July 31, 2012

Sure they do, if they are redefined to repub-lite

well, in terms of what the repubs use to be. http://www.alternet.org/story/154175/why_obama%27s_the_least_socialistic_president_in_modern_history_%28and_that%27s_a_shame%29?akid=8275.20699.QVbCh7&rd=1&t=5

Let's face it -- this has been why, starting with the DLC, that the ideological center line has been moved rightward, and what use to be unquestioned third rails have lost their jolt, because only dems have ever had a political chance at altering them significantly.

To those oblivious to or in denial of the many deleterious effects of the third-way BS and its role in this, I'd simply ask them to explain this http://www.americablog.com/2012/05/obama-2006too-many-of-us-have-been.html because it seems to unquestionably confirm that suspicions regarding his desire to "work with" the rightwingnut extremists on SS and Medicare "reform" are warranted, leaving only the type and magnitude of the tweaks he's willing to negotiate away, not whether he's willing to put his foot on the rail.

In other words, to harbor fears or apprehension about these matters is reasonable, and voicing concerns of them should be promoted and tolerated, and the senseless need to shit down and shut up if all they have are the usual "conspiracy theorist!", "you're the one that's not a real dem!" BS that defines who and what they are -- the functional equivalent of dem Bushbots. http://www.americablog.com/2011/08/barack-obama-best-president-ever.html If he has intentions of negotiating changes that will be unacceptable to the majority of his base, the time to let him know about that unacceptability is before he arrives at the negotiating table, not after he signs something. http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/guy-saperstein-time-negotiate-obama-n

As one who's long thought and predicted that the fear of rightwingnuttery is his biggest trumpcard this fall, the ugly side to it is that it leaves his base ripe for exploitation. In my experiences, even those the most disappointed in him intend to vote for him again because of the alternative, and the idea that the "x" dimensional chess player isn't acutely aware of this is silly. The fact of the matter is imho, is that the charade of being a "uniter" (because surely he was aware of the folly of that from those determined to make him a one term pres, no?) was really just a facade produced by the same good cop/bad cop act we've been subjected to since the DLC rose from the political muck.

congrats -- good post

July 17, 2012

BHO spent his early years smoking pot

finding empathy and developing people skills.

Romney spent his early years honing his barber/bullying and cop impersonation/deception skills.

BHO spent his time in his young working life organizing communities for the betterment of all within them.

Romney spent his time in his business career depriving communities of jobs and the people in them, money to spend.

BHO amassed a record as a state and federal senator he’s proud of.

Romney served one term as a governor, but doesn’t want to talk about it.

BHO made a successful bid for the presidency http://www.theonion.com/articles/black-man-given-nations-worst-job,6439/ and has had a relatively successful record

Romney will fail again at his effort for the job, depriving him of the ability to revisit the failures and recreate the conditions BHO inherited.

Currently BHO remains relatively unchanged morally/politically in his political career, and perhaps from his days of smoking pot.

Morally speaking, Romney remains the the dishonest bully of his youth, but politically and figuratively speaking, a chameleon has nothing on him.

I'm a man without conviction
I'm a man who doesn't know
How to sell a contradiction

Did I miss anything important?

July 14, 2012

Bush had his DUI

now the Mutt has his -- Dishonesty Under Investigation

Assuming his guilt, I’m not sure which is worse under the circumstances, the crimes he’s potentially guilty of, or the sense of privilege and protection he’s operated under that made his shenanigans a "without a second thought" situation, and one that points towards the same two/X-tiered criminal justice system we have in this country that has allowed the likes of Bush to walk away, and the Mutt to attend a fundraiser hosted by the darkest one, Dick Cheney, the real president for eight years https://www.google.com/search?q=dick+cheney+%22the+real+president%22&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGHP_en. Apparently he had some second thoughts about that one, given the prohibition on photographing the two together.

It's no wonder why Bush spent 32% of his presidency on vacation, no?

And of course, Romney can abandon his role as and involvement with the presidency should he win, and be it in name/title only except when needed as he did at Bain http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/02/13/1064417/-Grover-Norquist-on-the-GOP-candidates-All-we-need-is-someone-who-can-handle-a-pen.

Quite frankly, given his already well established and inarguable record as a prolific and pathological liar http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/21/mendacious-mitt-romney-bid-liar-in-chief I'm underwhelmed, but do hope this issue becomes icing on that particular cake. I doubt how much it'll negatively impact the support from the rightwingnut base, since the rightwingnuts gave their pols and pundits a license to lie without fear of political and/or financial reprisal long ago, and regardless of the human costs, like millions of dead and displaced Iraqis, the countless needlessly tortured, etc, so I wouldn’t be expecting them to look upon the crime of perjury should a conviction occur as a sin, I’d expect them to simply remind you of the falsehood about BC being convicted of perjury. https://www.google.com/search?q=was+president+clinton+convicted+of+perjury&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGHP_en
You know how they are -- claiming that their opposition is guilty of things they have the most if not exclusive guilt for – projection – is how they maintain the moral high ground, at least in their Bizarro World. This is in evidence by his charging BHO as a liar alone, no?

Who thinks a criminal prosecution will be pursued regardless of the evidence or support for it anyway?

I don't. I see this as merely the coup de grace in the game of integrity that is decisive and determinative in the outcome, which BHO will no doubt further exploit in the debates on a variety of issues, including what can be rightly considered the Mutt's lies by omission seen in the lack of specificity on his intended policy pursuits.

That’s why the real news in the Journal editorial — the stuff that should drive the discussion today — is its scalding attack on Romney’s lack of specificity on multiple issues:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/the-morning-plum-wall-street-journal-edit-board-blisters-romney/2012/07/05/gJQAqI1JPW_blog.html

The investigation into the Mutt's dishonesty will no doubt result in an "open and shut" case for guilt, no?