j_b Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 There little need to reprint all of your drivel. You assumed that a loss in approval rating among independents meant a loss of approval from the middle. That is true because I believe that some (not all) of those in the middle are in fact...independents! spare me. The constant drumbeat in the corporate media since early summer has been: "loss of independent = loss of the middle", which is a total lie meant to imply that Obama is too far to the left whereas he is in fact losing the left wing because he is governing on the right. I have caught you several times making the very same false inference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 i'd still vote for him again if the other choice was McCain/Palin. Definitely. Who wants "McSame". Oops. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 spare me. The constant drumbeat in the corporate media since early summer has been: "loss of independent = loss of the middle", you are conflating your perception of the "corporate media" with the (supposed) views of an individual (PP). apparently you are completely incapable of focusing on what a person arguing with you has actually said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 Says the goon who systematically practices McCarthyism. I wonder what that there really means? "systematically practices McCarthyism" Is he blacklisting again? Wiki says "Today the term is used more generally to describe demagogic, reckless, and unsubstantiated accusations, as well as public attacks on the character or patriotism of political opponents"...I don't see that from PP. America never recovered from McCarthyism. All public display of dissent is portrayed as un-American and likely the work of communists by the rightwing. The purpose is to instill fear in potential dissenters and therefore to suppress dissent like McCarthy did in his time. Rightwingers who use McCarthyist tactics are goons that act against liberty and freedom of speech. I don't believe I really need to point out how often PP claims/infers that his left wing opponent is some kind of un-American commie. The number of my posts calling him out for doing so, speaks for itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 spare me. The constant drumbeat in the corporate media since early summer has been: "loss of independent = loss of the middle", you are conflating your perception of the "corporate media" with the (supposed) views of an individual (PP). Nope. I am saying that PP is regurgitating what he reads in the corporate media because he too wants us to believe that Obama is too far left. He, too, wants us to believe that Obama hasn't been bi-partisan enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 i'd still vote for him again if the other choice was McCain/Palin. Definitely. Who wants "McSame". Oops. Well, Grampa still is still alive! At this time the ailing center of the free world would still not have Palin at the helm...just the second of command. But I suppose you like to gamble like that. Or is it you would rather she was in charge? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 spare me. The constant drumbeat in the corporate media since early summer has been: "loss of independent = loss of the middle", you are conflating your perception of the "corporate media" with the (supposed) views of an individual (PP). apparently you are completely incapable of focusing on what a person arguing with you has actually said. poll watchers or pole smokers? whats funny is that obama inherited a flaming bag of shit. only issue is, he started stomping on it to put the fire out. some of you are much more diplomatic. You keenly note that there is dogshit in the bag, and wisely ignore the situation until the matter is past. i'd first pin the blame on congress. both sides of the hall need to be emptied and replaced with people who aren't screwing pigs or whatever the latest congressional scandal is about. i realize that peter probably is a huge fan of the democratic side of the house and senate. they can't do shit for shinola. isn't there a majority in both houses? I know there are a lot of people who are disappointed in Obama for adding troops in Afghanistan. I don't know what to think. Perhaps it is the most prudent idea, given the situation in Pakistan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter_Puget Posted December 17, 2009 Author Share Posted December 17, 2009 Well with my jack boots oiled and lovingly put away for the day so I check out the WSJ and what do I see...... Also for the first time this year, the electorate was split when asked which party it wanted to see in charge after the 2010 elections. For months, a clear plurality favored Democratic control. linky Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter_Puget Posted December 17, 2009 Author Share Posted December 17, 2009 OH I agree he is losing the left wing too.. He has proven not to be a leader on the national level by letting the Senate and House spin out of control; he has proven not to be bipartisan as he once promised and he has proven to be ineffective on the international scene. In short it is quite possible that his presidency will be a total failure unless he changes course. The direction of change needs to be towards the middle. These failures aren’t the result of a flaming pile of shit he inherited but of his own political shortcomings. Compare to Reagan in the early 80s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil K Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 Reagan in the 80s at least had a Congress that was willing to do more than take the country down to make the other side look like loosers. Grover Norquist, one of the chief instigators of this scorched earth approach likened bipartisanship with the Rs to date rape. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 Well I disagree. I don't think it is a question of his leadership. You cannot lead those that won't follow. FYI I think he has veered to the middle. why do you think liberals are all pissed at him? WHERE IS MY PUBLIC OPTION????? WHY MORE WAR??? etc... And disagree...that shit was just starting to flame up when he won the presidency, and the problems we have right now far predate his work as president. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 Reagan in the 80s at least had a Congress that was willing to do more than take the country down to make the other side look like loosers. Grover Norquist, one of the chief instigators of this scorched earth approach likened bipartisanship with the Rs to date rape. Well maybe date rape is just the way you have to run the country. Especially if you want to be on the hallowed ground of old Raygun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 oh and peter, you're a fuzzy man peach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prole Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 Compare to Reagan in the early 80s. Ha, that was the last time conservatives had any ideas, how ever unoriginal. Seeing as how those ideas and the policies they spawned are directly responsible for the current mess we find ourselves in, they're unlikely to make much of comeback in the next 50 years, if ever. Apart from a few dead-enders, most in the conservative establishment realize this, and being completely bereft of any ideas to solve any of the problems facing planet Earth, are happy to sling poo, cry commie, and rally the lumpen against anything that might threaten their personal or collective wealth and power. Not that liberals are any better. They've been shoveling the free-market capitalist horseshit and feeding at the corporate trough alongside their brethren for so long, they're nearly as unlikely to find any way out of the global quagmire they helped create. Despite recognizing (and exploiting) the body politic's genuine desire for radical change (sorry Peter, your appeals to the "middle" don't stand much scrutiny), Obama and his coat-tail riders are showing themselves to be either too spineless (sorry, "bipartisan") or too deeply in bed with the forces that are part of the problem, to be effective agents of real change. Taking Howard Dean's advice to "kill the bill" a few more steps and withdraw support from the Democratic Party and perhaps existing political institutions altogether might be the only way forward at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 back to the future was a far less satisfying franchise after they ditched the original hottie for whatzerface... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 Well with my jack boots oiled and lovingly put away for the day so I check out the WSJ and what do I see...... not too worry. When thuggery is one's entire political tradition, it is certain to eventually feature prominently in one's interventions. Also for the first time this year, the electorate was split when asked which party it wanted to see in charge after the 2010 elections. For months, a clear plurality favored Democratic control. linky And PP to regurgitate quasi meaningless numbers spewed by Murdock's media empire. According to the poll, 2% more of the people polled would want a republican majority than in March (39% in March versus 41% in December), and 5% more than last October. The margin of error in the poll is 3%. But, hey, keep "catapulting" the propaganda, PP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 OH I agree he is losing the left wing too.. He has proven not to be a leader on the national level by letting the Senate and House spin out of control; he has proven not to be bipartisan as he once promised and he has proven to be ineffective on the international scene. In short it is quite possible that his presidency will be a total failure unless he changes course. The direction of change needs to be towards the middle. These failures aren’t the result of a flaming pile of shit he inherited but of his own political shortcomings. Compare to Reagan in the early 80s. Besides wishful thinking by right-wingers and corporate media pundits, there is no evidence that Obama is losing the center. Not only is there no evidence of it, but there is no reason for it since Obama hasn't done anything to rattle the center. He compromised way too much in the name of bi-partisanship. Bi-partisanship that isn't attainable with the party of obstruction no matter what Obama does. The only way Democrats are going to win in 2010 and beyond (assuming the wingnuts don't split up first), is by governing resolutely to the left and giving to the 2/3 of Americans who wants progressive policy a real reason to go vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 back to the future was a far less satisfying franchise after they ditched the original hottie for whatzerface... yes but Crispin Glover is GENIUS [video:youtube]rH6b_lSQst0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 [video:youtube]TF9NQ-VlS9c Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 He sounds a lot like Peter in that clip! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 [video:youtube]YTKNahASSDI Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 didn't he play andy warhol in the doors too "somebody give me this golden phone - they said i could talk to god w/ it - but i didn't really have anything to say - do you want it?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
33M Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 (edited) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIMj_tYfzsc Edited December 18, 2009 by 33M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billcoe Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 whats funny is that obama inherited a flaming bag of shit. only issue is, he started stomping on it to put the fire out. some of you are much more diplomatic. You keenly note that there is dogshit in the bag, and wisely ignore the situation until the matter is past. LOL! Great stuff there, you are the Ivan of your generation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 i'm cheating in that i exist in several generations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.