source.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/?source=rss

You know they’re going to want another $30 billion next year. Sometimes I wonder how many people have sent in $30 billion only to see the pleas pop up again a week later.

I think I’ve thought of a much cheaper charity to start. There’s a guy in South Carolina that just got arrested for buggery with a horse. This is the same guy with the same horse that got arrested for the same thing in 2007.

We’ll call it the Porkin’ Project. Send me $100 and I’ll buy him a cheap inflatable doll, some tire patches for when he gets a little too rambunctious and some HandiWipes. The $100 will cover the doll and related materials, gas money, postage and some cheap nighty I’ll buy down at the Goodwill store.

Yep, it’s an open thread. No weekend toys for us I guess.

Obama hates cops and crippled black guys like Gates-gate

Wingnuts are even crazier than you thought.
~

Karen, these stories are all well and good, but don’t forget the most important: Will Jon and Kate ever get back together?!

Yes, Howard Kurtz is sure to be brutal about this, just as he’s been about CNN’s Lou Dobbs. Kurtz is the king of conflict of interest.

Even more important — will Todd and Sarah?

Thanks, paulslansky. Some links re: Palins / divorce rumors.
yes? – http://alaskareport.com/news39/x71283_divorce_palins.htm
no? (per meg) – http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2009/08/01/palin-getting-a-divorce-nope/

Jay, if you’re reading this, please go back up there and get the skinny. Thanks.

Tweeting, compulsive:

Sarah Palin’s response to any perceived insult

Also mudflats.com, always a fun place to leave comments

If history has taught me anything, it is that US foreign and economic policy will rarely deviate from the power structure initiatives. Republican, Democrat, it matters not. The American war-machine will continue unbridled. Economic policy will largely remain intact. Obama’s presidency is evidence of this well-entrenched American policy direction that even Presidents find near impossible to adjust. The sole realm of actual substantive changeis the pendulum of social/domestic initiatives whereby policy swings left, then right depending on the faction in the White House. It is in this small field where Obama will leave his impact and it is in this field that he will ultimately return the reins of power to the GOP.

Paul Krugman has made describing health reform simple.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/01/health-reform-made-simple/

I agree with him every commentator needs to read this.

Speaking of Sodd and Tarah, they’ve been on the quiet side this week since she turned in her crown as the Queen of Alaska. I hope they haven’t come down with a case of sanity.

Since this is an open thread anybody see our girl Rachel on Bill Maher last night? Well her blue glasses were cool I was hoping for more. Despite her being my favorite media person on the planet, when the discussion turned to health care her response was indicative of the fatal flaw in the Democratic Party.

She dismissed the opposition because what they are saying is crazy. Now, there is no disputing she has correctly assessed how nuts it is for anyone to believe the statement of Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh or the two Michelles, Bachman and Malkin. But the problem is she helps make this the dominant mindset of the activist base and consultant class of the Democratic Party. While I agree with Rachel “that the best the opposition can bring to the table is that the insurance industry is doing fine and health reform is going to kill old people,” we part company when she says that this craziness will hinder the Republican’s ability to stop reform from getting passed.

I can’t count the number of issues over the last thirty years that Democrats have lost, despite polling that indicates Democrats are on the same side as the people, that the people believe Republicans would be bad on that issue and the premise they were advancing was one more step closer to crazy town. And every single time the Democratic response is dismissive, we mock their troll like behavior and laugh at their comedic qualities right up until the day we lose. I remember when we thought Reagan was a joke, the conservative philosophy was a hair brain scheme and that even prominent Republicans like Bush 41 described their financial tenets as “voodoo economics.”

Now, thirty years later, we have indisputable proof that Reaganomics would indeed bankrupt the country as predicted in 1980 and we can see that worshiping the unfettered market has brought us to the brink of global collapse. But when we first responded to these theories we told Americans that this is exactly what would happen and we laughed at conservatives because we said the American people would never fall for this crap. Well just as they fell for the okey doke back then and damned near every year since, they can be hoodwinked again.

The Democratic failure to recognize this indisputable fact is our fatal flaw. We must stop giving into our tendency to dismiss our opponents because their arguments are stupid. When we fail to recognize the ability of stupid to appeal to the electorate we do so at our own peril. Obviously, it is more fun, especially in this medium, to mock stupidity and I don’t expect anyone to abandon our comic relief. Just remember that there is no shortage of stupidity in America and like water seeks its own level, stupidity gravitates to its own kind.

So we can say don’t feed the trolls but its important that anyone reading this blog, even just in passing, see that any idiot thing they say is slapped down hard and in a hurry. The punditry class reads this blog, so its imperative if you are an advocate for health care reform that over the next month while reform is being debated not to give opponents a pass on anything that’s untrue, misconstrued, or unlikely. It is clear that the plan is to throw everything and anything on the wall and hope that it will pick up steam in the media and beyond.

I’m convinced that the basis of a recent article from Joan Walsh of salon.com. stems from a conversation on this site not too long ago. Now at the moment she is the only member of the media who is promoting this school of analysis which is probably why Tweety felt confident about slapping her down. Unfortunately for America, she was right and the original sin of race continues to impede our progress. You want to know why a crazy message like health reform is code for the euthanasia of old folks can catch fire? It’s because it is coupled with a message saying that this black president, who is foreign born and pals around with terrorists is going to take things from hardworking white folks so he can give it to this people. Once you put the emotional prism of race in the mix, logical reasoning flies out of the window and a black president personally coming to take your guns away starts to sound reasonable.

It’s no accident that the GOP and by that I mean conservative media, talk radio, conservative blogs, the religious organizations, all the other feeder organizations that are like minded, supportive or receive tacit consent despite public distance like the birthers, as well as the RNC and Republicans elected officials, are making race such a big deal right now. Regardless of how many of us feel about the rightness or appropriateness of Obama’s involvement in the Gates debate, we can’t deny that the GOP has used this issue to fuel their agenda. If they can keep America emotionally on edge about race they can keep them irrational about health care reform, the environment and climate change and possibly thwart Democratic realignment. and why not it’s only a slightly different twist on the successful “Southern Strategy.”

Apparently all that’s necessary for that to happen is for a single Republican to whine or say boo. Then Harry Milquetoast folds like a tray table on an airline. I seriously want to know his boxing record, with his lack of fight and spine he couldn’t have won too many matches!

So we can say don’t feed the trolls but its important that anyone reading this blog, even just in passing, see that any idiot thing they say is slapped down hard and in a hurry.

What happens when the troll argues for four pages and then declares victory?
What happens when the troll refuses to acknowledge the most basic of arguments, or the most fundamental of evidence?

If you’ve figured out a surefire way to achieve decisive victory on a comment thread, be sure to let us know.

Are paragraph breaks back?

Testing testing testing

Here’s another test for our lonely thread.

I’m testy, testy.

Not so testy now.

They’re back.

KT once again demonstrates how easy it is to get distracted by process over content.

Paragraph breaks…

Freedom of Speech or Subversive Conspiracy?

We Report You Decide!

New post will be up shortly, then I’m going over to CNN to do “State of the Union.”

KT: Good luck on your appearance. Take a big bulky handbag and bring us back something nice. An ashtray or a laptop would be good.

Sorry, Cliff, but obviously you missed the point and clearly your back handed slap down didn’t escape me. But that doesn’t change the fact that it’s not about convincing the trolls, it’s about convincing the media folks who read the blogs that we haven’t lost faith in our ability to get our agenda through. It’s about making it clear that this crap does not get through unchallenged. The biggest problem in this debate is that the media is engaging in the chicken little theory of diminishing returns. They fail to tell the public the truth about health care reform in favor of focusing on the horse race aspect through a prism of past horse races, So they portray the debate as nearly lost, struggling for air, and all parties fractured. And all these administration is failing stories despite the reality that we are so much closer to health care reform than we’ve ever even dreamed about before. But when the public starts to believe these all is lost stories it drives poll numbers in a downward direction. The media has done this before and in the past they have pointed to the fractious, handwringing debates on the blogs as the proof that the Obama campaign is over. I’m just saying let’s not help them.

How is “all Conservatives are crazy wingnuts” any more productive than “liberals are destroying America?” Have you considered that it is precisely this type of condescending caricature that turns even the most rational conservative vehemently against you. Liberal rhetoric is a wonderful recruiting tool for the GOP, as the more you show your utter contempt for conservative thought the stronger your opposition becomes. While there are certainly extremist views vocalized by the far-right, when you attempt to characterize the entire conservative movement by the actions/rhetoric of the extremists you do yourself and your ideology a disservice. The more rational and reasonable conservatives do not want a civil discourse with the left when you engage in such distasteful character assassination of an entire segment of America.

While the ideologue within you apparently has no room for accepting the legitimacy of conservative principles, you utterly fail to recognize that nearly half of Americans subscribe to this allegedly insane political philosophy. The GOP may be in disarray and the number of voters who are self-described as Republican may be a minority, however conservative leaning voters still constitute a near equal constituency of the American populace. The tactics sometimes employed by GOP members are simply that, tactics. They are not conservative ideologies. Extremist rhetoric such as race baiting, allegations of a liberal conspiracy, fear of government, etc are simply emotional tactics to recruit a dedicated, yet reality detached, group that would otherwise be a wasted constituency. When you attempt to tie well-entrenched and perfectly rational ideologies to the sometimes extremists strategy of a political party you are being disingenuous. You stir the pot with such condescending arguments. The result is increased mobilization of conservative votes to counter your gross mischaracterization.

Bill Maher is as divisive, irrational and full of contempt as Rush Limbaugh. Maher consistently degrades millions of Americans with his open disdain for religion. When you spout nonsensical invective about the “lunacy” of religious doctrine and conclude that religion is a social negative you are sure to alienate the majority of Americans. To ignore the great advances in humanity and compassion led by religious movements throughout history is shameful. To voice such views while ignoring the endless acts of charity, international humanitarian aid, social work, counseling, community building, ect that is carried out daily by religious organizations is a gross misrepresentation of the truth. It is one thing to not personally be religious, it is an entirely different notion, though, to pontificate about the ills of religion and to characterize the religious as fools and lunatics. Yet, many on the left see no problem with cheering on this man as a voice of liberalism. Yet these same people, rightfully yet hypocritically, find Limbaugh to be an offensive extremist. Well, I hate to inform you that your wingnut is as crazy as ours. I am rational enough, though, to realize that Maher does not speak for the left, just as Limbaugh does not speak for the right. They are combative and make sensational assertions because divisiveness sells. It’s all about ratings.

Well KT, here’s hoping your post is better than your appearance. Now don’t get me wrong, you looked great and you came across much better than Clilliza and the other guy. But as I expected, you went along with the village narrative without a single challenge. Now I suppose, after watching the Sunday shows, we should all assume that a middle-class tax hike is just around the corner. Why? Because the media couldn’t get anyone in the administration to “say read my lips no tax increases from this administration for any reason no matter what happens for as long as Obama is in office!– cross my heart and pinky swear it won’t happen never never ever.” Give me a break — and please stop acting like this is about reporting news or even analyzing it, while I hate being on the same side of Sarah Palin on anything but girlfriend did get one thing right — clearly this is an example of the media just making stuff up.

It’s funny, given the topic, that you responded to me rather than to Exiled.

Sorry for not combing through that tome you posted with a fine toothed comb at 1:30 in the morning. That was simply the quote that caught my eye.

And looking at it, it clearly advocates engaging trolls wherever they show up. So my point stands – after a certain point it’s not worth the effort.

As for convincing the press – I would say a good 75% of the posts here get bullsh*t called on them. And yet, the Swampers never blink.
Klein still thinks it’s a good idea to have altered FISA, and he still opposes torture investigations.
KT still insists the media is doing a good job.
JNS is still constructing herself into mindless mouthpiece for the GOP.
MS still posts thousands of words on the President’s beer drinking habits.

I’m still going to call bullsh*t where I can, but I try not to delude myself that I’m effecting transformative change through blog comments.

First let say the reason I responded to you and not exiled is because he hadn’t commented yet – please see time stamp. In addition, if I cam across as if I was somehow attacking you personally, then perhaps I should have been more clear. I am not suggesting that you have to address every four page rant point by point. But I do believe simply falling back on the Democratic default position that these are just crazies we should be ignoring has derailed many a Democratic agenda over the years. Now if you’d rather nit pick my argument than think about the basic premise I’m advancing — that’s clearly you’re first amendment rights, but clearly what you have chosen to view as an attack on you and your style of commenting was an attempt to focus attention on the media attempt to use our comments to buttress a narrative that the people no longer trust this administration on health care.

Exiled –

Excuse me but I believe you have once again responded to my comments without really reading what I have written. Now I’m not sure if doing it twice constitutes a behavioral pattern, but it does raise an eyebrow. Please reread, or should I say read, my comments and you will find that at no point do I say or even imply that “all conservatives are wingnuts.” In fact, I give no opinion about any group except for Democrats. As far as conservatives are concerned, I don’t think I even use the term outside of distinguishing between conservative blogs, media and talk radio hosts and those on the left influencing the debate. Moreover, and this is really important, the crux of my commentary was exactly the opposite of what you claimed. The entire point of the comments was to convince my fellow commenters on the left not to dismiss you all as wingnuts, to engage and refute your points rather than simply mocking you for comic relief. So tell me, when you finally get around to actually reading what it is I wrote should I expect an apology?

Granted, sitting back and claiming that the other side is obviously crazy doesn’t buy us anything.
But it’s trickier than I think you are suggesting. If we (or the press) argues with them too much they get legitimized, or they drag the argument down so no one can focus on other matters (like with the birth certificate thing).
.
If you are wanting the press to behave more like Glenn Greenwald or John Cole, and call out crazy bullsh*t where they see it and then move on, then I agree with you completely.
.
And what are some examples of the media using our comments to buttress a narrative?

Which Joan Walsh article referenced this site? …but other people besides KT and us actually read this blog? Well, I’m toast, oops. Seriously, I tried to find JW piece at salon.com search including “swampland” but got word salad. Normally I’m there to read Glenn Greenwald and Sarah Hepola.

Then again, re: mocking stupidity, sometimes it works. Think Tina Fey. Even if unproven, I think she seriously damaged Palin’s campaign. The Couric interviews were the coup de grace….and then there was Fey and Poehler’s SNL “interview” + “lifelines”….

re: CNN / KT, is Wolf Blitzer a human or one of those Terminator models? T-1002? While there, I hope KT pulls the programming Bluetooth out of his ear and changes the code to report facts instead of TP’s (and smile once in awhile). And Karen, to save money in this recession, can you carry out enough food in your handbag from the CNN cafeteria to feed the family tonight? And breakfast tomorrow (whip up leftovers w/ eggs and shredded potatoes, then serve in bowls w/ cheese)?

(Dee, I asked a question 30.3 about Joan Walsh articles. thanks)

Exiled you definitely missed the substance of Dee’s post. Not sure if that was consistent with your prior comments or not as I’m not as engaged here in the Swamp as to be deemed a ‘regular’. I think Dee highlighted that area well so I’m not going to dwell there. In many aspects I agree with you that lumping everyone together in any mass generalization is lazy and unhelpful, and I’ve said so here before. I just don’t believe that was on point as a response to Dee’s comments.
.
There are a couple things you said that aren’t really true however. Bill Maher and Rush Limbaugh are not equivalent. While Bill may certainly be aggressive and divisive by the nature of that aggression, first and foremost he isn’t irrational. Dare I say he uses logic and rational thought to conclude there is no need for emotionally basic formal doctrines, IE: religions. Some of us may not like that conclusion, but it isn’t illogical. And of course, Bill Maher is not the ‘left’ or a ‘Democrat’ while Rush is certainly the ‘right’ and a ‘Republican’. Maher stomps all over the Democrats and Obama almost as much as the Republicans. It’s just about factual things, logic and tactics, not about flag pins, manchurian conspiracy theories, and things (as you put it) designed just to illicit a quick emotional response.
.
Just as you pointed out that lumping everything into one pot that is not “on your side” is unhelpful, this is certainly the case with your equating of Maher to Rush. In the political world it may come down to black/white, yes/no, Democrat/Repbublican … but out in the real world people tend to be a combination of many different aspects. We are conservative on some things, more liberal on others, perhaps more practical in some decisions, while totally emotionally driven in decision making in other aspects of our lives. As technology and communication have grown, this is probably one of the reasons there are more and more independents rather than Dem/Rep. If the systems in more states would allow people to have a voice without pledging to either party, we’d provably have substantially more independents as well. Both parties want to keep things in that polarizing context for their own benefit. It is my opinion that it is to the detriment of the country in the overall long term.
.
Now Maher can be untactful and downright cruel., and he is a comedian after all. Yet that is a far cry from the false equivalence of him being the “left’s Limbaugh”. No doubt such a figure does exist in some fashion, but Bill Maher’s not it.

Deconstructiva — I didn’t mean that Joan quoted the site directly, she just referenced a new article (which one I have no clue) that advanced a meme that I hadn’t heard anywhere prior to it being brought up on this site and the meme has pretty much been pooh poohed by the villagers just as Tweety did when Joan brought it up,

But it’s not the first time I’ve heard comments from this site being used by contributors at msnbc. David Shuster was on a roll for a while and so was Keith Olbermann, although if I remember correctly I do believe he actually gave a commenter credit at the time. So don’t underestimate your impact on the debate, Whenever they refer to something being all over the blogosphere or that the blogosphere is lit up, they are talking about you. You are every bit as much a part of driving this debate as Greenwald. You represent the new punditry class and your collective comments are used like the focus group findings Dan Balz quoted this morning to explain what independent voters were thinking. So I’m saying if the press are going to rely on the blogosphere for their anecdotal evidence we ought to give them something to helpful to talk about.

Since I don’t see the new post yet, and KT has been consumed by the great beast that is CNN and (hopefully) gets out alive, KT, did you see that single-payer is actually going to get a floor vote in the House? Apparently Pelosi has it scheduled, so it might actually get DISCUSSED (watches for fainting pirates).

Dee @ 39.1,

That’s a little disturbing to think about. Posting here in the Swamp always seemed more like a little club with maybe three dozen regular or semi-regular members. I know there are lurkers who read and don’t post ( I used to be one) but I thought even their numbers were relatively small.

I’m going to have to think about this. I’m not sure if I really want to keep on posting.

Oh come on sacred how would I ever get through the day without your humor to remind me that it’s all relative. I’ve kind of gotten use to thinking of you as our own personal Jon Stewart. Please don’t let the idea that others may be watching deter you from contributing. I say keep an eye out and the dvr running just in case we can catch someone stealing your material, I’ve got an in with the trial lawyers.:)

It’s like being an unattributed source really Sacred. I mean, they really have no idea the actual people who write these blog posts, but hey, if you’re on a deadline and the writing’s already done for you, why not just lift some stiff’s words off a blog and call it gospel? It’s the same stenographic laziness, just sort of in the opposite direction. The other option is to mention that anything posted here is the property of Time Warner, so if they lift your comments from here they’re actually taking it from them, so you just put the sharks in a feeding frenzy and sit back and enjoy the chumming of the waters. Whatever you do don’t you dare stop posting!

Dee
~
This is the way I see it. You essentially assert that liberals should not simply dismiss conservatives as nuts, they should engage them and prove that conservatives are nuts. So, you’re general opinion was still that conservatism is irrational and loony.
~
She dismissed the opposition because what they are saying is crazy. Now, there is no disputing she has correctly assessed how nuts it is…
~
I can’t count the number of issues over the last thirty years that Democrats have lost, despite polling that indicates Democrats are on the same side as the people, that the people believe Republicans would be bad on that issue and the premise they were advancing was one more step closer to crazy town…
~
I remember when we thought Reagan was a joke, the conservative philosophy was a hair brain scheme…
~
We must stop giving into our tendency to dismiss our opponents because their arguments are stupid. When we fail to recognize the ability of stupid to appeal to the electorate we do so at our own peril.
~
With that said, my point was somewhat aimed at progressive commentators in general, not merely you. But your subtle rhetoric, while disguised as a chastisement of your fellow progressives, was dripping with contempt for conservative thought. My point was that this wholesale dismissal of conservative ideology, even if you are advocating engagement, when worded so condescendingly mobilizes the right in its opposition. One thing I have learned on this blog is that nearly all you think that I (and the philosophy to which I subscribe) am an irrational nutcase. This is not a conducive approach if your goal is to debate the practicality of my ideology.

The idea that someone might lift something one of us posts and use it doesn’t really bother me. What bothers me is that there are just too many crazy people out there. I’m not exactly the most discrete person in the world and my idea of fun is to use the verbal equivalent of a flamethrower on the wingnuts.

I did something once that made it onto a national conservative radio talk show. A friend at work listens to that crap and told me he knew exactly who they were talking about (it was pretty creative). My name wasn’t mentioned but the description of the sign and the location made it impossible to think it was anyone else.

I live in a conservative area and would hate for some looney toon to put two and two together and fire a few shots at the house to teach me a lesson.

Thanks, Dee. KT’s concerns aside, with others reading us maybe we CAN change the media debate on health care. I lurked here a long time before posting and tend to stick to levity (aka my knitting) but no doubt long time loyal readers here who have KT’s ear (not literally, I hope) can help her and other bloggers get things accomplished. And free Amy from the Vatican dungeon ala Charles Bronson “Breakout”. (she’s still there?) Maybe another possibility for her absinthe is she’s trying to top KT’s Obama / JNS’s Sarah interviews by interviewing the Pope…but he’s balking, so she’s literally hounding him 24/7 using the Bart and Lisa Simpson Mt. Splashmore approach: “Oh, Your Holiness, may I have an interview?” “No.” “Your Holiness, may I have an interview?” “No!” “Your Holiness, may I have an interview?” “NO!” “Your Holiness…” rinse and repeat (I’m betting on Amy)….and sacredh, please keep posting. You may be generating material for Stewart, Colbert, etc. and the future royalties can set you up for life (sim. to KT’s books when she writes them). Like Congress, it’s all about the money. Go for it!

Sorry. I went off to do teevee, then got caught up in weekend chores and never got back to my post. It’s a long one, so maybe I’ll put it up tomorrow.

I wonder what actions republicans could take that would stop the idea that they are conservative?
Are the people who whole heartedly supported the previous president conservative or republican?

Ron Paul, as nutty as he sometimes can be, seems to be honestly conservative.
The vast majority of republicans on the public stage and in comment threads are far from conservative in any real sense.

Exiled_At_Home wrote of Bill Maher: ‘Yet, many on the left see no problem with cheering on this man as a voice of liberalism.’
.
Although I find Maher’s show entertaining and thought provoking, I do not consider him a ‘voice of liberalism’. I don’t know any knowledgeable liberals who do.
.
I’m not sure who those ‘many on the left’ are that you claim consider Maher a ‘voice of liberalism’. If there are such people, they’re misguided. Maher is not a liberal — he’s a libertarian, as he’s stated many times. He voted for Dole in 1996 and Nader in 2000. In 2004 he supported Kerry but made it clear that he preferred Nader (but didn’t want to risk Nader votes throwing the election to the Republicans again). In 2008 he supported Obama, was critical of McCain, and considered Palin an extremist.
.
I suspect Maher is being cast as a liberal simply because he isn’t a right wing Republican. I’ve met many in that group that have a “you’re either with us or against us” mentality that frequently results in them casting those that disagree with them as ‘liberal’ — whether they are or not.
.
Not Conservative does NOT necessarily imply Liberal.

Bob
~
I am conservative with libertarian leanings. Maher, despite what he may claim, is a radical progressive.

…oops, my reply went up just after sacredh’s last one. Sacredh, I doubt anything serious would happen, but there’s a flip side. Even if revealed, you could have friends and allies in your area who would look after you. It’s tapping the silent majority of sane people out there. Some major bloggers like Christy Harden Smith and Shannyn Moore have faced tough times while blogging, but they now have even more friends.

I’m glad to see you’re safe KT. My post was not a criticism of your lack of posting, rather it was more the latter part of my comment I was curious about. Unless of course that IS the subject of your next post, which in that case I’ll just wait on pins and needles until I get to work tomorrow!

Here’s a link to the single-payer vote.

(Actually, it’s a link to a comment in a Matthew Yglesias post about the vote…h/t to Digby)
~

Especially when the media makes it seem like the birther conspiracy is widely accepted by the GOP!

Sorry I took so long to get back but some yahoos out here put on one hell of a fireworks display so I was outside. My ears are still ringing. I think everyone within 2-3 miles saw them. They quit when the sirens and lights came up the hill.

We did have some minor vandalism right after it happened. The signs were stolen and our mail box was blown up. The police did a bunch of drive bys for us and nothing further happened.

Exiled_At_Home wrote: Yet, many on the left see no problem with cheering on this man as a voice of liberalism. Yet these same people, rightfully yet hypocritically, find Limbaugh to be an offensive extremist. Well, I hate to inform you that your wingnut is as crazy as ours.
.
He shoots! He misses!
.
We’ve debunked the ‘many on the left’ argument. Of course, that leaves the ‘your wingnut is as crazy as ours’ argument only half right. And there we can agree. Limbaugh is truly a crazy wingnut.
.
What should distress you about that, though, is that virtually every time someone in a position of leadership in the GOP has been caught saying something critical of Limbaugh’s vitriol, that person has been forced to apologize to Limbaugh. The patient is running the asylum.

Oh don’t start in with that utterly unverifiable nonsense about “we’ve debunked…” I know quite a few self-proclaimed liberals/progressives who worship the ground upon which Maher. Rotten, putrid ground at that…No worse than Limbaugh, though, I suppose. He’s a fat, ignorant pig.

KT: I ran across this clip. Middle Eastern health care is becoming privatized / less public and includes Saudi Arabia mandating employers to provide HC insurance to all employees.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?play=1&video=1201246826

This video does NOT address my long-standing rants about: (1.) insurance cos. denying claims / policies, pre-existing and (2.) that HC is a safety need, not a thing to buy. Both a minimum HC public safety net (for those who can’t pay) and a private network (for those who can) is my irrelevant $0.02 best compromise…until we can get single-payer, but I digress.
Karen, if you’re reading the blog tonight either for laughs or as a sleeping pill, thoughts?

.…last news thingy before nighty-night….
Greenwald – http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/08/01/ge/index.html
AMC – http://twitter.com/anamariecox/status/3054927362

I talked it over with my better half last night and agreed to go with her suggestions (demands). No more political signs in the yard (especially hand painted inflammatory ones), no more references to where we live or where I work, no more references to local representatives, no more putting the truck in 4WD and running over offending political signs (on hillsides) and if there is any vandalism she gets to make the call and I stop blogging.

She tried to throw in some crap about me being nicer to her mother (Satan’s Sister) and unlocking Fox from the parental control feature but I drew the line at those.

Oh for the love of God, you all need to go out and buy yourselves a collective sense of humor.

It was a funny bit. Equal opportunity in its send up of political leaders from a wide spectrum of political leanings.

Indeed, the whole beer brew-ha-ha is deserving of a Family Guy episode.