17 thoughts on “Torn

  1. No real reason to be “torn”, Suze. Personally, I’m holding my nose in November and voting for the Prez. My belief is that he’s failed on numerous issues, the least of which are the economy and the crooks still walking free on Wall Street.

    However, in spite of his failings, I also believe that he has in fact done some good, and has set the table for a real progressive to move the country back to the center: who knows who that person might be, but I damn sure would find a way to leave this country if McConnell got his wish. Generations will suffer, and here we come 3rd world if Romney gains power.

    So, No, I ain’t fucking “torn” one bit. Maybe Obama might help a “new”, stronger DEM —–Grayson, Weiner possibly, or an old school low-down and dirty politician like ??????………….Susan Madrak??

  2. Well, let me browse the internet and see how the win nuts will spin this one.
    Just read the article and, yes, he is correct on so many points.
    But, seeing wing nuttery in its unabashed fashion nowadays I don’t see an alternative.
    But, as I have been saying, watch the local and state races and do vote in those races.
    Nose holding may be required in November.

  3. I’m sorry, but this dude can go suck eggs.

    “He has failed to advance the progressive cause in the United States.”
    Well, except for getting DADT repealed, coming out for gay marriage, lilly ledbetter law, putting two people who aren’t right wing maniacs on the SCOTUS, and getting health care reform (as flawed as it may be) passed. We elected a president, not a saint.

    “there will be a cost … in judicial and administrative appointments.”
    …setting back the progressive agenda even further. or permanently.

    “”His policy is financial confidence and food stamps.””
    Their policy is financial confidence and no food stamps.

    “He has delivered the politics of democracy to the rule of money.”
    I didn’t realize Obama was responsible for the SCOTUS’s bad decisions. It’s not like he called them out on it publicly, either, right? And didn’t he vote against Roberts, as senator?

    “He has reduced justice to charity.”
    I don’t even know where to begin with this statement. It’s just retarded. So the DOJ intervening in the Florida voter purge is charity? Investigating a creep like Arpaio is charity? Those Harvard guys smoke some AWESOME weed, clearly.

    “He has subordinated the broadening of economic and educational opportunity to the important but secondary issue of access to health care in the mistaken belief that he would be spared a fight.”
    Yes, god knows the issue of health care reform hasn’t been polarizing since Clinton and then some. Goodness knows the GOP and a lot of Democrats made clear that health care wasn’t going to be a major lift.
    “He has evoked a politics of handholding, but no one changes the world without a struggle.”
    Again, wtf is he talking about?
    Who is this fucking clown?

  4. Oh, Jesus, Brendan, don’t start with Lilly Ledbetter. It was a minor change that extended the statute of limitations on filing a lawsuit on sex discrimination in the workplace. It doesn’t have that much practical effect. It is almost impossible to 1) win one of these gender or age suits unless it’s class action, and the Roberts court is doing a pretty good job of killing those off, and 2) most lawyers won’t take the individual suits because they’re so hard to win. This is a useful law that will benefit some victims of the most obvious and easy-to-document discrimination , but it’s hardly some groundbreaking landmark. So if this is the best you can come up with for Obama’s feminist bona fides, it ain’t much.

    As for the Roberts vote: Obama was planning to vote for him, until his chief of staff said, “Not if you ever want to run for president, you won’t.” Being the ambitious young man that he is, he didn’t.

    I’m not even agreeing with everything his law professor says. But there isn’t much doubt that he’s a tool of Wall Street, and that sucks for the rest of us.

    There are reasonable arguments to be made for voting for Obama, but not these. There’s no question that he made very bad choices on the economy, and the people caught in the crosshairs have every right to be very angry. I never thought I’d see a Democratic president who basically shrugs and says, “You’re on your own” during a depression. Not only that, he’s talking about cutting Social Security and Medicare! Nope, sorry. Not everyone who criticizes Obama is a whack job.

  5. Address the real criticisms, Susie.
    Rebutting the crazies just feeds the bully instincts.

  6. Well, I happen to agree with that: not everyone who criticizes the president is a whack job. I happen to think that this guy is a whack job though.

  7. anyone who looks at Mitt Romney – a man with no principles whatsoever, a man who will do whatever he’s told provided there’s some gain for him- and says “Obama needs to lose”, is by definition a whack job.

    But then, wtf do i know. I voted for Gore.

  8. I cannot see myself voting for the man who has presided over the Tuesday Kill List meetings…. considering the pros and cons of killing strangers across the world for little more than thought crimes with (effectively) a complete lack of regard for lives of anyone in the general area.

    Things I am against forever: Robot Drone Bombings and anyone who supports them.

  9. sounds like you own’t be voting this year then, because if you think Obama’s drones are bad, wait til you see what the Romneybot 2.0 has planned.

  10. To talking head Al Hunt and the rest of the intellectual midgets in the chattering class, “You’re a loser baby. Why don’t you kill me?”

  11. Well, when Robamney, in whichever form is elected, starts to “change” SocSec, Medicare, Medicaid, in which case might the Democrats in Congress actually stand against the opening salvo in dismantling the New Deal and Great Society social saftety nets?

  12. The meetings and the drones are rather disturbing, I can agree. I don’t think the drones would be going into Pakistan if there wasn’t nuclear weapons there. A real quagmire.
    It may come down to the lesser of two evils.
    It all has depressed me for several weeks that I am finding it hard to opine on what may be a reasonable solution (in my mind.)
    Katiebird, my heart is with you. New forms of warfare as a substitute for the older types of warfare is not really a palatable situation.
    The Right and now, the Wing Nuts, have controlled the conversation on the safety net for sometime.
    What’s the answer for all this. Shoot, I forgot the question.

Comments are closed.