Jane Hamsher sums up the left's frustration with Obama

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

I thought she did a good job, especially point #4. That is indeed where some of my frustration lies with Obama.

Jane picks up at around 4:00
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3096434/#40789545

[PBS Poll-435]

1. .

:)

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

2. thanks

[OregonBlue]

3. Who cares? She hates Obama and nothing he did would make a difference to her.

[JamesA1102]

45. And she has no problem lying about him nt

[Donnachaidh]

94. really? Where?

links would be nice with this BS charge.

[JamesA1102]

95. Here you go!

HAMSHER: I think the poor are being used as human shields to give billionaires tax cuts—I think that there is no way you can argue with a straight face that having an estate tax that is even better for rich people than anything George Bush ever had is in any way—

O‘DONNELL: Hold on, hold on. No, that‘s not true. The estate tax today is zero. It is zero. There is a zero estate tax. The estate tax on January 1st, on the Obama deal, will be 35 percent on estates of $5 million and above.

So, we have a zero estate tax. Let‘s not let anyone pretend that the estate tax next year is somehow going to be lower than what George Bush managed to achieve for this year. You don‘t get lower than zero.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40566695/ns/msnbc_tv

Last night she said the President tried to stop the repeal of DADT but that was not true either:


President Barack Obama makes Congressional calls from the Oval Office before today's final Senate vote repealing the ban on gay men and women serving openly in the military, Saturday, Dec 18. White House Photo by Pete Souza

http://www.pridesource.com/article.html?article=44806

[sendero]

126. So you choose..

... to compare to the lowest under Bush and she compares to the greatest.

Hardly a "lie", a semantic argument at best.

[JamesA1102]

129. Bull, it is a flat out lie

which is why O'Donnell called her out on it.

[bluestate10]

108. I agree. Her analysis was twisted. nt.

[Bluebear]

116. "She hates Obama" - yes, she is such a haterrrr!

:rofl:

[defendandprotect]

131. Deal with the issues .. no one "hates" Obama ... voters are disgusted with Obama....

Public supports these issues by 65% to 80% --

As Jane Hamsher points out these issues are usually identifed as liberal issues

but the reality is they are CENTRIST issues given the wide support for them.

[tridim]

4. She has her own site, can't you worship her there?

IMO she's a bitter, not-so-smart, ego-maniacal flame thrower with an agenda that is far from "the left".

[dkf]

8. Yeah she does come across as bitter.

Sometimes she looks like she has been sucking on lemons. Seriously.

[Missy Vixen]

24. In the lack of substantive criticism

make fun of a woman's appearance.

After all, it's always a win.

:eyes:
:sarcasm:

[dkf]

28. No... looking bitter is an attitude thing.

It's not appearance precisely, it's expressions. Sadness, joy, bitterness, it's all on a persons face. It's not like I said she looks old or something.

[Missy Vixen]

53. So, you believe she has a poor "attitude", so you won't listen to a

word she says?

Again, stellar argument.

:eyes:

[Jamastiene]

62. Makes you wonder how long before they post a picture of her

tied to a stake with fire all around her...like they did with Hillary during the primaries. So incredibly enlightened and mature, aren't they? :sarcasm:

[Hello_Kitty]

19. And I think Ezra Klein is a hack and a DLC butt smoocher.

Yet he's quoted here all the time. It's called "hide thread". Use it if you see things you don't like.

[tridim]

23. DU needs to know she's a hack.

And I never quote Ezra Klein.

[Hello_Kitty]

25. I'm pretty sure I've never quoted Hamsher.

But if she's a hack, Ezra definitely is. All he does is regurgitate WH and DLC press releases.

[Missy Vixen]

58. When you have a blog that gets well over a million hits a month

and is known for being a fundraising powerhouse for progressives, why don't you come back and let us know how you succeeded at it?

I believe most of the criticism of Jane Hamsher here is nothing more than the fact she's a female, and dared to succeed in the biggest boys' club of all: National political analysis and debate. I also remember the hue and cry when her colleague Marcy dared to use an obscenity to make a point during a televised appearance.

It's interesting there is no reasoned debate on her comments or her ideas. It's all about her appearance.

[tridim]

59. Bull fucking shit. How dare you make that accusation.

She's a hack, period. It has nothing to do with her gender.

[Missy Vixen]

63. It's not an accusation. It's the truth.

If you'd like to prove me wrong, please post the reasons why you disagree with her stances on the issues, and be sure and cite them as well. After all, calling someone a "hack" because their appearance is "bitter" isn't a reason to believe they don't know what they're talking about, and is a well-known tactic to silence females. After all, they're not being ladylike by having an opinion or disagreeing with men.

Again, Hamsher's site has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars and fielded many progressive candidates. Is this a problem as well?

[fascisthunter]

132. well done

[Ikonoklast]

97. Drudge does the same thing for the right.

He must be a success, too.

Having followers doesn't make one correct.


Hamsher is a tool that uses her perpetual outrage to drive hits to her website, which = money.

And anyone that finds common ground with Grover Fucking Norquist can go piss up a rope.

[bluestate10]

109. I am glad.

That you informed me. The tears must be overflowing at her blog site. Since I don't want to die young from drowning, I will stay away. Nothing she said was substantive. The most reasoned voice on the piece with the british accented guest.

[Nite Owl]

57. I think so too

he was on something this am while I was cooking and thought the same thing.

[Union Scribe]

50. Lol, you say that and call someone ELSE bitter?

[tridim]

54. I'm not bitter at all, I can just spot shysters easily.

DU has known about her game for years.

[JackRiddler]

78. Great idea - I don't think there should be any discussion at all allowed on DU.

Certainly not a presentation of views! Nothing and no one should be quoted, since everyone after all has their own site where they can be worshipped. And news? Piffle! All those news stories are published elsewhere and most of them have a comments function.

Good idea!

[Bluebear]

117. You know from bitter!

[roguevalley]

135. same sort of sound coming off this thread that pulverized the

'traitor' Paul Krugman when he wasn't sufficiently worshipful. Cute.

[Renew Deal]

5. "Grover Norquist told me Obama was a bad guy."

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

6. LOL last time I was hit with this much vitriol, I quoted Ralph Nader

:rofl: :rofl:

[bluestate10]

110. Ralph Nader. You quote that......I'm calm now. :-( nt.

[LostInAnomie]

7. I wonder if Grover Norquist wrote that for her.

She's trash.

[sabrina 1]

123. I doubt it, But isn't bi-partisanship a good thing? Grover Norquist

was invited to advise President Obama's Deficit Commission. Can you explain that? I mean that is the kind of bi-partisanship that can actually affect the lives of the American people and I'd like to know why he was invited to speak about Government finances when we all know his opinion of the Government?

[girl gone mad]

136. They'll never exlain that bit of hypocrisy..

just like they'll never formulate criticism of Hamsher that involves being able to debate at above the kindergarten schoolyard level.

[sabrina 1]

137. You're right. I've asked about it many times but have yet to receive

an explanation for the different standards. Personally I would prefer that bloggers be bi-partisan if they wish, rather than those in power since bloggers have no power over our lives. But when the President gives power to the likes of Grover Norquist (I thought we threw them out) that harms all of us. Yet, for some yet to be explained reason, the outrage is directed at a blogger who has no power over our lives. I am so curious to know why? But no one will explain it.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

9. Adam Green of Bold Progressives must be really unpopular here, too

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

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

[JamesA1102]

46. Adam may be a bit naive sometimes

but he doesn't hate the President and lie about him like Hamsher does.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

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

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

64. yep and I agree with your last line

:thumbsup:

[MineralMan]

10. Jane Hamsher's Wheel Is Broken

Not interested. Unrecommended.

[apex nerd]

11. I refuse to go all Republican...

...and lash out at any one who criticizes the President. She was respectful in her dissent. The GOP could take the same respectful tone in their dissent if they had a mind to.

Having said that, Ms. Hamsher is, of course, totally wrong.

[Nite Owl]

12. Jane is so right about that

the things that passed this week were popular pieces of legislation and not 'liberal'. The center has moved that far to the right that these are considered liberal.

[OregonBlue]

13. Jane's glass is always half empty. So is her head. Guess Norquist provides the remainder.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

14. That's what I got out of it

:thumbsup:

Glad you summarized it since I wasn't aware she was a lightning rod, here.

[MadMaddie]

42. So repealing DADT was just a popular piece of legislation

no ones life was impacted by the popular piece of legislation? Oh and it is a far to the right move? Really?

I guess START was just another popular piece of legislation, I mean loose nukes in the hands of terrorist would impact no one right?


She is bitter and she never has anything positive to say. All the blame goes to President Obama but the Republicans have no responsibility at all.

[Nite Owl]

55. Yes, the things that passed were

popular pieces of legislation. The public backed them by large margins, they weren't any sort of liberal legislation.
You are so touchy about any sort of blame going to Obama, why is that? Does he ever do anything that doesn't please you?
I don't think Jane is bitter, she is realistic and non partisan.

[MadMaddie]

65. Those pieces of legislature were the right things to do

not just popular things to do.

You say I am a bit touchy, you are damn right I am. He has accomplished in 2 years what most presidents couldn't do in 8 years. Yet the Jane's of the world who supposedly are on the same team have nothing but disparaging remarks and elementary observations over his supposed failures. While Jane and others like her are playing the short game he is playing the long game.


As soon as a rumor comes out the Jane's of the world are all over it and won' let it go until it's proven wrong and then it just disappears like it never happened.

I criticize President Obama when he needs criticizing but what I don't do and what you are patting ole Jane for is attacking him even for the successes. Is he perfect, hell no. I think that he has reached out too much to try to work with the Republicans and they have spit in his face.

Nothing is ever good enough, you don't have to admit it but trust me many recognize it for what it is. Even when Clinton was at his worst he didn't get attacked like President Obama has been for the last two years.

Jane hates President Obama and perhaps others do too. I frankly don't care. Jane tries to hide behind her "Uber Liberalism", when in fact she is just another hater.

[ProSense]

15. Jane Hamsher on DADT repeal

Transcript, Dec. 14

<...>

O‘DONNELL: Joining me again are: Jane Hamsher, founder of FireDogLake.com; Adam Green, cofounder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee; Ezra Klein, columnist for “The Washington Post”; and Karen Finney, former communications director for the DNC.

Today, Speaker Nancy Pelosi tweeted, “The House will vote on Representative Patrick Murphy‘s stand-alone “don‘t ask, don‘t tell” repeal bill tomorrow. Senate action on “don‘t ask, don‘t tell” is long overdue.”

Jane Hamsher, does this look like what could be the breakthrough on “don‘t ask, don‘t tell”? Surely, the House can get a stand-alone bill through. And there seem to be more than 60 senators who are available, theoretically, to vote for a stand-alone “don‘t ask, don‘t tell” in the Senate. Might this be the breakthrough?

HAMSHER: Well, as Nancy Pelosi (INAUDIBLE) goes, I think I prefer “Pirates of Penzance.” This has about zero chance of actually getting through the Senate. They‘re due to break on the 17th. They‘ll fight about tax cuts for a few more days. They make take up the START Treaty.

But this will ultimately wind up being—ending in procedural commotion, much like it did last time. There isn‘t the will to pass it.

The question then becomes: does President Obama really want to end it? Because it‘s questionable that he has the ability either through the Justice Department to not challenge the court decisions that have rendered it unconstitutional, or also to end it with a presidential order ending “don‘t ask, don‘t tell.” So, I think that‘s going to be the real question.

<...>

She laid it all at the President's feet. If she is going to insist that nothing is getting done because the President doesn't have the will and isn't pushing hard enough, she is going to have to concede that he proved her wrong when it he gets it done.

[Hello_Kitty]

20. And you predicted we'd get a public option. You were wrong.

I get to lay that at the President's feet too, right?

[Arkana]

49. Blind squirrel, nut, etc.

[NYC Liberal]

21. LOL - "does President Obama really want to end it?"

Well, Jane?. :eyes:

[MineralMan]

31. Oh, I'm sure she'll be apologizing for that stupid mistake

real soon now. :rofl:

[MineralMan]

30. So Much for Hamsher's Predictions...

Bye, now, Jane...

[hfojvt]

74. see my comment below

or I will just repeat myself, at the risk of being rude...

the stand alone bill actually did not pass

what passed was an amendment to HR 2965 - the Enhancing Small Business Research and Innovation Act, a bill that had passed the House on 7-8-2009 by a vote of 386 - 41 and then passed the Senate on Jul 13, 2009 by unanimous consent - with an amendment. The DADT amendment was introduced on 12-15-2010 by Mrs. Davis of California.

She was not wrong in what she said about Murphy's bill on 12-14.

[SpartanDem]

77. That amdenment stripped out the text of the old

it is a stand alone bill as there nothing remaining of the old one. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c111: 7:./temp/~c111SRAElc::

[hfojvt]

90. okay that does seem to be true

so much for my ability to navigate THOMAS.

But it is still true that Murphy's stand alone bill did not pass, and there would not have been time enough to get that through committtee and whatever other hurdles there are. So Hamsher is still not wrong about Murphy's bill.

I find it somewhat troubling that legislation which had broad bi-partisan support could be used in such a way, but their procedures seem very strange anyway.

[MineralMan]

82. You are mistaken. The original content of that bill was removed,

and was replaced by the DADT repeal. This was done due for technical reasons, since there was not time for an original standalone bill to be presented. You are misinformed.

[hfojvt]

88. actually I read the amendment on THOMAS

it does not all seem stripped, although it can be hard to follow what they are doing. There were 4 pages in the amendment, and only the last one mentioned DADT. In any case, I am my own informant, which does not mean I am right, of course, but is your own information original or second hand?

[Missy Vixen]

61. Every commentator I heard in national media till last week

said we would not see a DADT repeal this year due to the issues in the Senate, too.

Are you going to call them out as well?

[hfojvt]

72. the stand alone bill actually did not pass

what passed was an amendment to HR 2965 - the Enhancing Small Business Research and Innovation Act, a bill that had passed the House on 7-8-2009 by a vote of 386 - 41 and then passed the Senate on Jul 13, 2009 by unanimous consent - with an amendment. The DADT amendment was introduced on 12-15-2010 by Mrs. Davis of California.

She was not wrong in what she said about Murphy's bill on 12-14.

[MineralMan]

83. See my comment above.

[ProudDad]

16. Latest corporate/political buzzword ... "Austerity"

"Austerity, the 14th century noun defined as "the quality or state of being austere" and "enforced or extreme economy," set off enough searches that Merriam-Webster named it as its Word of the Year for 2010, the dictionary's editors announced Monday."

When we hear the word used by the current pResident and the Dems, we should be afraid, very, very afraid...

Especially since they and their fellow travelers (called republicans for short) have shown a propensity for preserving and extending the fortunes of the most wealthy (moving the wealth upward) as opposed to moving the wealth DOWNWARD...

BUT...

It's very true that humans have overshot the carrying capacity of the Earth and unlike any other "downturn" in history there are not the stores of "surplus" resources and energy available to "grow our way out of it" using the old paradigm...

We will ALL have to simplify and power down.

Our only question is whether we have a hard landing (which is what's happening here in USAmerica and in most of the EU) or a softer landing that includes rethinking what's "important" and how and why we live our lives;

Are we consuming machines providing unbelievable luxury and wealth for a few, for a while, at the expense of our essential life support systems?

Or are we a community of beings in concert with other beings on this Earth who have a vested interest in and desire to maintain our home as a viable habitat? And have some leisure time for fun and play along the way?

Expecting the status-quo to save us or the USAmerican economy of the 50s/60s (before USAmerican Peak Oil) to magically reappear is a delusion...

I've got my own developing answers to those questions...

www.transitionus.org <-- is one...

[Marr]

17. That's basically what I've been saying. We've got people claiming that aid for 9-11 first responders

is some kind of victory for the left. Things like the START Treaty and aid for 9-11 first responders aren't "left" issues, they're the basic functioning of government. They're the sorts of issues for which the term "bipartisan" was created.

Our politics have become so ridiculously skewed, and our expectations so lowered, that many of us actually interpret the standard functioning of government as a "victory" for which huge concessions must be made to big business and the wealthy. That's how our own political leadership frames it, which says a hell of a lot about our political leadership.

[treestar]

36. So why is her "frustration" not with Republicans

They are the ones that turned those into issues.

[Marr]

40. Because it takes two parties to move the center.

And the right is always going to be on the right.

[bluestate10]

111. So. Never getting nothing is better than making progress piecemeal?

Gawd. The logic astounds me. Has the far left been munching on magic mushrooms?

[Marr]

115. You must be responding to someone else.

Because your comment makes no sense in this context.

[Arkana]

122. When the right is fighting them tooth-and-nail, they ARE victories for our side

because it means we're getting done what we want to get done.

We're not on Jane Hamsher's side, we're on the people's side--and we "win" when things that help the people are passed into law.

[Cirque du So-What]

18. The fact that the corporate media deign to even mention Jane Hamsher

should be a big ol' clue that she's not one of us.

[Hello_Kitty]

26. WTF? "she's not one of us"?

First off, the only outlet that lets her appear is MSNBC. Furthermore, centrist Beltway DLC faux liberals get all kinds of MSM attention.

[Cirque du So-What]

39. You are utterly wrong about her only appearing on MSNBC

I guess her appearance on Fox & Friends was merely an optical illusion :eyes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9F_J_sbeU8

I suppose I'm just hallucinating her numerous appearances on CNN. Here's some criticism of her carrying water for execrable CNN chief Erick Erickson:
http://www.oliverwillis.com/2010/05/11/jane-hamsher-supports-erick-erickson-who-called-michelle-obama-a-marxist-harpy/

Fact is, when the corporate media want to demonstrate lack of support for President Obama from 'the left,' they trot out Ms. Hamsher with great regularity.

Any other rash statements you want me to shoot down? Let 'em fly!

[Hello_Kitty]

41. Fair enough. I don't watch CNN or Fox.

Maybe you're right about her being the go-to gal for criticism from the left. Good. I'm glad some left wing ideas are getting out there. Because the Sensible Centrist Beltway Villagers sure aren't going to espouse them.

[bvar22]

52. Bill and Hillary Clinton also appear on FOX.

Are you willing to discard them too?

[Cirque du So-What]

92. No, but it kinda destroys the myth being spun

about Hamsher being the 'anti-insider.' I'm not discarding anyone, but I dislike people being portrayed as something they are not. Hamsher allows herself to be used as a tool: the corporate media's 'go-to person' whenever they want to attack Barack Obama from 'the left.'

[Number23]

103. You just won this thread.

:thumbsup:

[great white snark]

27. Ding! Ding!

:thumbsup:

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

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

[ClarkUSA]

29. I have always been of the left and that hateful bitter PUMA doesn't speak for me.

Jane "Kill The Bill/Grover Norquist's Faux News teabagger ally" Hamsher also doesn't speak for the very large majority of self-described liberals who have approved of President Obama's job performance since Day One.

[NorthCarolina]

32. K&R

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

33. Someone not named Jane Hamsher posited...

...perhaps the fact that enough Republicans broke had little to do with the President.

Perhaps, he said, post-election, they felt they couldn't go back to their constituencies holding these very popular pieces of legislation hostage. Prior to the election, they were unified in hopes of winnig at least one house if not both.

I think that is pretty insightful, and it makes a whole lot more sense than Obama arm-twisting.

[OregonBlue]

37. You learn quick. LOL. If you want to discuss and issue. please leave Jane out of it. She's not taken

seriously by many here ever since she threw her lot in with Grover Norquist. Grover, "drown it in a bathtub" Norquist is the epitome of evil and she showed her true colors with her choice.

[MilesColtrane]

35. Got a transcript?

[DainBramaged]

38. It's fun watching some of you fight over the purity of a blogger/TV guest

And by attacking the messenger instead of telling the person who you are really pissed off at what you think about them you prove only your smallness.


DU, shake the bottle up and spray the crowd.......

[alarimer]

68. Attack the messenger because she is largely correct about Obama

They cannot believe they voted for someone who betrays Democratic Party principles at every turn. It is not just that he compromises; it is that he REFUSES TO STAND UP FOR WHAT IS RIGHT. This is an administration that is continuing Bush's policies at almost every turn. So many promises broken. It is clear to me that he had no intention of keeping those promises; he only said them to get elected. Just like every other single politician out there. He is not special and they are hurt because they thought he was special. The adulation around Obama during the election really bothered me because I knew that he would be a disappointment, from a progressive point of view. He never was progressive and it was obvious from some of his votes as a Senator. And it is certainly clear now that he is President. It is a very bad idea to put any politician on a pedestal the way Obama was put on a pedestal. Very dangerous- that cult of personality has no place in a democracy.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

43. So people are upset with Jane because she and Norquist...

...called for Rahm's resignation?

I missed that discussion, but just Googled Hamsher and Norquist and this is what I found.


Cenk Uygur: "Jane Hamsher & Grover Norquist Are Right"
"They do make very legitimate points, and Rahm has to answer them."
-Cenk

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/12/25/819162/-Cenk-Uygur:-Jane-Hamsher-

[sabrina 1]

124. And are they also upset that Grover Norquist was invited

to advise President Obama's Deficit Commission? Sometimes it's hard to know where people stand. On the one hand people claim that bi-partisanship is a good thing, so I guess they were happy about Norquist being given the power to advise this president, but it's a mortal sin for a blogger to sign a petition also signed by Grover Norquist? Is it just me, or this make no sense at all? :eyes:

[JamesA1102]

44. Please she lied saying that the President tried to stop DADT repeal.

The woman hates the President and will make stuff up to smear him.

[cottonseed]

47. Wasn't she the one that wanted to primary Barney Frank?

[Arkana]

48. Hamsher's lost a lot of her credibility in the last month.

And if we get the DREAM Act she's going to look even more like an angry, impotent tinpot dictator.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

60. Perhaps that's what I missed

I missed the alleged *lying*. I think everyone has been wrong about a lot of things the last couple of months, let alone the last couple of years. I don't hold wrong predictions against anyone.

From what I hear and read--I must read it here, because I don't go to her site--I agree with a lot of what she has to say.

It's unfortunate that I saw the film "Inside Job" just the other night, because it reminded me of why I'm pissed at Obama.

[bvar22]

56. K&R

Jane Hamshire gets it right more often than she gets it wrong.

K&R so that people can decide for themselves.

[LWolf]

66. Do I have to view a video to see what she had to say? nt

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

67. If you're looking for transcripts, you'll have lost interest by the time they...

...are available. This clip was from last night. Only transcripts up to Monday are available at this time.

[Better Believe It]

69. Those who can't engage in civil debate have to resort to personal attacks against Hamsher.

They have nothing else to offer.

That's all they've got!

Those who constantly engage in such low level "drive-by" personal attacks should be ignored.

[girl gone mad]

70. Hamsher's DU critics make this place look trashy.

Sorry, but you guys are embarrassing yourselves with all of the foaming at the mouth insults over her appearance and the lame "Norquist!" canard.

Truly a pathetic group of people.

If you disagree with the woman, better to argue using logic and reason, not spittle and rage.

[NorthCarolina]

89. Well said...

:applause:

[Ikonoklast]

98. Did she ally herself politically with Norquist? Yes, or No?

Simple answer, and no weasel words.

YES, or NO?

[girl gone mad]

104. Politically? No.

However, Obama did align himself with Norquist politically by inviting Norquist to advise the deficit commission and appointing Norquist's political ally Alan Simpson to head that commission.

Hamsher merely called for the resignation of a deeply corrupt official. That's not a political issue, it's an ethical matter. As much as Rahm would love to hide in the party's skirts and accuse his critics of political bias, the truth is that the man has no business in public service.

[truedelphi]

138. Great argument that you make there.

You nailed it.

[Scurrilous]

102. ROFL

:P

[Number23]

105. ROFL indeed. No better or more appropriate response to such a post.

:thumbsup:

[Citizen Worker]

71. Hamsher's salient point about how health care for first responders was passed is significant for the

looming battle over Social Security and Medicare. The first responders bill was passed because the first responders doggedly pursued and embarrassed both business parties to pass this legislation. We would do well to remember how things are accomplished here and it's by direct action. The only way to thwart the chamber of commerce and the DLC is through direct action.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

73. +1 x 100

[namahage]

120. True indeed.

Funny, though, that the examples she cited were "came here, demonstrated, chained themselves to the White House, who followed the President around"--one might get the sense that she thinks that only one person is responsible.

[johnaries]

75. "The Left" is quite pleased with Obama. It's the extremist

hate-mongers (such as Hamsher) who still rail against him despite his and this Congress's many acheivements.

[TheKentuckian]

91. "The left" being anyone not too far to the Reich of Goldwater

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

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

[johnaries]

79. There are so many examples. Basically, she has developed

a history of twisting, cherry-picking, and manipulating facts in an almost Rovian manner. She jumped the shark for me during the HCR debates when she totally mis-represented the Ashoo generic drug amendment. After that, she seemed to get worse and more manipulative, IMHO.

I, personally, got so tired of trying to correct and debunk so many of her posts and statements that I don't even bother amymore. She is an unreliable source, plain and simply. What really "gets" to me is that she is using the same techniques that so many of us rail against when the RW uses them.

I would suggest that anytime you see a Hamsher statement that you simply use Google to discover more about the issue, and you'll see what I mean.

[girl gone mad]

81. If you rationally refuted her many times..

you should be able to link to those refutations.

I've never seen a rational refutation of Hamsher on this site. Just hate and venom.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

84. That was way more helpful than all the other hater posts combined

Thanks johnaries :thumbsup:

Ironically, I really don't follow her as closely as everyone else. I hear her on MSNBC and the Ed Schultz Show (radio) and I have found that I agree with many of her opinions, like those expressed last night.

Having said that, thanks for providing context.

[JamesA1102]

96. But she lied last night

She said the President tried to stop the repeal of DADT but that was not true:


President Barack Obama makes Congressional calls from the Oval Office before today's final Senate vote repealing the ban on gay men and women serving openly in the military, Saturday, Dec 18. White House Photo by Pete Souza

http://www.pridesource.com/article.html?article=44806

[JackRiddler]

80. What does it mean that the only answer critics of Hamsher (and Nader) have is always to scream:

REPUBLICANS!!!

It's beyond pathetic. It really means there's no answer to the critique, except to resort to a dichotomy that is known to be false even by those who invoke it.

[LWolf]

85. +1

[bluestate10]

112. I don't scream republican.

I scream, "two dunces lost in a deep, dark forest", leading their adoring lemmings right off the sheer, big assed cliff that is just on the other side of the upcoming bunch of weeds. Their prescription for getting progress is to help elect republicans.

[JackRiddler]

113. Fine, you don't scream Republican -- but you just advanced the more civilized version.

Because you don't address Hamsher except to a) insult without substance ("lemmings") and b) tell us how she's working for the Republicans.

Can you try a different a) that's an actual answer to Hamsher?

[bluestate10]

119. My answer is that she is wrong.

maybe she looked at the candidate Obama with rose tinted glasses and is not disappointed. The fact is her vocal, somewhat unhinged criticism embolden the very people that despise the causes that she espouse. Her positions will lead some on the left to sit at home, or vote for a candidate that has no chance of winning, thereby electing those that are lethal to the causes she supposedly espouses. I was unimpressed by every one of her "points", the logic gaps were enormous.

[Raine]

86. THANKS for posting this I really like Hamsher! nt

:thumbsup:

[WillyT]

87. Go Jane !!!

:yourock:

:kick:

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

93. Just a heads up: Cenk is channeling Jane on Ed Show tonight

More of the same, but Cenk says Obama will never get the Dream Act now.

[Name removed]

99. Deleted message

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

[Hell Hath No Fury]

100. Denial just ain't a GOPer disease --

I thought we were supposed to be the smart ones. :(

[WillyT]

107. Hey !!! - Happy Holidays You !!!

:loveya:

Say "Hi" to your mom for me, please?

:hi:

[Name removed]

114. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

106. :)

:hi: WillyT

[Number23]

101. Damn. Can a sista get a SYNOPSIS or something??

[vaberella]

118. Do you really want it?!

It's always veiled marginalization and snark against Obama.

[msanthrope]

121. Msanthrope sums up Jane Hamsher's frustration with Obama----

"I don't get invited to the 'better' parties, still."

[Whisp]

125. dogfuckerlake

she is a shameless pathetic fucking liar.

I am fond of dislking her so.

[sendero]

127. I don't know anything about Jane..

... other than I really like that name and every woman I have met named Jane was fascinating.

That out of the way there is simply no way for anyone who is actually left leaning to NOT be bitter about today's politics, especially Obama.

So if that is all you have, get lost.

[mmonk]

128. There was a lot of substance in that video piece. By mentioning just Jane

you have left it to the Hamsher haters to attack the thread with their usual lack of substantive or intellectual arguments.

[defendandprotect]

130. K/R --

[defendandprotect]

133. Jane Hamsher did a fantastic job of summing it up .... pointing to the reality ....

#1 -- that REID HAS THE ABILITY TO GET SOMETHING DONE when he wants to get it done!!

#2 -- that the PROTESTING GROUPS who would not take "no" for an answer persisted in fighting --

#3 -- that JON STUART pushed the health care for 9/11 responders to victory by shaming GOP --

#4 -- DADT - Food Safety - Unemployment Benefits were supported by the public 65%/80%


Jane Hampsher also makes the point that while these issues are frequently labeled as

liberal issues, they are supported by 65% and 80% of the public and are therefore CENTRIST issues.



TERRIFIC JOB BY JANE HAMPSHIRE!!

[fascisthunter]

134. what's the Problem? Nothing she said was a lie