Never seen a nerve hit quite like this

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

I am used to a rallying around effect on DU. The WH does something bad and there is a rush to defend it and slur marginal types, demanding side-choosing on false-choice lines.

And the worse the WH action the more vociferous the "with us or against us" "we have never been at war with Eastasia" action.

But this Gibbs thing takes the cake.

Why would anyone rush to defend a Lou Dobbs-esque RW meltdown? An open and intentional slander of the entire American left in the flimsy guise of going after "the bad ones."

How did "saying Obama is like Bush" become "Obama=Bush"? The former begs the question, in what respect? (Charlie.) The later is simply false.

Which did Gibbs say? The former, but gee... lets pretend he said the later and have a false choice loyalty oath frenzy.

Gibbs was only talking about the fringe... Really? Reeeeaaalllyyy?

The fringe who favor the right answer in healthcare? Yeah, fuck those people. Single-payer is a nut-left idea like eliminating national defense.

Sorry, I know exactly what people mean when they go on these anti-left tirades.

Gibbs was not going after a few bad apples.

He was trying to stigmatize all left-critique of Obama and his actions by equating them with the nut left.

The impossibility of principled disagreement. To disagree means that you are in league with lunatics.

And now on DU we see the begged question put... "Gibbs was only talking about a handful of nuts. Are you one of the nuts?"

It's funny that the WH Press Secretary took time out from his busy day to rant about a tiny handful of nuts if that's who he was really talking about.

[still_one]

1. The problem has been building, it isn't just this one event. To many it seems that the

administration has gone out of their way to exclude progressives from policy discussions, and at the same time including republicans in those same discussions, even though the republicans have stated since Obama took office that they would do everything to derail his administration

[bvar22]

64. Bingo....been building since day one.

The most bitter broken campaign promise was that "everyone will have a seat at the table".
I though, "WOW. At Last, the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party will have a voice!!"

Well, when that table was set, all the chairs went to Republicans, Lobbyists, and Centrists.
Rahm was hired to keep The Left out in the cold.
There weas No seat at the Table for people who want stupid things like Canadian Health Care!!!

The DLC New Team
Liberal Democrats Need NOT Apply

(Screen Capped from the DLC Website)


Downhill since then.

[leveymg]

116. Took almost two years for reality to set in - didn't it? The DLC aren't like us, and don't like us.

There really is two Democratic parties. The one they own, and the one we let them take from us. Time to take ours back - they forfeited their opportunity at good governance, so they're out.

That's it. I'll work for progressive Democrats, but not the others.

[Scruffy1]

248. As a professional nut I agree

As I look back o my life from the sixties to now I have come to the conclusion it is more important to stand on ones principles even if its not a majority or even a popular view.
I'm glad I fought futilely to end the VietNam War and learned from the experience.
I'm proud of fighting for Civil rights and voting rights more successfully.
I'm not ashamed for being an activist for Native Americans.
I will continue to fight for a more just society until the day I die because that's who I am and what I do. Along the line I've been beaten, arrested, and called lots of names. I've never received a dime for any of this but I still am a Professional. I think we scare the hell out of the DLC and that's why they are trying to marginalize us.

[mod mom]

251. Progressives only for me too. Our state party made a concerted effort

to undermine (as in the afternoon before the primary pass off a false claim to the media that they knew was false, but without ample time for a reply) a Progressive candidate before the primary which almost really pissed me off. This wasn't some out of the blue person who didn't work her way up the ranks..this was Jennifer Brunner, our current SOS (who has done a wonderful job bringing integrity back to Ohio elections after the fiasco that Ken Blackwell left), a Kennedy Medal if Courage award winner and a former judge. The establishment has made it crystal clean that although they want progressives to do legwork on campaigns, we don't have a seat at the table and no chance of advancement w/in the party.

I'll go one step further than you...not only will I not work for them, I won't vote for corporate DLC types as well. I'd rather vote Green or leave a blank than be part of the problem of enabling them.

[defendandprotect]

147. It's taken a long while for many here to be able to admit that ....

that it was a purposeful misleading of Democratic voters -- which happened immediately

after the election --

Can we see it any other way?


Pelosi is also making that clear: "Obama was for a lot of things during the campaign ....

that he is no longer for!" --

[Nite Owl]

178. Absolutely, it was right after the election

Rahm appeared on the scene and his cabinet was all lined up. Then there was Warren giving the benediction at the innauguation, a real slap in the face and even then he refused to listen. That was before he felt so unappreciated for the legislation he has passed. This was no slip up, the campaign was a lie.

[Grinchie]

220. Thanks for the image Bvar22 -- It makes me want to puke.

But sadly, I was compelled to save it for posterity.

K&R

[bvar22]

270. You don't have to save it.

This graphic is still UP at the DLC's own website!

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=254886&kaid=86&subid=85

There is also an active propaganda campaign to deny that the DLC still exists, or has any influence in the Democratic Party.
That would be laughable if it wasn't so frightening.
I've even seen it here at DU.

"The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist."
- Verbal Kint, The Usual Suspects (1995)

[Grinchie]

271. Actually, just about everything decision they make is frighteningly stupid

It's as if the Government is formed by Committe after were hire a new face.

Only we really don't know who the Committe is, what they stand for, or whether they even have any morals.

All I know is that the Committee has been shaping policy for the worse for that last 40 years that I can tell.

[rhett o rick]

266. .

[L0oniX]

123. Agree. Do they really think repukes will vote for Obama?

I mean ...even the far left would rather vote for Obama as a matter of the lessor of 2 evils than see a fucking repuke take over.

[awoke_in_2003]

175. "as a matter of the lessor of 2 evils"

they got us over a barrel and they know it- I would give up a nut before voting republican. The spankings will continue until morale improves.

[defendandprotect]

146. Right ... and look at the new "Cat Food Commission" .... !!

[daleanime]

173. Don't worry...

the Cat Food commission will stay under wraps till after the election.:sarcasm: Then Pragmatist here will be telling us not to blow up, because the Administration is only doing what's necessary and possible.:banghead:

[defendandprotect]

182. No one believe them now . . . . and certainly no one will believe them later ---

Seems to me the liberal press -- ah ... the "professional left" ...

has been very slow in getting the word out on the Cat Food Commission!!!

Think that's going to be nuclear war here especially under "new STFU rules" -- !!!

And think the public will be in danger of thinking . . . hey, this is a Dem president

who must be telling us the truth!!

RW propaganda always works -- even when it comes from Dems!

[tularetom]

2. Please identify the "nuts"

I'd like to know if I am one of them or not.

I resented a lot of what was in Gibbs's self pitying diatribe. But I need to know if that's because he was calling me a nut or merely warning me not to ally myself with nuts.

[EFerrari]

5. And get this, Gibbs talked about "the professional left" --

where does that him him, exactly?

[bvar22]

65. Do you want something stupid like "Canadian Style Health Care"?

If so, YOU are one of the fringe Leftist Wackos.

[L0oniX]

124. I was a nut ...and voted for Obama but now I've been cured.

[Phlem]

202. I'm with you Brother

But I think DU's been completely infiltrated by republicans posing as Democrats. I'm talking about the ridicules assertions about Gibb's intentions concerning his remarks. The left is under going a minimizing and demonizing from this administration because we're not center to right enough. These days center is right and this is coming from the top down, yes Obama feels the same way. It's a complete attack of the left and an attempt to push the nation towards the right, if you believe your in the minority. I think you might be surprised. A confirmation in the WSJ tells the whole story.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...

It's official Obama's not really left at all!?!

Fing A$$hole

-p

[RaleighNCDUer]

268. Because that is what really draws people to you - threats and warnings,

not approval and encouragement.

[Loudmxr]

3. Never never never would a republican ever talk that way about even the worst of their base.

i feel that the right has a point, after all these years, we have been used. But where we gonna go?

After all Americans are not really good at forming parties. The last was when Ronald Reagan reformed the Republican party in his image.

[Missy Vixen]

6. And this is the bottom line

>But where we gonna go?<

Those who are currently disenchanted with what's coming out of the White House these days have no workable alternative.

Those who believe President Obama and his staff members don't know this should put down the crack pipe.

In other words, he can tell us to "force him to do it" till we're blue in the face. We are of no use to them. Oh, silly me -- we're useful when we're contributing to the campaign, or putting in those volunteer hours at the local campaign headquarters.

:woohoo:

[Winterblues]

33. Where can we go? Well I can go fishing and the hell with politics or voting

Yes they feel, and with good reason, that they can take the Left for granted. They know we could never ever ever ever vote Republican. But we can also go out and just enjoy a little of what is left of our lives and screw them. When your ideas and in fact entire ideology is so blatantly spurned and mocked why the hell bother????

[bvar22]

67. Or,

you could start considering a longer term solution like building something better.

[Better Believe It]

78. You could get involved in helping to build movements for social change from the ground up.

And participate in actions like the October 2 National March on Washington.

[Missy Vixen]

279. We can't afford to march on Washington

We're currently busy attempting to survive this economy. I might also add that the last "march on Washington" (IWR, anyone?) was fruitless.

BTW, I'm positive that I've given more time, money and effort to electing progressives and the Democratic Party as a whole over the past thirty years than the vast majority of those who believe it's best to tell me I should "get involved".

[defendandprotect]

149. We can at least do what the GOP did in targeting their own moderates ....

and lefties -- and Democratic Party liberals -- which they did viciously so --

GOP/Pro-life -- and GOP/NRA -- and tons of corporate money moved that scheme along --

We need to do the same thing, but in reverse --

Think for one thing, we have to reignite the anti-war movement before Democrats now

bankrupt the Treasury with these wars!!

[NEOhiodemocrat]

218. Yes!

[ThomThom]

250. Yes, where are we going to go?

We can't allow another Bush to appoint a Supreme court Justice, ever.

[defendandprotect]

283. We're going to go to the LEFT ... all of us together .... and keep pushing in that direction . . .

stick together -- don't wander off alone --

stay with the liberal/progressive voting bloc --

and keep speaking out -- louder and louder!!

[mike r]

24. Exactly

Excellent point.

[anigbrowl]

107. ...which is why I'm not a Republican

Right now the GOP is pandering to the Tea Party, and the nativist/racist element who hate immigration, and the economic fundamentalists who believe all taxes and government services are evil. They are 'the party of No', usually voting against the administration on everything because if they don't, the wacko conservative fringe labels them traitors and raves about how it's time to polish up their guns. And even a GOP so far right that it's starting to sound fascist isn't considered conservative enough by the wingnuts.

The Democratic administraion has told its fringe, very bluntly, that it's out of the mainstream. Yes, it's hurtful to be told one's views are 'fucking retarded' or that one 'must be on drugs'. But I'm afraid it's going to keep happening until you adopt a reality-based perspective.

By that, I do not mean uncritical agreement with Obama, Pelosi, Reid or whoever. Advocating for the policies you want is a good thing, and so is constructive disagreement with policies you disapprove of. But that's not what we see at the fringe: instead we get empty slogans, ad hominem attacks, ignorance (of economics, civics, law and anything else that smacks of the mainstream), and a high level of aggression. The leftmost fringe of the party always appeals to emotion rather than reason, and always demands priority based on the worthiness of its goals, while offering little or no input on how to achieve those goals.

A huge percentage of DU threads degenerate into 'tax the rich!' or 'bring back the guillotine!' why yes, I AM in favor of progressive taxation, and I DO think that the main failing of Republican economic policy is the relentless upward distribution of wealth. But I also think that there's a lot more to economics that just calling everyone over a certain threshold a class enemy and jacking the top marginal tax rate to 100%. So what if that's how the right operates when they piss on the poor? There is nothing morally superior about picking a different class and saying you'd like to piss on them instead. It's fundamentally childish.

As for the regular hymns to the guillotine, give me a fucking break. Apart from the latent sadism on display (which is utterly toxic to moderate and independent voters, even more so than the Republican gun fetish), it displays an utter ignorance of history. 'People's Republics' in China, North Korea, Cambodia and many other places have started out intending to right the wrongs of society by lopping a few heads of the worst exploiters, and ended up carrying out indiscriminate slaughter of anyone who even looks like a dissenter. Besides the inhumanity of this, it destroys the country economically for a generation or longer. In Cambodia the Khmer rouge ended up imrpisoning or killing people because they had glasses, which was taken as a sign that they liked reading and were thus more likely to have ideas of their own that might not square with the leaders of the revolution.

But perhaps you think this is a crazy example, and what you refer to when you mention the guillotine is the more englightened country of France. Well, study your French history better. The use of the guillotine ended up as a free-for-all in France too, until common sense reasserted itself and the leading proponents of the guillotine, such as Marat and Robespierre, ended up being executed themselves. And once France had got past that little bump on the road? Seven years after the French revolution - less than two presidential terms - Napoleon Bonaparte staged a coup and became the most powerful man in France, acclaiming himself Emperor 5 years later and devoting himself to the conquest of Europe for another 15 years before being defeeated. Napoleon wasn't some sneaky aristocrat who hid from the guillotine - in fact, his military skills played a key part in the success of the revolution.

I'll stop there, although I could go on about French history and the difference between France today and the popular, but mistaken, beliefs about it on the left. I'm European, I speak French, I like the country and admire a lot of things about it - but it is not the post-revolutionary socialist paradise that many on DU imagine it to be. Next time you endorse setting up guillotines, I suggest you think real hard about what happens after the novelty factor wears off.

So, if you were hurt by the phrases 'fucking retarded' or 'must be on drugs', now you know how we moderate liberals feel when we're on the receiving end of your ideological rants.

[SwampG8r]

210. you are my new hero

well said

[cliffordu]

214. Exactly. Exactly right.

Thanks.

[Enthusiast]

222. Yeah, we're childish.

Who in the fuck advocated 100% taxation for the wealthy? If we complain about the Great Wall Street Heist we are now the "Khmer Rouge". Now we are "fringe" if we want decent reasonably priced health care. Way to distort things.

[defendandprotect]

284. Loved Grayson's comments for making clear Gibbs' misdirection .....

in putting liberals/progressives on his "enemies list" rather than attacking

the right wing -- on joblessness, need for more stimulus, lack of health care for

Americans, their desire for more tax cuts for the rich!!

[sendero]

236. You are just like Gibbs..

... trying to extrapolate reasonable demands into ridiculous ones, such as 100% top rates. I see very little of that. The public option or Glass-Stegall are not far left goals at all, they are sound management and not having them is simply INDEFENSIBLE.

Good luck with that.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

244. Not only that, 90% tmtr, Glass-Steagall and single payer/public option

are things that have already been proven successful in this country.

I mean :wtf:

[anigbrowl]

289. Yes. I also have ginger hair and glasses.

I am not extrapolating reasonable demands into ridiculous ones. I am pointing that the frequency of ridiculous demands from the fringe is self-defeating. If you see very little of that, then you are not looking very hard.

I too think the public option and the restoration Glass-Steagall are basically good policies, and that is why I only give the administration & Congress a B- or a C. On the other hand, I'm not blind to the fact that there is intense opposition to reform...and so I view this as a shortcoming to be rectified, not 'INDEFENSIBLE'.

See, having been very por and hungry at various times, I have this idea that half a loaf is in fact better than no bread at all.

[sendero]

290. I have been poor too..

... and being given a stone to eat IS worse than nothing.

[Axle_techie]

247. +1

I don't agree with everything you said, but it is well said. That said, NOTHING excuses Gibbs blatant attack on the people who want the POTUS to be the POTUS they voted for, not this empty shell of a half assed right-centrist he seems to be becoming.

[RaleighNCDUer]

269. If fear of the guillotine does not prompt so-called moderate liberals -

who are in fact neither - to stop promoting RW republican policies, then the result WILL be the guillotine.

Nobody really wants a Reign of Terror - but you can only play the class war game so long before those on the bottom end really do rise up. In every instance you mentioned there was a rich, powerful top class, and a vast marginalized bottom who wanted nothing more than safety and security. The reason there was no second Civil War here in the 30s was because FDR's policies cut the legs out from under both the fascists and the communists.

I, for one, don't want to see that. There are too many million of Americans with too many millions of gun. Such a political collapse would make the last civil war look like a barroom brawl.

The left - the REAL left, not the "moderate liberals" have been right on every social and political issue in the history of this country, from ending slavery to the emancipation of women to strong unions strengthening the economy to civil rights. Why would they now be on the wrong side IRT gay rights, winding down the military adventures, saving social security from Wall Street predation, health care reform rather than health insurance mandates, and so many other issues the corporatist, er, moderate liberals say are impossible?

We are NOT hurt by the words - we are hurt, on a daily basis, by the policies that spawned those words.

Wake up.

[whathehell]

217. To another country, maybe?...

where they have that radical single payer healthcare?

Kidding..I know most can't do that.

[LibDemAlways]

257. Reagan famously advocated never saying anything bad

about a fellow Repuke. He understood the concept of circling the wagons. Apparently the only circle Gibbs understands is the circular firing squad.

[EFerrari]

4. The handlful of people defending this cr@p

really need to sit down with themselves and figure out why they are enabling their own disenfranchisement.

[LostinVA]

10. Maybe they aren't being disenfranchised

I was thinking about this last night. Maybe many of them like things this way, and the direction things are going?

[Starry Messenger]

11. Yes, exactly.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LostinVA]

22. I don't disagree

[alsame]

46. What's bizarre to me is how they take it so personally. Any criticism

of policy or legislation is met with rabid responses. They fight and fight to convince you that what we got is just perfect. It does make you question motives.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

81. There is a mode of personal identification

A lot of times folks seem to view attacks on the Prez as personal attacks on them.

Sad.

But it explains the upside of such personality-devotion.

By blurring ones' identity with that of a celebrity a person feels a sense of power.

[alsame]

93. That must be at least part of it. It always amazes me how

criticizing a piece of legislation can generate such hysteria.

[Lorien]

200. It's a sports team fanatic mentality

The "team" is their own adopted alter ego. Nothing matters except wins for the team.

[KoKo]

259. It seems "sports team" adoration and "celeberity worship" has taken over our whole culture, politics

as well. When Roone Arledge (ABC) was the first to run news shows like covering sports he was applauded and the copy cats took over news coverage in the new model we started our decline.

When Tim Russert ended every interview by asking the guest about how his "team was doing" and getting into numbers about who was going to win...you could see where it had become. When shows sprung up on MSNBC during the Clinton impeachment that became voyeuristic and partisan, it was the forerunner to Fox News. Our country is a mess and our politicians are just part of the whole celebrity focused, voyeuristic media parade. We live by the scripts they write for us. We are manipulated by Wall St., Corporations, Conglomerate Media and Think Tanks Talking Points and Talking Heads from the Right and Far Right.

It's going to take hard work to dig ourselves out of this. Not being manipulated by Robert Gibbs and Rahm Emmanuel would be a good step in turning things around. We need to push back against this manipulation and these attacks.

[defendandprotect]

285. Ah --- thank you!! Terrific explanation . . . . "personality-devotion" re president ---

By blurring one's identity with that of a celebrity a person feels a sense of power!!


Wonderful Enlightenment ...


There is a mode of personal identification
Posted by Kurt_and_Hunter
A lot of times folks seem to view attacks on the Prez as personal attacks on them.

Sad.

But it explains the upside of such personality-devotion.

By blurring ones' identity with that of a celebrity a person feels a sense of power.

[Name removed]

109. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[defendandprotect]

150. And they fight for "new rules" here which will eventually give them what they want ....

that is -- for the left to STFU -- !!

Which is also what Gibbs' is saying --

but he's after the liberal hosts who are reflecting our feelings --

wants to shut that down, as well!!

Remember when it was only the right wing that wanted to shut up the left???

[Lorien]

199. People are most defensive of the things that they are actually ashamed of

or know are indefensible. Look at smokers with young children in the house who will try to convince you-in an extremely hostile fashion-that second hand smoke carries NO health risks with it at all and that you really want to curtail their "freedom of choice".

[rhett o rick]

256. They dont tell us that what we got is perfect, but the best they could do.

I think their attacks are intentional. IMO after the election, they decided to go after the center-right, the New Democrats, the disenfranchised Republicans, and to do that they had to cut all ties with the "radical" lefties.

[KoKo]

261. They are playing on the Repub Meme that all Dems are Socialists...that Obama is a

Socialist. So the "bright lights" of Rahm and Gibbs and others said: "Attack your Party Activists" and equate them with "Tea Baggers!" Fringe/Crazies...and you will Win Big and drag the country to the manipulative center. But, where is the center they want to drag the country to... What is their VISION for this new Center made up of mostly Republican Conservatives (Heritage Foundation, AEI, Council on Foreign Relations, Cato Institute) and DLC Big Corporation loving Democrats who supported Reagan? Is it Reagonomics they want to return us to?

[rhett o rick]

263. They want to drag us to a land where corporations and citizens can live in harmony.

Of course the citizens will be serfs.

I agree with your reply KoKo.

[alsame]

281. Sadly, I think you're right. It's just a shame that it's also the MO

here on DU.

[whathehell]

278. Yes...As a few have said:

Were that they were so fast and zealous with the "professional right".:eyes:

[Sheepshank]

58. The predicatbility goes both ways

it's prety easy to list those who will immediately jump on the band wagon of any thread that wants to bash anything Obama, and anyone stupid enough to offer support for the curent POTUS.

Laughably, hysterically, transparently predictable....always the same people, ALWAYS

These are the same people that have sold themselves to the Reps, support the Rep meme and vested in the failure of even a glimmer of hope for a Presidency that attempts any change.

How'd you like them apples loaded onto a turned table?:sarcasm:

eta the smilie...which isn't much of a smilie, more of a finger poke.

[SammyWinstonJack]

75. +1

:thumbsup:

[Desertrose]

79. +2

[Occulus]

184. It's coming from four or five posters for the most part.

At least, there are four or five that are more vocal than most others. You're right, too- it's utterly transparent. Any criticism of Obama at all has become, to them, an ideological attack worthy of a with-us-or-against-us response.

It's disgusting. They act as though there isn't any such thing as "legitimate criticism".

[rhett o rick]

265. And they never provide reasonable discussion, only attacks. nm

[Nite Owl]

186. I know it's gotten to the point of

of beinging humorous. Some are nasty and I discovered ignore after years of being on DU. Hard to believe that they can find absolutely nothing with which to disagree with the administration. Always some excuse. I don't know any pol that I agree with on everything.

I wonder if they do anything for the Democratic party besides sitting at their keyboards telling us how much we disagree with them and their administration.

[EFerrari]

23. Hmm. Last night I was trying to figure out the relationship

between bad boundaries and authoritarian followers. You have something there, I just don't get it all yet. :hi:

[yowzayowzayowza]

12. Handful? Looks like itz running 2:1 from the polls. n/t

[Donnachaidh]

19. and polls are *never* pushed, right?

:eyes:

[LostinVA]

20. The numbers looked flipped to me

:shrug:

[EFerrari]

26. What polls are you referring to?

[spoony]

66. Must be this scientific survey of three neighbours:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8925047&mesg_id=8925047

[Individualist]

70. rofl

:thumbsup:

[yowzayowzayowza]

94. These:

Close to even - http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8921720

2:1 - http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8919967

[EFerrari]

121. Okay, thanks. n/t

[defendandprotect]

151. Two polls which were new to me .... didn't see them til now ....

And the poll with a direct question shows 234 participated -- and

30% of them supported Gibbs' comments while 70% disagreed with them -- !!


The other poll seems less clear -- and there you do have a divided vote but with

only 163 voting --

[xiamiam]

56. star struck and mesmerized..still..nt

[RoseMead]

57. It's been disconcerting to watch, that's for sure. n/t

[rhett o rick]

119. I feel the president is willing to give up the left to seal the center. nm

[dflprincess]

158. What is now called the left - used to be the center

Obama is working on moving the party even further to the right by declaring what were once mainstream Democratic beliefs to be "far left".

[rhett o rick]

193. Agree. What on the "far left" does he agree with? nm

[Axle_techie]

249. The handful of people defending this crap

Are still enjoying the kool-aid

[ecstatic]

7. Once again, a very small sliver of the left thinks they represent the entire

side. You don't. Hopefully you will get it soon.

[EFerrari]

28. The object used in these sentences shrinks hourly.

Soon, it will be microscopic.

[Hello_Kitty]

80. Such a strong reaction to such a tiny sliver. eom

[liquid diamond]

183. I have been saying this repeatedly, but it won't sink in with them.

It's sad how they think they are so damn important and powerful.

[donco6]

241. Then you shouldn't have to be saying it so often, right?

Since no one here supports "their" position.

[doc03]

8. I am waiting for the usual post that it was all part of

some great chess move by Obama to throw the Republicans off guard. Don't worry there is a great master plan behind it we just aren't smart enough to figure it out.

[Steely_Dan]

51. I Recall When...

some of the criticism of Obama began many months ago, some defenders would regularly respond by implying that Obama had some sort of secret plan, that his questionable strategy was really a very sophisticated political move to defeat the Regugs and get his progressive legislation passed. I think that they were reaching a little... They saw what was happening and were really "hoping" that this was the plan. I believed them for a while.

-PLA

[doc03]

112. Yes that was what i was referring to. There got to be some

brilliant strategery here we just don't understand. I thinks we have those Republicans just where we want them we will checkmate them soon.:sarcasm:

[me b zola]

114. I was guilty of that

...but no longer. I have exhausted every possible reason/excuse as to why this administration governs from a center-right position. Stick a fork in me, I'm done.

[defendandprotect]

153. Think DU'ers generally need their BS meters turned up way, way higher ....

Thanks for letting us know -- I don't think anyone wants to blame anyone or take

anyone to the woodshed -- but, wow . . . how could you have missed it when Obama

eloped into the White House with DLC-Rahm and the Wall Street gang?

Sad for all of us!!

[me b zola]

213. I didn't miss it, I just couldn't believe it

It takes a lot to look at your situation and say that you've been "taken". At least I am here now, and yeah, I'm pissed.

[Enthusiast]

223. The brilliant plan is

to become the party of Reagan as in the 1980s.

[RaleighNCDUer]

273. Except without returning to those tax rates. nt

[RaleighNCDUer]

272. I was one of them. I saw him putting off DADT as a strategic move to

position it for after a successful HCR would make more people happy with him, and more willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. HCR with a public option, even a relatively weak public option, would force the insurance companies to lower their profit margin in order to compete, bringing down health care costs across the board. Everybody would benefit - even the insurance companies, through expanded coverage. I argued strongly for this, despite my disappointment and his rejecting single-payer from the outset.

Then he let the insurance companies write the legislation, and set in stone their right to soak the public with mandates.

Then I was what was happening...

[defendandprotect]

152. A lot of damage has been done behind that alleged "Chess Game" ...!!

Wow--!!

[saracat]

167. You don't have to wait. There already is one! LOL!

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

9. Great post and excellent analysis.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

21. This is not a fucking RELIGION

I am plenty appreciative of a lot that has happened.

It does not, however, follow that I am obliged to perform perform public obeisances to please you.

These people are supposed to work for me in some way. This is a fucking Democracy, not a monarchy.

I have no obligation to set aside a chunk of daily time for flattering the king.

[Nite Owl]

196. Good reply to whomever it was

they do seem to forget that part, the we elect them to do a job and work for us not the other way around.

[LostinVA]

25. "change for the better in all respects"

Well, this is absolutely not true.

[eridani]

160. Bingo. I'll go with "a change for the better in some respects, though" n/t

[Starry Messenger]

14. These days everyone who supports Keynesianism is considered a socialist

Even by members of "our" side in power. Let that sink in and decide what you consider "nutty".

[LostinVA]

29. You just caused a bunch of hits on Wikipedia

I, of course, know what that means, since I was informed I am a well-known DU malcontent. Which is hysterical, since i haven't posted on here for a year until just a few weeks ago.

[Starry Messenger]

You are a famous internet bandito

Even in your absence the terror lingers. :D Librarians are like ninjas.

[LostinVA]

40. rofl

I know, I was like :wtf:

I've only been back on here a few weeks.

[Starry Messenger]

45. Hey, revel in it!

I wish I had that kind of DU rep! If you scared them when you weren't here, just think of what the future holds! :D

[defendandprotect]

154. Jesus was a socialist . . . which is what makes claims of "I am a Christian" so weirdly ironic!!

[mike r]

15. WH to RW: "Your enemy is my enemy, ergo I am your friend"

Obama got the Oval Office and the Nobel - he doesn't give a shit anymore.
That's my take.
By the way, even though he was not my first choice, I gave him some of my hard-earned money.
I want it back.

[rhett o rick]

120. I partially agree. WH to the CenterRight: "Your enemy is my ememy..."

Pres Obama willingly used the left to get elected. Then to maintain the presidency he is choosing to abandon the left in the hopes of winning the center-right.

[bvar22]

194. Gore tried that in 2000.

Didn't work then.

[rhett o rick]

204. Agree. nm

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

16. "“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” - Gandhi

[FiveGoodMen]

117. We've been losing steadily for 30 years at least.

"Then you win" my ass.

[jaxx]

17. Jeez he made a lot of people mad.

The people who are saying what he brought up don't like hearing it. I wonder why.

[LostinVA]

32. Maybe because it was baiting and snide, at best?

[jaxx]

36. He was a bit snide.

But then when you're giving back what you have gotten, it tends to run that way. And pointing out the truth pisses people off.

[LostinVA]

39. Except eh didn't point out the truth at all

The Pentagon snark being the obvious giveaway.

And, why do you think the Administration has a right to attack liberal critics of their policies? they don't. You really wouldn't ever of heard Bush or Cheney say something publicly about GOPers. they even cooled it with people like Christine Whitman and Olympia Snowe.

[jaxx]

47. How many times a day do we see "well if they stopped the wars,

cut the defense spending" everything could go for the social programs? You can't count them because that is a standard answer to something the congress has passed and sent to Obama. Nothing is good enough, there is always the backseat driver saying you shoulda turned at the last corner. When someone is constantly attacked, sooner or later they hit back. Might not have been the smartest thing to do, but it was real.

I'm a little tired of the praise heaped on bush and cheney the last couple days....hell yes they said things about the wingers. They got pinched for making fun of the evangelicals when the faith based stuff was getting going. Look at them now, they're so scared they're running from the teabagger nuts, and then turning right back and begging them to join the RNC.

It's not ok to praise dubya and the boys, it's not ok to constantly equate Obama with bush. This is the Democratic Underground.......and we like Democrats. We want them to win and we want them to be in charge of the legislative process.....and no they will not be perfect. And that, my fellow liberal, is life.

[Hello_Kitty]

86. Wanting to stop idiotic wars and cut wasteful spending

Is not the same as wanting to do away with the DOD. Then, as the OP noted, he conflated support for single payer health care with the outrageous (and mythical) position of wanting to dismantle the Pentagon.

And if equating Obama with Bush is always unacceptable, how, pray tell, do we describe it when Obama continues one of the Bush policies he promised to discontinue when he was campaigning?

[Nite Owl]

191. When someone is constantly attacked?

That would be 'the left'. They are the ones who lied themselves into this not the the left. To expect at least some of the promises kept isn't asking much.

As far as cutting social programs and not defense...it should be fair is all. If social programs need to be cut to balance the budget then Pentagon needs need to to cut too instead of asking for billions of dollars which never seem to be accounted for and mysteriously disappear with no questions asked. Lives are being lost for what?

I have not seen any praise of W and the boys. No excuse for that if was done.

[Enthusiast]

224. Unconvincing.

No one suggested "everything could go for the social programs". When this nation spends more on the MIC than the next eight nations combined most of us will consider it excessive. Our military spending is excessive by any measure. Especially in light of the fact that the U.S. health care system is a failure. "Fellow Liberal"? It isn't life, it's bullshit.

[RaleighNCDUer]

276. BZZZT

They NEVER made fun of the evangelicals.

And since when is "stop the wars, cut defense spending" = to disbanding the DOD?

If we stopped BOTH wars and cut the Defense spending in half, we'd still have the most powerful, best equipped, and strongest military on earth.

[Caliman73]

288. And what about that statement is wrong?

What is wrong about wanting wars that have no effect on national security, that are killing our soldiers and spending our tax dollars at billions per month? What is wrong with using our vast wealth to give people actual opportunity to improve their lives? Do you understand what you are advocating? Although some of the rhetoric is a bit much and people certainly let their emotions get the better of them, there is valid criticism from the progressive side of the Democratic party. The President has taken stances that align him with the former administration, he has chosen people to work in his administration who do not represent the interests of the average citizen, but the wealthiest among us. You are saying that pursuing those stances is okay because the person has a D by their name.

No one is asking for perfection, that is hyperbole and used merely to dismiss an opponent as unreasonable. Progressives merely want effort to pass legislation that is progressive. If Obama and the Congress fight the fight and they fail, that is one thing. They have capitulated often, and still fail to gain even political victory from their efforts.

[RaleighNCDUer]

274. Name ONE American who believe we should close down the DOD.

ONE.

OK, other than Cheney, who thinks we can replace it with Blackwater.

[L0oniX]

126. think it's that we want to see the repukes attacked aggressively ...and what we get is this shit......

attacking the left? What utter stupidity. We need "every vote we can get" and take nothing for granted.

[defendandprotect]

156. ... but understand, WE/the left are the ones endangering the DLC corporate agenda....

and Gibbs makes clear -- it is anti-universal health care --

and pro-war --

[patrice]

27. The "Left" DOES need to differentiate it's fuck-November crowd & those who are defending people who

NEED someone to say for them

"WE WILL NOT BE THE SACRIFICIAL LAMBS ON **YOUR** ALTARS"

[EFerrari]

35. Again, is the "left" a tiny sliver or a might force that can tank November?

Because these two talking points are repeated endlessly and often in the same post.

lol

There is no Fuck November Crowd at DU. There are people who express frustration and more rarely, people who have made a personal decision. There is no campaign against voting this Fall.

[LostinVA]

41. Exactly, EF

[patrice]

37. And if that's not clear enough for you: Throw us under the bus now and you can run whoever you

goddamn well please in 2012 and I promise you I WILL work against them.

[jaxx]

48. Well, did that get it all out?

The bus left the station long ago, you missed it. Idle threats to work against the President are not what makes a cohesive unit....

[depakid]

135. Hardly an idle threat

Indeed, I fully expect to see a third party candidate (if not a primary challenge).

And I expect to see a large drain of on the ground resources in 2012 as well (which will be more significant).

If Republicans run an ostensibly competent and moderate candidate, I'll lay odds on Obama being a one term president.

Won't take much of a swing in key electoral states for that to happen, and there are going to be a lot of dissatisfied customers out there given the probable state of the economy.

[defendandprotect]

159. Well, I don't think you're right .... and certainly hope not ... Democrats didn't work

this hard to bring Democrats to power in '06 and again in '08 to see this

slip backwards again --

But, I think we really need a more liberal/progressive candidate to rise from

the ranks and take on an early liberal fight against Obama's corporate agenda --


Whitehouse - Grayson -- we need to "move on!" as Obama is so fond of saying!

[depakid]

171. I hope I'm wrong too

but in politics, like physics, you can't create a vacuum and not expect it to be filled- and there's also another basic law that applies:

Presidents (fair or no) get the credit or the blame for the state of affairs in the nation- and particularly for the economy.

Cases in point: Bush I and Jimmy Carter.

[defendandprotect]

181. Well, I'm more worried about liberal/progressive voting bloc --

and whether comments like these from Gibbs will sufficiently demoralize them

enough to have them wander off --

Don't understand what you mean by "create a vacuum" -- where?

Granted we need new stimulus and Obama isn't doing it -- in fact, FED is the one

deciding our economic policy whereas Congress should be doing it -- we don't elect

the FED. But, think they're concerned today --

there was some news on that today but not as much hard news getting posted here at DU

these days as used to be, IMO -- ?????

Think everyone knows that Obama didn't create this mess -- but we also all know that

he eloped into the White House with those who did.

And too long a delay in reacting to this thing which is a "Depression" --

as Obama say weeks ago and then scrubbed from Yahoo and replaced with "Recession" --

[enlightenment]

49. edited

edited to remove comment because I honestly don't know understand where you're coming from and don't want to shoot an arrow that shouldn't be shot!

[kiva]

52. So....if the Democratic Party nominates someone other

than Obama you will work against them? Really? Guess that shows exactly where your concern lies.

[inna]

138. wtf does that even mean?? your comment does not make sense. explain yourself.

[OnyxCollie]

205. Don't bother.

It's just another defender of the status quo who believes civilization will collapse if authority is questioned.

[defendandprotect]

157. No -- the LEFT needs to hear from the White House that they are turning this ship around ....

and/or we move for a new Democratic candidate in 2012 --

If Obama wants to continue sailing in corporate waters, then let's find a

new Captain --

[killbotfactory]

30. It's amazing how a few off-hand comments can rile people up

some people here have lost the plot. get a grip.

[LostinVA]

34. This wasn't off-hand, it was the Administration's official mouthpiece

Speaking to Inside the Beltway political media.

[RoseMead]

60. Why are people overlooking that distinction?

The fact that those slurs were spoken *publicly* by an *administration official* who is supposed to be part of *our side* is what really stings, imo. Yes, lots of people have said lots of crazy things on DU and elsewhere, but *they aren't the President's press secretary making statements in front of God and everybody.*


And yes, Republicans say lots of nasty, stupid things to and about Dems. We deal with that in a better way because it's expected: that's what they do, because they are our *opposition.* They are not part of our own party!

I truly don't understand why so many defenders want to put Gibbs' words on the same level with those of anonymous posters on the internet or Republicans. There's no comparison, imo, because Gibbs is supposed to be on our side ("us" being all Democrats, including the ones on the left). That's what got me. It's one thing when the other side is disdainful of us, but it's another thing entirely to hear something like that from one of the people who's supposed to be working *with* us.

[L0oniX]

127. Indeed. Obama seeks to quash Wikileaks but lets its own mouth piece attack some of the base?

STUPID!

[defendandprotect]

162. What's amazing is how long we've been taking this crap from people like Rahm and Gibbs!

[RaleighNCDUer]

277. Speaking on the record as a spokesman is not quite the same as

blathering on a bar stool, or even blogging.

He said it.

[patrice]

31. There are honest people who stand with the Real Left, not just those who are creating careers for

THEMSELVES.

[Bluenorthwest]

38. Problem with that argument is that this is Gibbs' carreer as well

He takes $172,000 tax payer dollars a year to say these things. And he takes it for himself. With a salary like that, no caps are needed.

[L0oniX]

129. Creating careers for themselves = bending over for the DLC.

DLC = tow the line or else you can forget any extra funding and or backing for your campaign and career.

[defendandprotect]

163. +1000% ----

[NJmaverick]

42. This post is just hyperbole filled nonsense. Gibbs was addressing

the left FRINGE (remember 90% of the left supports and approves of the President). He clearly stated he was talking about those that claim Bush=Obama. Your rant completely ignored that critical FACT.

[SOS]

55. The majority of Americans are not the fringe.

Gibbs pointed out that "the left" would not be satisfied until we had a Canadian-style health care system.

"Between 2003 to 2009, 17 opinion polls showed a simple majority of the public supports a single-payer system in the United States."

The February 2009 NYT poll showed 59% of Americans favor the single-payer Canadian model.
59% of the US population can't be considered the left FRINGE.

http://www.wpasinglepayer.org/PollResults.html

[inna]

139. thank you

[havocmom]

143. Yeppers, Gibbs pissed all over the majority of the base

And he is still employed by Obama.

[Nite Owl]

203. And that is exactly the problem

with their thinking. I don't know who it is that they are really trying to please except for healthcare corporations and big banks. My republican neighbors were all hoping for Medicare for all, in other words single payer. They didn't vote for him but it would have won them over. Now, not so much. Ending the wars and bringing our troops home is also not just a 'left' idea. It's people not just the left that they are hiding behind. So fringe seems to be you aren't a CEO.

[Enthusiast]

225. Thank you for pointing this out.

The PTB want to paint progressive ideas as wild eyed liberal craziness. It is not wildly liberal to expect reasonably priced effective health care. We could have had single payer but we watched it frittered away right before our eyes. It was part of the plan. This is pretty damn clear. Now we have to wait for the Cat Food Commission recommendations.

[RaleighNCDUer]

282. I guess 'the left' are like 'Christians' - you are one if you say you are,

no matter what your actions or beliefs.

90% of DEMOCRATS do not support Obama - much less 90% of the LEFT, which is a much small subgroup.

Unless, of course, the real socialists actually believe Palin and Hannity when they call Obama a socialist.

[Desertrose]

84. So its up to 90% who support Obama now?

Would love to see those stats.

[FiveGoodMen]

118. Oh no, I'm sure it's more like 110%

[EFerrari]

122. LOL

[L0oniX]

130. Maybe you are ignoring that we need every vote we can get.

Now is not the time or place to be creating enemies from those who may vote for a Dem as the lessor of 2 evils.

[defendandprotect]

166. Gibbs' was addressing the 76%+ of Americans who wanted "Canadian Health Care Plan" ....

and the numbers were continuing to rise --

And the left wing TV hosts who understand this and who are reflecting back

the feelings of the liberal/progressive base --

A Democratic Party which keeps these wars going though they were elected in '06

to end the war is too much like Bush --

A Democratic president who held the insurance industry/drug industry concerns higher

than the public's needs is too much like Bush --

A Democratic president setting up a right wing "Cat Food Commission" to attack

Social Security and Medicare is too much like Bush --

[RaleighNCDUer]

280. BS

1) 10% of the far left does NOT think Bush=Obama. I would be very surprised if 1% does.

2) He equated that less than 1% with the 70% of Democrats who wanted single payer/public option/Canadian style health care.

3) Nobody outside a mental institution believes we can shut down the DOD.

FACT: He was conflating exaggerations of leftie issues with obviously crazy shit to make ALL leftie issues equally crazy. That was NOT an attack on a few far-left bloggers (who he did not name) but upon basic Democratic party issues.

[BzaDem]

43. I think he was specifically targeting his comments towards certain groups of people (not the left in

general).

He was attacking people who thought Obama was little different than Bush, and people who thought single payer was politically feasible at this point in time. He wasn't attacking everyone who disagreed with him from the left, and he wasn't attacking single payer as a policy matter.

You seem to be saying that his criticism of the general left was over the top, trying to equate the left with the most "nutty" criticisms of Obama. But I see it as only attacking those with the "nutty" criticisms, and going out of his way NOT to attack the left in general. As he said, progressives by and large support the President as a general matter (so he obviously wasn't attacking them).

[L0oniX]

131. Yea the "regular left is fine ...it's the "professional left" he has a problem with.

:crazy:

WTH are the "professional left"? Someone who's getting paid to be a lefty?

[OhioBlue]

192. I think it was the bloggers and TV personalities

he was referring to. He's frustrated and he said something stupid. The RW noise machine always had Bush's back. Gibbs is just frustrated that he feels he has to fight a PR battle on 2 sides and Bush never did. He's human. He said something stupid out of frustration. I don't believe it is a personal attack toward progressives or those of us on the left or even those of us that want single payer. Again.. he said something stupid. He's frustrated. He is human.

[defendandprotect]

168. Nonsene, he was attacking the 76%+ of Americans who wanted single payer/government run...

health care --

and the anti-war movement --

and liberal hosts who are reflecting the public's liberal/progressive concerns --

[Enthusiast]

226. Yeah, he was only targeting those

extra leftish lefties that want a Canadian style health care system. :crazy:

[BzaDem]

232. He was targeting those who wanted to GIVE UP on HCR if they couldn't get single payer.

There is a huge difference between wanting single payer (which I actually think Gibbs does) and determining the political actual feasibility of single payer.

[Enthusiast]

238. Criticism of Obama from the left

during and after the HCR debate was because he negotiated from a position of weakness by capitulating on single payer from the start. I don't know why you would believe that Gibbs or Obama wanted a more robust HCR reform bill. Why do you think we are so angry at the administration? You think we just like to complain? You think we just want a pony?

How do we actually know single payer isn't feasible? No one has actually debated it. It was "off the table". Apparently single payer is feasible in other countries.

[RaleighNCDUer]

286. progressives by and large support the President as a general matter (so he obviously wasn't

attacking them)

Those are not equal sides of an equation. THAT is what people are upset about - progressives DO support the president, and in response are dismissed to the 'left fringe' by his spokesman. Get it? IF PROGRESSIVES DID NOT SUPPORT HIM, THEY WOULD NOT FEEL BETRAYED AT THE BASHING AND RIDICULING OF THEIR POSITIONS.

His castigating of the 'left fringe' included Canadian style healthcare (70% Democratic support, 59% overall electorate support, and eminently possible with a solid Democratic congress - if the administration had asked for it); closing down the Department of Defense (which 'far left' media ever suggested that?); and Dennis Kucinich supporters (nevermind the issues like ending the wars, he saw a UFO so he must be crazy - a nice double-dip because Dennis is against the wars and saw a UFO, therefore the anti-war movement must be equally unstable). Just who does he think the Kucinich supporters voted for in '08? McCain?

I'd expect this crap from Fox, not from the president's spokesman. He keeps this up, he's got a great future there.

[Poboy]

44. K&R... I also think this post is noteworthy as well-

gratuitous (1000+ posts) Tue Aug-10-10 11:52 PM
Response to Original message
27. Call it a hunch

But he was definitely using the same code words and dog whistles I'm accustomed to hearing from my friends on the reactionary right. Oh, it was gussied up a smidgen, but the plain meaning of his words was there. He was taking dead aim at the folks who wanted a single payer health care system, which his administration bargained away before they ever sat down for the first negotiation. He was making an obvious caricature of folks who think we should spend a little more on butter and a little less on guns. Seriously, is there anyone making a case for eliminating the Pentagon? If there is, why didn't Gibbs name that person? Instead, he was disguising the administration's own ineptitude in making the case for trimming defense with a straw man about eliminating the Pentagon. "That's not reality," says Mr. Gibbs. The one true thing he said: He's making arguments against positions that aren't being advanced in what the rest of us would call reality.

Like I said, I'm pretty accustomed to this kind of nonsense out of the likes of Fox, CNN, and MSNBC. The couch it in slightly different terms, but it all boils down to hippie punching. And now we get to see the spectacle of the loyal legions telling us to sit down like good little boys and girls. Gibbs didn't really say what he said: He was talking about "professional" leftists! What are there, like three in the entire nation? He couldn't just call them?

No, he was talking directly to me and others dissatisfied with the chasm between the Obama administration's brave words and wimpy deeds. Instead of showing leadership, and rallying public opinion (fully 2/3 of the American people supported single payer, which had the added bonus of saving billions of dollars), the administration has turtled on issue after issue, letting the reactionaries set the tone and terms of discussion. And now the President's Press Secretary has the nerve to say we want the impossible.

That is why you fail.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8921132#8921300

[defendandprotect]

169. +1000% -- excellent post --

[LoZoccolo]

50. You wish. n/t

[hfojvt]

53. I must be imagining things then

You mean that there is not a contingent on DU, a seemingly large and vocal one that has been bashing Obama and the Democratic Party for months? http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/127 Saying that the Democratic Party is the same as the Republican Party? Now you want to wiggle out and say that "is like" is not the same thing as "equal to".

Is single payer a "nut left" idea? I am afraid that the vast majority of the public thinks that it is. The left has done a very poor job of selling it, even here on DU, and the right has done a very good job of trashing it.

It is typical of the so-called "principled disagreement" to see almost nothing said to sell the principles. There are very few essays on DU that a non-choir member would read and come away thinking "wow, single payer really is the best". Instead the typical reader is going to come to DU and read a dozen threads a day with the same basic themes. Those themes being "The Obama administration sucks" and "the Democratic Party sucks". They are both part of a group of dishonest morons who never do anything right. In fact, the RNC could probably write a weekly column called "the top 10 Democratic idiots" just based on material from the front page of DU (you know, those threads with 100+ recs).

I am gonna google "Obama done" on DU and see what I find.

[Poboy]

54. Bullshit, nonesense...

"Is single payer a "nut left" idea? I am afraid that the vast majority of the public thinks that it is."

Vast majority? Wow, and who needs a drug test again?

[hfojvt]

61. yeah, I must need a drug test if I think that an idea that is not adopted

by any major candidate is a fringe idea.

[bvar22]

69. Oh. So you let lobbyists for Wall Street and the Health Insurance Industry...

...decide what your opinions are?
And, YES.
I'm talking about the "major" candidates.

[hfojvt]

83. it's not about my opinion it is about what the public's opinion is

IF the public is gonna run away from single payer at the first sign of a Chamber of Commerce ad using the S-word, then, like I said, public support for it is not very strong, and it would behoove advocates of single payer to quit pretending the public is on their side and to start trying to win public opinion. Because a Republican victory this fall is not gonna be seen as a vote for single payer. The Republicans who win will be unabashedly against single payer.

[bvar22]

98. The PUBLIC didn't run away from Medicare for ALL.

Obama & the Centrist Democratic Party Leadership did.

Rahm was recently overheard crowing about "preserving the Private Health Care delivery system."


"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."
--- Paul Wellstone

[defendandprotect]

170. Interesting ... didn't know that about Rahm . . . !! 76%+ of Americans wanted a government-run

health care plan -- single payer -- MEDICARE FOR ALL --

and the numbers were still rising as Obama was selling us out in back room deals

with drug company --

[bvar22]

198. Here is the quote:

”In a Thursday interview, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel argued that rather than recoiling against Obama, business leaders should be grateful for his support on at least a half-dozen counts: his advocacy of greater international trade and education reform open markets despite union skepticism; his rejection of calls from some quarters to nationalize banks during the financial meltdown; the rescue of the automobile industry; the fact that the overhaul of health care preserved the private delivery system; the fact that billions in the stimulus package benefited business with lucrative new contracts, and that financial regulation reform will take away the uncertainty that existed with a broken, pre-crash regulatory apparatus.

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=B2F85DDF-18FE-70B2-A835FE1E7FA8D74C

[defendandprotect]

275. Thanks -- saved it -- "business leaders should be grateful...." !!!!

Thanks, Obama ... for something else that Bush could have done!

[L0oniX]

132. I should have been tested for drugs before I voted for Obama too.

[BlackHoleSon]

71. Single payer

I seem to remember MONTH'S worth of excellent essays, studies, actuarial tables, etc. showing that single-payer covers the most people at the least cost. The only reason it didn't "sell" is because the other side, with a great assist from the media (and a throwing under the bus display from the Administration) lied, obfuscated and demagogued. So you're correct if you think the average reader would come away thinking that covering the most people at the least cost is a crappy, crappy idea.

[hfojvt]

76. perhaps you could link to them then

I am talking about what is written on DU, although essays anywhere would likely be re-posted to DU.

My owne feeling is that Obama et. al. did not bring single payer up is because then it would have been associated with Obamacare and have been an albatross that sank the whole project. Even now many people are calling the bill that passed a "government take over" of health care, and many of those people are going to be re-elected by wide margins.

[LWolf]

90. Bullshit.

For example, the Times/CBS poll asked: Would you favor or oppose the government offering everyone a government-administered health insurance plan — something like the Medicare coverage that people 65 and older get — that would compete with private insurance plans? The poll question was phrased generally so that it could be asked in repeated surveys over time regardless of any specific legislative proposal.

With the question asked that way, most respondents supported the idea, with 65 percent in favor, 26 percent opposed and 9 percent offering no position.

http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/25/a-primer-the-public-may-have-more-appetite-for-a-public-option-than-congress/

[Individualist]

102. No sale!

Fuck DLC!

[inna]

140. offensive bullshit

shame on you

[xiamiam]

59. this criticism is cast at entire communities..not just fringe..

i'm in northern california...i know my community after 30+ years and we are liberal..gibbs statements just negated the desires of an entire geographical area..no doubt about it

[EFerrari]

62. I think they thought it would be a 2-fer.

They'd look even more "moderate" and they'd get the left to quiet down or show appreciation or something. I don't think it's going to work out the way it was intended to work.

[LostinVA]

77. +1

[Raksha]

237. +1

[bullwinkle428]

63. KO said it best last night : "BAD POLICY is BAD POLICY, no matter

who happens to be implementing it!"

[rucky]

68. I understand the strategy. It's a stupid strategy, but I understand it.

They're alienating the left to court independent voters. We've seen it. We get it. I'm not taking it personally, but it is stupid. Yes, it even works sometimes, it follows a logical pattern if you assume independents are in the middle of the spectrum (some are, but most reject the spectrum altogether. So any benefit from this tact is temporary, unpredictable and it comes at a cost. It's based on a narrow & false assumption.

On the other hand, folks like Alan Grayson are way more in touch with independent voters. The go with the candidate that stands for something, and makes that position crystal clear. And he does it at the expense of nobody - except for the people who would never vote for him anyways.

[glitch]

110. Well stated. nt

[defendandprotect]

174. My impression was he was trying to shut up liberal TV/radio hosts ....Olberman, Schultz,

Maddow -- and liberal/progressive journalists -- you know, those who are on

the DLC "enemies list" here - Michael Moore -- Jane Hamsher --

Those are the people reflecting the feelings of the liberal/progressive base --

and the administration doesn't want those opinions being amplified --

they want to be able to deny them!

Let's see if MSNBC begins to reign in Olberman, Maddown, Schultz ????

That could happen!!

But it was also another attempt at discouraging the liberal/progressive base -- an

attempt to try to make it look foolish -- especially in trying to make any further

attempts at getting universal health care -- MEDICARE FOR ALL -- seem absolutely without

any hope!

Also looked like an attack on the anti-war movement -- which, IMO, has been too damned

quiet as Obama administration has tossed away another 18 months of financing Bush wars

and helping to bankrupt the Treasury.

Btw . . . DU is getting real low on hard news here --

Wasn't there a report today that the FED was going to buy more of the Treasury's debt????

[jgraz]

72. Oh, I've seen a nerve hit like this.

See Chuck, Wood.

It's much more painful when the criticism is true. Gibbs' comments are just "they're never gonna get it" discouraging.

[Individualist]

73. K&R

[Radical Activist]

74. Why would anyone spin this as an attack on the entire left?

Obama has invited criticism from the left many times.

So you distort one comment and ignore the others. What's your agenda?

[Desertrose]

82. Because it pretty much was.

What's your agenda saying that its not?

[Radical Activist]

87. His words were plain.

He was talking about people who think Obama is just like Bush. That's a very small slice of the left. Interpreting that as an attack on the entire left takes a lot of spin to put words in his mouth. I also understand who he was talking about when he said "professional" left, and it certainly wasn't the large majority of liberals who approve of what Obama is doing.

[apocalypsehow]

91. The thing about Gibb's push-back is that enables all sorts of folks who never liked/supported this

administration in the first place to triple the level of their vituperation.

And about that push-back: it was about the mildest criticism of President Obama's critics that one could possibly utter, a lukewarm counterattack. And yet look at the hysteria, the frothing rage, the indignant posturing & sputtering it has brought forth.

Very telling, that.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

96. That's some fancy cherry-picking

Okay, you have settled on the one phrase you think you can make a stand on.

Conveniently omitting other stuff, like the pointless slur of single-payer advocates.

But I understand that you are trying to defend the indefensible so the Obama=Bush thing is all you've got.

[Radical Activist]

101. Wow. It was only what, two or three sentences?

Calling it a "slur" on single-payer advocates is putting words in his mouth. It's really amazing that I'm taking his plain words at face value and you accuse me of cherry-picking. I'm not making up imaginary meanings Gibbs never spoke just to nurse a persecution complex.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

103. Oh the irony...

"Calling it a "slur" on single-payer advocates is putting words in his mouth."

Wouldn't want to put words in his mouth, would we?

From your post I was replying to:

"He was talking about people who think Obama is just like Bush"

That's not what Gibbs said.

You added the word "just" to bolster your bogus argument.

Hence my reply.

[Name removed]

105. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

106. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[inna]

142. see update 2:

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/08/10/gibbs/index.html

[defendandprotect]

176. No -- he was talking about people who want universal health care which Obama doomed ....

and people who are anti-war while Democrats have kept Bush's wars going

for 4 years now!!

[rhett o rick]

267. Would you please explain to me what he meant by "professional left".

Give some examples, please.

[RaleighNCDUer]

287. It is not a very small slice of the left - it is a non-existant slice of the left.

There are many, many people who rightfully decry Obama's continuing Bush policies - and NONE of them are saying "he is just like Bush".

And where is this 'large majority' of liberal approval for Obama? Do a 'large majority' of liberals approve of extraordinary rendition? Do a 'large majority' approve of keeping Gitmo open long after the 1 year closing date Obama set? Do a 'large majority' appreciate single payer being excised from the health care debate before it even started?

I suspect that a large majority believe he is better than Bush - but maybe 'better than Bush' is not quite enough.
(edit for spelling)

[anigbrowl]

97. ^ this is a prime example of the problem

"Because it pretty much was."

This is non-answer - restating a belief does not justify a belief. Unfortunately, this kind of non-logic is widespread on the political fringe. To anyone with half a brain, it reads as 'I do not have an answer to your question.'

'What's your agenda saying that its not?'

And the follow-up? Suggesting that the person with the opposite view has an 'agenda', some hidden motivation. We hear that all the time from the right wing - gays are supposed to have a hidden agenda, as are educators or liberal-minded economist. It's nothing more than a rhetorical tactic designed to put people on the defensive.

The sad fact is that the left, just like the right, has a small but very vocal fringe which is anti-intellectual and authoritarian: in short, they are bullies. The main difference between the left and right (in general, and at this time in the US) is that the left repudiates its lunatic fringe, while the right is pandering to its own lunatic fringe.

I'm with Gibbs: the radical fringe can go jump off a cliff as far as I'm concerned. Overall I give the administration a B- at this point in time, and would like to see it push some leftist policies more asertively than it is.

[Desertrose]

113. Oh give me a break.

Non-logic

political fringe

suggesting the person with the opposite view has an 'agenda'...nothing more than a rhetorical tactic designed to put people on the defensive

anti-intellectual and authoritarian: they are bullies

the radical fringe can go jump off a cliff



Read the above and apply it to your post, the post I replied to Gibb's comment as well.

And you wonder why people are tired of this stuff? Gimme a break.

[EFerrari]

85. First, it's not one comment, it's a pattern of behavior from this White House.

Second, it's not spin. You can read the words.

Third, this is exactly how this party and this country has been pulled to the right. Undermine the left to look good to the shifting, rightward moving "middle".

You were there.

So, unless you think this is a good trend, it's time to wake up and smell the coffee. Maybe you think you're "supporting Obama" but that isn't where this is going. This undermines support for him, not the other way around. It fragments our party. It's never worked to our advantage and it won't this time, either.

[Radical Activist]

89. There's a pattern of Obama encouraging the left to push him

and organize people's movements on the ground. That's a call too much of the left has ignored. Writing inflammatory columns in your monthly progressive magazine may help, but it isn't real organizing.

The other pattern I see is of people trying their best to find comments they can take offense to and hold a grudge. The fact that people STILL bring up Rahm's stupid comment on a daily basis at DU is just childish.

Obama has already pulled Congress and the nation to the left of where we were under Bill Clinton. In fact, many of his reforms are reversing Clinton-ere deregulation. And no, I haven't seen Obama undermine the left in Congress the way Clinton did. Obama invites the left to be stronger and pull things in that direction. How can you argue that Obama is pulling us right when everything he proposes IS TO THE LEFT OF WHAT CONGRESS WILL PASS? There's a reality disconnect with your argument.

You seem to think that Bill Clinton is still President playing triangulation games. Get out of the past. It's a totally different situation this time.

[apocalypsehow]

92. On point and quite right.

:thumbsup:

[Radical Activist]

99. thanks

[EFerrari]

95. Nope. As an educator I can tell you, insults are not a teaching strategy.

As an activist, I find your assumptions a little comical.

And as for the direct orders, I pretty much tune you out at that point. :)

[Radical Activist]

100. You block out any facts that don't support your worldview.

Kind of like talk radio viewers, huh?

How about answering this. Do you agree that Obama has introduced proposals that are to the left of what can pass the US Senate Democratic caucus?

It's pretty clear that he has. I'd like to hear you explain how that fact is compatible with your argument that Obama is pulling the country right.

[TransitJohn]

115. Talk radio viewers?

:spray: :hi:

[EFerrari]

125. Nope. It is the opposite of talk radio listeners

who go to those venues to be told what to think and how to act. If the best case you can make is that Obama is to the left of the Senate Democratic Caucus, we should just stop because that's pretty depressing.

[Radical Activist]

128. So you're not going to make any attempt to defend your claim

that Obama is pulling the country right. I didn't think you would.

[EFerrari]

180. You're personalizing a process that has been in place

at least since Clinton ran. This isn't about Obama.

[inna]

145. "It's pretty clear that he has." Absolutely not. Provide examples how

Obama is supposedly to the left of the US Senate Democratic caucus. I call bullshit.

[L0oniX]

133. Indeed. Anytime you use the word "you" the (you) person is going to go into defense mode...

as opposed to "I" statements.

[defendandprotect]

177. Evidently, Gibbs' never heard Obama say that -- !!

[Enthusiast]

229. Nope.

You characterize bringing up Rahm's comment as childish? And you suggest Obama has pulled the country to the left of Clinton? There's a reality disconnect alright.

[Enthusiast]

227. It certainly to fuck isn't

working with me.

And all this support of Gibbs and spin on his behalf is not encouraging me either. Here we are already demoralized being told we are crazy and wrong by the Administration. Great strategy.

[Hello_Kitty]

88. Obama invites criticism and when he gets it his admin attacks the critics. eom

[inna]

144. "What's your agenda?" - a better question is, wtf is yours.

:puke:

[Warren Stupidity]

104. yeah that sucked and the cabal here pushing it suck too.

what is the point of telling us to go fuck off?

[DCBob]

108. I think there is method to his madness.. this plays well to the independents..

who think the administration is too liberal.. almost socialist.. its not true but they believe it since many of them listen to MSM and Faux Nooz. The danger is of course they will alienate the left even more but I think the WH is willing to risk that since they think most on the left will vote Dem regardless. We shall see.

[w4rma]

134. Then I suppose "The Left" needs to attack his DLC administration and the DLC even harder.

You know... to prove that he isn't on our side.

[Poboy]

148. Very good counterpoint. We should oblige him. -nt

[Enthusiast]

231. It doesn't play well

to independents. It only alienates his own party. A majority of Americans wanted a government run Canadian style health care. Telling them they should be drug tested isn't going to curry favor with that MAJORITY of Americans.

[Bluenorthwest]

260. Maybe the indies in DC

But the Oregon indies are not please with this sort of smearing, and they take particular issue with the 'drug testing' comments. Here, the Democratic candidates are sometimes cross nominated with the Independent Party. If the Democrat is liberal enough.
Our conservatives, like elsewhere really, are Republicans, and they do not like Obama, nor any other Democrats or Independents or Greens. Just Republicans. They are rare, but they exist.
Gibbs did not 'play well' here at all, to anyone. Oregonians do not like to be lectured by public servants, period. Tell us how to be, we will be the opposite. The State motto is 'She flies with her own wings'. And the voters do just that, DC.
Gibbs harmed the President's reputation. Nasty policial verbiage here is never welcomed.

[TransitJohn]

111. Olive Garden n/t

n/t

[pipi_k]

136. Yep, and it must have been a pretty raw nerve, too!

Either that, or people are just way too obsessed with what Robert Gibbs says, thinks, and/or feels.

My "hide thread" finger was busy the last 24 hours hiding any and all threads whose title contained a reference to Robert Gibbs, by name.

As of about five minutes ago I had counted 60 (!!!!) separate threads, all having to do with Robert Gibbs...good or bad...in support or against that I had to hide.

OK. Whatever.

I suppose that will keep up until the next outrage.

Off to hide more Gibbs threads...

[gulliver]

137. Nonsense. What I think is happening is this...

...Gibbs attacked a certain, low population segment of the left, the ones who want to eliminate the Pentagon or want to say Obama is as bad as Bush. This had a chilling effect on those who are nearby to that wacko mental space but not actually mired in it directly. The wackos (directly attacked) and the nearby semi-wackos then decided to try to sell the vast majority of logical liberals that the insult was intended for them.

It is a classic rhetorical trick, and it won't work. In fact, it is probably doing exactly what Gibbs wanted to do, further distancing the wackos from the liberal majority, and calming the nerves of independents.

I don't think the vast majority of liberals--very intelligent and careful in their approach--are going to fall for being told they have been insulted when they haven't been.

[Laelth]

141. And that's why "wacky" Alan Grayson is calling for Gibbs to be fired, right? n/t

-Laelth

[gulliver]

155. I like Grayson and Gibbs

Most liberals don't care whether Grayson thinks Gibbs should be fired or not I'll bet. If they are like me, they just like seeing Grayson throw rhetorical bombs at Republicans. Gibbs has a harder time doing that, although I think we are going to see a lot more gloves off against Republicans now that the major legislation is out of the way.

Gibbs' statements were intended to stifle the squawking, and they will probably succeed in doing that somewhat. I don't think Grayson, Arianna, Rachel, Keith, etc., were the intended targets by any stretch. But some of their audience and hobbyist wannabe's were close to Gibb's ground zero if not in it. So these pundits and voices practically had to smack Gibbs. It won't hurt Gibbs with the vast majority of liberals, and it will help Grayson, for example with the wackier, oversensitive (but still appreciated) hyper-sensitive minority who felt insulted.

[laughingliberal]

164. Gibbs' statement was meant to stifle the squawking & you think it will succeed? Watched many of...

"professional leftists' today? Maybe he should memo Keith, Ed, Rachel, etc...and let them know they weren't the targets cause they are all 'squawking.'

[defendandprotect]

185. Agree -- 1000% --

however, I'm also concerned that this might have been a message also for

MSNBC and those putting liberal talk show hosts on radio --

to dampen down the criticism --

It's disgusting -- but it's what I'm thinking --

Also, completely anti-universal health care message --

and completely anti-war message --

[gulliver]

189. Y, I think it will succeed.

I think the direct "Gibb's ruffled our feathers" squawking will die down rapidly. Tomorrow evening it will be off the radar. The noise level of the complaining that Gibb's was complaining about will most likely drop to a lower plateau than before Gibb's comments. I read yesterday that Obama's approval rating among liberals was 90%, so I don't think the real base will be too upset by Gibbs. Plus there is a lot of room for olive branches and so forth.

I am glad Gibbs did it, and I see practical reasons for doing it.

[Laelth]

245. I wouldn't trust those poll results if I were you.

The Gallup poll, a much better poll with a much larger sample, shows that Obama has lost a lot of his support from the left. The poll shows he has gained a little with conservatives, lost a little among moderates, and lost a lot among liberals (and, I might add, for good reason).

In 2008, according to exit polls, 89% self-identified liberals voted for President Obama. Over the past four weeks, according to Gallup, President Obama's approval rating among self-identified liberals has averaged 74%. That is a decline of 15 points.

In 2008, according to exit polls, 60% of self-identified moderates voted for President Obama. Over the past four weeks, according to Gallup, President Obama's approval rating among self-identified moderates has averaged 54%. That is a decline of 6 points.

In 2008, according to exit polls, 20% of self-identified conservatives voted for President Obama. Over the past four weeks, according to Gallup, President Obama's approval rating has averaged 24% among self-identified conservatives. That is an increase of 4 points.

http://www.openleft.com/diary/19769/dear-swing-voters-you-suck-love-the-white-house

Feel free to deny, spin, and obfuscate, but it appears that the Administration has lost ground on the left, and Gibbs' comments are part of the reason why. How many times must Rahm tell us that we're "f*ing retarded" before we get the hint that we're not welcome? Evidently, liberals are finally getting the message.

-Laelth

[liquid diamond]

190. Great post Gulliver. I don't feel insulted, but then I don't think

Obama is a black Bush (I've seen wackos here call him that).

[OnyxCollie]

208. I just did a Google search on DU for black+bush.

Dave Chappelle doesn't count.

[Phlem]

197. Wow

just Wow?!?

-p

[Enthusiast]

233. It was a calculated insult

to the majority of Americans that wanted a Canadian-like health care system.

[laughingliberal]

161. K & R nt

[laughingliberal]

165. Off to the Greatest with you! nt

[jobycom]

172. What Kurt_and_Hunter said. nt

[Name removed]

179. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ibegurpard]

187. god you remind me of the knight in Monty Python

who kept trying to goad the other one even though he was systematically getting each one of his limbs chopped off.
Gibbs is getting his ass handed to him from every quarter.

[Phlem]

188. really?

where's the data on the "radical minority" you might be referring to?

-p

[bvar22]

195. The "radical minority" of Democrats who support "Canadian Style Health Care"?

Better go check you numbers.

[deacon_sephiroth]

206. define:

"You guys"

[donco6]

201. I would love to have written this.

Because it so exactly expresses what I think and feel.

[eleny]

207. +1

K&R

[30rock]

209. I agree and disagree

I agree with your contention that there's been a rallying-around in support of the inexcusable attack on the left. But I think you should not understimate the bigger response against Gibbs' idiotic commens. If you look at the greatest threads, all of them are opposed to Gibbs' tirade.

So fortunately we are a majority. The minority is very vocal, but the left still prevails.

[Dinger]

211. Except For One Thing . . .

He probably knows that we're not a "tiny handful of nuts," and that is why his comments make no sense. Maybe HE'S scared. He should be after his comments.

[tomp]

212. that's why i said on another thread: this is red-baiting.

the democratic party hates the left.

they hate the left so much, they would rather lose elections than support truly progressive ideas.

really.

[RandomThoughts]

215. I figure I can explain rational things rationally.

Never had a problem with a rational conversation. Or I can explain things in less rational ways. Being able to do both is a guarentee of sanity, and being able to at any time be in any mode.

The funny thing is he mentioned delusions, when that is what most people live in.

Very few people do not live in various forms of delusion.

[Waiting For Everyman]

216. This is some political gaslight mindgaming by Gibbs

and we're not buying it.

It's shameful, it's uncalled for, and it's very RW. Period.

[Enthusiast]

235. Exactly. Very RW. nt

[Flagrante]

219. It's all about the center

To win elections the center must vote for you. If the center thinks you are a leftie they won't vote for you; you must distance yourself from the left to get the center vote. I suspect the WH is positioning itself as the election approaches, and won't be surprised when more of this type of behavior occurs as the elections draw nearer. That the WH really feels this way is the annoying part of this, and only continued pressure from the left will keep them from straying too far right once the elections are over. Write them about your agenda positions frequently to help keep them in line.

/Dean for VP

[wial]

221. agree

but does this mean the left has to inject ideas from another party, forcing the dems to co-opt them? worked for the Greens in Germany for a while, maybe it can work here. After all, Ralph Nader wrote most of the positive environmental legislation since Teddy Roosevelt.

It would be frustrating to set up a third party only to have its best ideas absorbed and attenuated by a centrist party like the dems, but maybe that's what has to happen now. After all, the dems are far to the right of US and world opinion on actual policy issues even if they aren't as far to the right as the 'pukes. That means they can afford to steal ideas if someone else makes them politically consequential and forces their hand.

Canadian style health care is a matter of life and death for a lot people, and a solution to climate change is a matter of life and death for the planet. The dems alone can accomplish neither. They're going to have to be forced by people who care more about the country than about winning elections.

[DailyGrind51]

228. What if Gibbs had been a flight attendant being abused by passengers instead of Liberals?

He would become a folk hero!

[donco6]

240. What if quarters started flying out of my ass?

I'd be a millionaire!

[DailyGrind51]

242. Would you like some Ex-Lax?

[BootinUp]

230. There are lots of good ideas that have no chance IN REALITY

to be sent to the Presidents desk in the form of a bill to be signed. WHat is it you don't get about that?

[Bluenorthwest]

262. History is made up of the 'impossible' becoming actual.

The list of things 'impossible' in the past that we all do all the time is very long indeed. And then there is this sort of thinking, which many here embrace:
"If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible; who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time; who still questions the power of our democracy, tonight is your answer." President Elect Brack Obama, in Grant Park, election night 08.

[BootinUp]

264. How ironic

that you use Obama's rhetoric to dismiss his efforts.

[democrank]

234. K & R

Gibbs should have mulled a few things over before he opened his disrespectful mouth.

I,like many (if not most "leftists") vote on issues, not personalities. For example, if I lived in Ben Nelson`s state, I wouldn`t vote for him. So,I`m not going to start clapping for the war in Afghanistan or the back room deals made against "Canadian-style" health care just because President Obama is a Democrat. Nor am I`m not going to give a standing ovation to Goldman Sachs or shiver with pride over the re-appointment of Bush`s Defense Secretary. Since the Democratic Party`s center mark moves further and further to the right with each passing day, I feel very comfortable calling myself a leftist.

Notice the part of Gibbs` anti-left statement that referred to the Pentagon. He says we want to shut it down. Imagine that....according to Gibbs, there`s no positioning between sending truck loads of taxpayers` cash to unaccountable mercenaries in Iraq and shutting down the Pentagon. No room for discussion, no room for complaints.

I`m with Keith Olbermann. Gibbs should have gone after the Professional Right and left the leftist bashing to all the other administration`s personalities...like Rahm.

[disillusioned73]

239. Very astute observations....

The last part hit it on the head;

"It's funny that the WH Press Secretary took time out from his busy day to rant about a tiny handful of nuts if that's who he was really talking about."

Why address a so called small fringe?? It's like going after the birthers at this point. They have been marginalized out of even the corporate media (they would love to keep that one going)...

So, the issue is to understand what the intent was. Energize?? Mobilize?? Supress?? I don't have the answer, that's why I come here to get as many "lefty" opinions as possible :toast:

[TheKentuckian]

243. If the White House needs the false equivalence framing then it is our duty to provide an actual left

Being "pragmatic", "sensible", "realistic", and compromising leaves far too little room in the spectrum to maneuver to the "middle".

Our criticism had been too muted, our demands too pedestrian, our frustration too constrained, and or patience too long suffering.

I mean if they have to resort to using the tired FOX talking point of "Canadian style health" in order to do enough hippie punching to indicate to "centrists" that they aren't "radical leftists" them we honestly aren't doing our jobs.

[border_town]

246. You guys are doing more damage

by talking about this day after day. Just let it go!!! Isn't there other things you can be complaining about then what Gibbs said?? Like how the republican party want to exclude immigrant 9/11 rescue responders whom may be sick from getting help??

[dgibby]

258. I'll let it go when Gibbs issues a sincere apology.

I didn't start this, the WH did. Until then, I'll take my cue from the Dixie Chicks, "not ready to make nice".

[LWolf]

291. There are plenty of other things, and I do, regularly, talk about them.

Like Obama's war on public education, for example.

If discussion of Gibbs makes you uncomfortable, you might want to look at why.

[burnsei sensei]

252. Didn't get it the first time, WH?

We do not follow our leaders uncritically.

[Hubert Flottz]

253. The pols will love the "fringe" at election time.

We'd just like to see far better accounting measures employed, regarding the massive out-flow of our defense dollars.

We'd like to see jobs programs instead of more tax cuts for jobs exporters.

We'd like to know that if we get sick we can get some help.

We'd like to know why Bush and Cheney and their henchmen are free to cause more trouble.

We'd like to know how a guy with his head that far up his chubby entitled ass, could speak for the President Of The United States.

We'd like to know when the "Change" will start to take place.

We've all seen the pocket change that our 401ks have turned into, while the banksters gave each other big bonus checks.

We'd LOVE to know why we wouldn't be pissed off.

[MissDeeds]

254. K&R

:kick:

[sellitman]

255. The reason the Rethugs moved right is because they had too.

Without the vote of the Religious right Republicans will never win another election.

The Liberals should take notes.