1. Ha ha ha! Obamabots! You thought he was sent from heaven and could walk on water and could summon an army of unicorns! But where’s your Obama now?!?!? Change? HAHAHAH!!! He’s worse than Bush! You fools! DOOM!!! Ect., ect...
2. He was never a liberal! Show where he ever said he was a liberal! His position is the same as it ever was and is the same/better than Hillary’s.
3. He’s still better than McCain/McSame/McBush.
4. Supreme Court appointments...
5. [Link to meaningless poll data]
6. Baby steps
7. [Slog regular posts the same exact post that he/she always posts with slight variation]
8. @[Comment number/Commenter name]: YOU FUCKING IDIOT!
9. I bet Mr. Poe agrees with/participates in [Despicable act]!
10. [Mr. Poe] I totally agree with/participate in [Despicable act].
11. [Slog poster] has totally taken this out of context! Way to be a journalist!
12. Dan Savage supported the war!
13. That’s a straw man argument.
14. [Commenter hits refresh after posting and double/triple/quadruple posts his/her comment]
15. Fucking Seattle/Seattlites/Capitol Hill!
16. [Comment number] for the win.
17. Nanny state!
18. Use a fucking jump/cut, Erica! Bitch whore slut. Feminism is dead.
19. Stupid [Elected official/government agency]
20. I’m sick of everything.

1. Ha ha ha! Obamabots! You thought he was sent from heaven and could walk on water and could summon an army of unicorns! But where’s your Obama now?!?!? Change? HAHAHAH!!! He’s worse than Bush! You fools! DOOM!!! Ect., ect...
2. He was never a liberal! Show where he ever said he was a liberal! His position is the same as it ever was and is the same/better than Hillary’s.
3. He’s still better than McCain/McSame/McBush.
4. Supreme Court appointments...
5. [Link to meaningless poll data]
6. Baby steps
7. [Slog regular posts the same exact post that he/she always posts with slight variation]
8. @[Comment number/Commenter name]: YOU FUCKING IDIOT!
9. I bet Mr. Poe agrees with/participates in [Despicable act]!
10. [Mr. Poe] I totally agree with/participate in [Despicable act].
11. [Slog poster] has totally taken this out of context! Way to be a journalist!
12. Dan Savage supported the war!
13. That’s a straw man argument.
14. [Commenter hits refresh after posting and double/triple/quadruple posts his/her comment]
15. Fucking Seattle/Seattlites/Capitol Hill!
16. [Comment number] for the win.
17. Nanny state!
18. Use a fucking jump/cut, Erica! Bitch whore slut. Feminism is dead.
19. Stupid [Elected official/government agency]
20. I’m sick of everything.

Just pick a number.

not agreeing with obama's moves. i'm disappointed. but it seems clear this was a calculated move to put the issue behind him for now.

there's a loophole in the bill that will allow retroactive criminal prosecution of the telecoms. it will be interesting to see where that goes once we have a new president.

and i didn't see anyone fillibustering who needed support.

i'll take 16.

I'm sick of everything.

I like the idea of the t-shirt.

You've ruined the whole election.

Like, they're both human, both pols and both subject to overwhelming forces such as the nature of our electorate?

Us?

Yeah, guilty.

But yeah @3 got it right.

What you fail to get is HRC supporters don't usually adulate her quite so much. There were many good reasons to support her and same for Obama.

In the end they're both mildly progressive centrist Dems who want to fucking get elected. Big news flash!

But if you think calling out HRC supporters to state the obvious is somehow disproving the point -- that they're just not that different -- um, duh, like you are wrong.

Yup they both compromise and guess what -- sometimes any one of us likes it and sometimes any one of us doesn't.

Oh, another thing. We shall see what his health care plan gets watered down to after he wins presidency then you can say "golly gee, those damn Hillary supporters sure are likely to point out they told us so, just to make the point she couldn't get it done and now he cna't either."

And you'd be right. We would point it out.

Both of them, and us, are trapped in a conservatively structured Senate where 18% of the population of the US gets to control 40 Senators and via the cloutre rules choke off anything progressive at all -- a major reason why we ain't so progressive.

Don't y'all get it? It's not the personality or charisma of the president so much. Anyone who would win, would compromise on lots of things, yessir. But it's not a moral fault of theirs. That's the point. It's s-t-r-u-c-t-u-r-a-l.

Thinking it's about the personality (Obama can save us! Obama can save us! He's "different"!!) is so petite bourgeoisie-type thinking I'm going to vomit in my Marxism 101 class tonight just thinking about it.

Liberal Bloggers Accuse Obama of Trying to Win Election
Nominee Called Traitor to Democrats' Losing Tradition

The liberal blogosphere was aflame today with new accusations that Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill) is trying to win the 2008 presidential election.

Suspicions about Sen. Obama's true motives have been building over the past few weeks, but not until today have the bloggers called him out for betraying the Democratic Party's losing tradition.

"Barack Obama seems to be making a very calculated attempt to win over 270 electoral votes," wrote liberal blogger Carol Foyler at LibDemWatch.com, a blog read by a half-dozen other liberal bloggers. "He must be stopped."

But those comments were not nearly as strident as those of Tracy Klugian, whose blog LoseOn.org has backed unsuccessful Democratic candidates since 2000.

"Increasingly, Barack Obama's message is becoming more accessible, appealing, and yes, potentially successful," he wrote. "Any Democrat who voted for Dukakis, Mondale or Kerry should regard this as a betrayal."

Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean said that he was "sympathetic" to the concerns of bloggers who worry that their nominee seems stubbornly bent on winning the election, but he warned them that the DNC's "hands are tied."

"If Sen. Obama is really determined to win, I don't think any of us can talk him out of it," Mr. Dean said.

Liberal bloggers said that they would be watching Sen. Obama's vice-presidential selection process "very closely" for signs that he is plotting to win the election.

"Barack Obama still has a chance to pick someone disastrous as a sign that he wants to lose this thing," Ms. Foyler wrote. "If not, he should brace himself for some really mean blog posts."

hhttp://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=2&vote=00168

Update your scorecards.

And @23 did get one thing right - Obama's capitulation is reflective of our political system's overall structure. I don't know why so many Americans don't care about their civil rights these days, but they don't. I refuse to blame Obama for this condition of our society, but nonetheless, damn him for his FISA vote, and damn everyone else in Congress who voted for it.

Let's just hope someone is sewing the names of every one of those vile, repulsive, tongue-waving douchebags in a quilt ala A Tale of Two Cities.

P.S. I'm gonna tear up Barry's picture in my locker now...

Obama's FISA vote demonstrates that he is already thinking like a President, a good President. If the telecommunication companies can be held liable for allowing illegal wiretapping, the resulting lawsuits would threaten the nation's telecommunication systems, and thus threaten national security.

If telecommunications companies cannot be punished for breaking the law simply because the president suggested that they break the law, what good are our laws?

Mrs. Jarvie, do you believe in the rule of law or not? Our president believes that he is above the law. Our Congress just confirmed that. It's now up to the judicial branch to solve this, and the most patriotic organization in the nation has set that ball rolling. If the courts don't straighten this out, then we're truly living in a dictatorship.

ACLU is going to run a prominent newspaper ad announcing the suit. Everyone reading, please add your name to those that will be printed in the ad.

see also: Lawrence Lessig: "The immunity hysteria", July 10, 2008