Slog
News & ArtsMonday, January 18, 2010
Politics All Hell May Break Loose In Massachusetts Tomorrow
Posted by Dan Savage on Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 10:34 AM
The Dem's (supposedly) filibuster-proof majority in the Senate and the fate of health care reform is on the line—Barack Obama's presidency is on the line—in Massachusetts. The wooden woman who won the Democratic nomination for Ted Kennedy's seat is neck-and-neck with an unknown-until-two-weeks-ago Republican state senator who has pledged to block health care reform if he wins tomorrow. Seattle got behind Obama, for 16 months Slog was all Obama all the time, we had feature after feature about Obama campaign. And now with Obama's agenda seemingly on the line in Massachusetts tomorrow... it's crickets here in Seattle and on Slog.
Does nobody give a shit anymore?
1
It's hard to give a crap about a seat in Massachusetts when there isn't any damn thing we can do about what's happening.
And, Obama kind of sucks a lot of ass these days.
And, Obama kind of sucks a lot of ass these days.
2
Well, Slog's also been really pissed off at Obama for the last year, railing against him for his lack of aggressive leadership on a number of topics, not least health care reform, economic recovery, gay rights, civil rights, etc.
What do you expect? If you spend a year telling people that the guy's a lousy president, you can't be too surprised when they agree with you and don't care particularly if the super-majority that we've agreed he's squandering is going away.
What do you expect? If you spend a year telling people that the guy's a lousy president, you can't be too surprised when they agree with you and don't care particularly if the super-majority that we've agreed he's squandering is going away.
3
sadly.. he didn't make use of the supermajority when he had it. always trying to make sure the repubs were ok with things when they were never ever going to be. i do hope she wins though...
4
If I hadn't been repeatedly kicked in the teeth over the last year by Obama and the Senate Dems I might give a shit, but...
5
coakly eeks this one out, then ancient byrd dies. then we have another senate race to eek out. then its election season. and, of course, lieberman.
no one expects anything good from the senate anymore.
no one expects anything good from the senate anymore.
7
I've been wondering how much the national health care debate has affected Massachusetts voters. After all, they're all supposedly covered under Romney Care, something that is similar to the plan put forth by Congress. Unless the voters there are feeling particularly generous about everyone else in the country, I don't think "saving health care" is strong motivation for them to vote Coakley.
If someone could direct me to an article discussing this angle, I would appreciate it. I haven't found one yet.
If someone could direct me to an article discussing this angle, I would appreciate it. I haven't found one yet.
8
I think everyone is burned out from the sheer relentlessness of the Right's assault on America. The problem is they're fundamentalists, Christian, anti-government, or otherwise. They will never stop until death, because they are True Believers. Not enough of our side are willing to be that insane, because we're proportionally Very Nice and Relaxed people. We won't rise up in arms until we start losing existing rights or getting arrested for violating the Ten Commandments.
9
Why give a shit about somebody who has taken everything you believed in, everything you worked for, everything you thought he was going to do, and then disowned it?
Health care: No public option.
Gays: no support for repealing DADT
War: 30k more troops in Afghanistan
Fiscal policy: Big bailouts (& bonuses) for bankers, nothing of any substance for homeowners.
How long do we have to be anally raped before we stop giving a shit?
Health care: No public option.
Gays: no support for repealing DADT
War: 30k more troops in Afghanistan
Fiscal policy: Big bailouts (& bonuses) for bankers, nothing of any substance for homeowners.
How long do we have to be anally raped before we stop giving a shit?
10
Obama would have won without the Slog.
It's more correct to describe the Obama campaign as an enthusiastic movement that many blogs, including this one, were able to hitch their wagon to and generate lots of lucrative content and a diverting outlet for those caught up in the moment.
And tomorrow's vote will not hinge on what the Slog didn't say about it. I almost hope the Republican wins just to make the Democrats face up to the need to fix the filibuster rule. But passing health care reform is probably more likely than changing Congress.
It's more correct to describe the Obama campaign as an enthusiastic movement that many blogs, including this one, were able to hitch their wagon to and generate lots of lucrative content and a diverting outlet for those caught up in the moment.
And tomorrow's vote will not hinge on what the Slog didn't say about it. I almost hope the Republican wins just to make the Democrats face up to the need to fix the filibuster rule. But passing health care reform is probably more likely than changing Congress.
11
Maybe if Obama and the congressional Democrats stopped raping the middle and lower classes people would care.
But right now we're to damn busy trying to keep our jobs (if we still have them) and trying to keep a fucking roof over our heads!
But right now we're to damn busy trying to keep our jobs (if we still have them) and trying to keep a fucking roof over our heads!
12
Obama does suck ass these days for sure! A US president sucking ass? Are you really suprised? BUT he'll suck much more ass if she looses. Nothing we can do? Go to, cough cough, moveon.org, and they'll give you numbers of, more coughing, democratic voters in Mass. to call, no exp. necessary. You can call the Mass-holes yourself, and mobilize voters. Feel that political power surging threw your...
Once we get out of the 80's, the 90's are going to make the 60's look like the 50's... Missed that one by a mile. Too bad so sad.
Once we get out of the 80's, the 90's are going to make the 60's look like the 50's... Missed that one by a mile. Too bad so sad.
13
The whole thing is such a dispiriting clusterfuck. If those idiots in Massachusetts are stupid/selfish enough to elect a teabagging moron, so be it. I'm too tired to care anymore.
15
Hardly surprising.
Obama's popularity has dropped further faster than any modern POTUS...
For this to even be close, in a state he carried by 24 points, is deafening repudiation of his policies.
The fact that its happening in a state that has in place the public health care program his is modeled on is particularly damning of that policy in particular.
Obama's popularity has dropped further faster than any modern POTUS...
For this to even be close, in a state he carried by 24 points, is deafening repudiation of his policies.
The fact that its happening in a state that has in place the public health care program his is modeled on is particularly damning of that policy in particular.
16
@12, I appreciate the sentiment...and I get what you are trying to say...but me calling from SEATTLE to tell people in Massachusetts who to vote for seems ridiculously asinine to me. Why would they listen to me? If someone from Boston called me to tell me who I should vote for - I would tell them to kindly go fuck themselves.
Or maybe you had a different experience while you were at the phone bank?
Or maybe you had a different experience while you were at the phone bank?
17
I love how my mom thinks that after we get this current Healthcare Bill passed we will eventually get a bill with public option....she says "we need to build up to it" ....what she doesn't know is that we are going to lose the majority any second now and we are never going to get a public option.....like ever....
thanks mom and all you Blue Dems out there....thanks for a shitty little pointless bill that we've wasted literally a year spinning our tires in the dirt.
thanks mom and all you Blue Dems out there....thanks for a shitty little pointless bill that we've wasted literally a year spinning our tires in the dirt.
18
These comments show why liberals/progressives (or whatever the fashionable name for us is these days) always fail, and will always fail, unless we get our act together.
We're wimps. Babies. Whiners. The moment anything goes wrong, or doesn't comply exactly with our vision of what we think it should be, we knock over the board game and storm off, crying something about moving to Canada.
Conservatives, on the other hand, are organized and disciplined. They know their party message, they employ people to artfully reduce it to simple-minded soundbytes that appeal to the lowest common denominator, and that wins them a loyal base that would follow them anywhere.
The conservatives took a beating with Goldwater, and quietly regrouped. They came back in a huge way with Reagan, and have controlled the national agenda since - and all we do is in-fight, and snipe, and whine and say we're "burned out".
We buy into the right-wing memes, all the time - we're doing it now with the Obama-as-failure" message (They set him up as the Messiah, we - or at least some of us - bought into it, and now we are unhappy because he's not the messiah). We refuse to look at the big picture, insisting instead on sabotaging each other's special interests in favor of our own, which gives the conservatives a victory almost every time.
Part of the problem is that we tend to be more intelligent and engaged, but like the oft-mentioned cat-herding, it's almost impossible to lead a group like that. No one will ever be good enough for us, so we get our feelings hurt, go off pouting, and the nation ends up with the likes of George Bush and Sarah Palin - and I'm beginning to suspect that a lot of us "liberals" secretly like it that way.
Brown is exciting (he posed in Cosmo!) and Coakley is a dreary bureaucrat who actually understands policy. It's clear who would be the better leader, but it's also clear that will always be played for saps unless we grow up.
Oh, and Brown is on the record as being against gay marriage - he was one of the state senators who tried to put it to a vote. Martha may be a drip, but she's our drip. Why aren't we all rooting for her? Because Obama isn't the messiah.....
More...
We're wimps. Babies. Whiners. The moment anything goes wrong, or doesn't comply exactly with our vision of what we think it should be, we knock over the board game and storm off, crying something about moving to Canada.
Conservatives, on the other hand, are organized and disciplined. They know their party message, they employ people to artfully reduce it to simple-minded soundbytes that appeal to the lowest common denominator, and that wins them a loyal base that would follow them anywhere.
The conservatives took a beating with Goldwater, and quietly regrouped. They came back in a huge way with Reagan, and have controlled the national agenda since - and all we do is in-fight, and snipe, and whine and say we're "burned out".
We buy into the right-wing memes, all the time - we're doing it now with the Obama-as-failure" message (They set him up as the Messiah, we - or at least some of us - bought into it, and now we are unhappy because he's not the messiah). We refuse to look at the big picture, insisting instead on sabotaging each other's special interests in favor of our own, which gives the conservatives a victory almost every time.
Part of the problem is that we tend to be more intelligent and engaged, but like the oft-mentioned cat-herding, it's almost impossible to lead a group like that. No one will ever be good enough for us, so we get our feelings hurt, go off pouting, and the nation ends up with the likes of George Bush and Sarah Palin - and I'm beginning to suspect that a lot of us "liberals" secretly like it that way.
Brown is exciting (he posed in Cosmo!) and Coakley is a dreary bureaucrat who actually understands policy. It's clear who would be the better leader, but it's also clear that will always be played for saps unless we grow up.
Oh, and Brown is on the record as being against gay marriage - he was one of the state senators who tried to put it to a vote. Martha may be a drip, but she's our drip. Why aren't we all rooting for her? Because Obama isn't the messiah.....
19
i agree with the comments that express disgust with the "fierce urgency of whenever" pace Obama has taken.
also, some of us are reading Sullivan, and its pretty hard to get worked up about the candidate the Dems put forward.
finally, i sincerely hope our own appalling "democrat" governor is watching this race. i think there is a very real chance the republican's take the governorship back as a result of the democrats screwing seattle over for the last decade.
also, some of us are reading Sullivan, and its pretty hard to get worked up about the candidate the Dems put forward.
finally, i sincerely hope our own appalling "democrat" governor is watching this race. i think there is a very real chance the republican's take the governorship back as a result of the democrats screwing seattle over for the last decade.
20
Obama is such a disappointment in his promises to the LGBT community, so NOT a "fierce advocate" that I don't much care what happens to him. Health care either won't pass or won't last. He's a one-term president and we're toast.
21
The corporate-owned federal government has been kicking us in the teeth for...hell, at least since Reagan. When Clinton was elected, it looked like the kicking might stop...but no, more of the same. Last year it looked like this time, maybe, things might change...but no, still more of the same. Obama could have done things, if he'd wanted to, but it turns out smarts and rhetorical skill aren't the same as will or leadership.
It's an abusive relationship, and I'm too burned out to expect anything better.
It's an abusive relationship, and I'm too burned out to expect anything better.
22
A large conservative branch of my family settled on a rustic compound of about ten houses in Massachusetts horse country, and FOX News is always on in every house, and they get along with everyone in the county who matters, for everyone who matters is just like them. They'll be delighted I'm sure.
24
We've got the same sort of people calling the shots at the Fed, Dept. of "Defense," have yet another good Catholic appointed to the Supreme Court and have the insurance companies calling the shots on health care reform. Why not have a Republican in Kennedy's seat?
25
You know, it's funny - I brought this up a week ago and was basically told "oh, get outta here, you've been watching Fox News too much." It's exactly that kind of complacency that could end up costing us this election.
26
Pretty amazing the witlessness on display here. Do any of you read anything besides Slog? I think anyone vaguely in touch with reality would have known long before Obama was elected that the fantasies on the left about what he was going to accomplish were just that, fantasies. Really, politics is about the lesser evil everywhere and anyone that does not think Obama is exponentially less evil than the alternative (and who does not hail from the Real America that is) has got to be senile, insane or some combination thereof.
29
Meh, its always something to get all apocolyptic about. So we move the inevitible up a few months. They all suck anyway.
30
No Dan, we do NOT give a shit anymore....most of us worked tirelessly for his campaign for "change we can believe in" in exchange for unkept promises and numerous gut punches. If Scott Brown wins it is only the fault of Mr. Obama and his administration and fellow Dems for lacking backbone, keeping their promises and for shitting on those of us who voted for them. They had a majority in which they happily squandered. They've had numerous opportunities to pass an effective health care bill - they did not. They had numerous opportunities to advance the civil rights of the LGBT community - they did not, in fact did more damage than good. They sent 60,000 more troops to war instead of work on an exit strategy etc. etc. etc. The list of disappointments from this administration has become almost endless and as a result discouraged the moderate and progressive voters.
31
@23
If he pulls this off... "President Brown" might be a real potential... He's about as well known now as Obama was in January 2005... And Obama's proven you only need a few years of experience as a junior Senator to run the free world. Plus, if he wins, Brown is going to get to wear the mantle of "The Obama Slayer" simply because he had the political savvy to make this election an initiative on Obama's policies. (And it'll be easier to cut Palin off short in her aspirations than it was for Obama to cut Hillary off.)
It would be hard to argue that a Republican that can win in Massachusetts wouldn't be contender.
If he pulls this off... "President Brown" might be a real potential... He's about as well known now as Obama was in January 2005... And Obama's proven you only need a few years of experience as a junior Senator to run the free world. Plus, if he wins, Brown is going to get to wear the mantle of "The Obama Slayer" simply because he had the political savvy to make this election an initiative on Obama's policies. (And it'll be easier to cut Palin off short in her aspirations than it was for Obama to cut Hillary off.)
It would be hard to argue that a Republican that can win in Massachusetts wouldn't be contender.
32
I have given up on progressive politics in the US. Progressives can win elections now and then, but are unable to govern or expand on those victories, so we're doomed to the misrule of the offspring of Bush & Cheney.
33
@24
It's not Kennedy's seat.
It belongs to the people of Massachusetts...
We opted out of the whole monarchy thing a couple hundred years ago.
It's not Kennedy's seat.
It belongs to the people of Massachusetts...
We opted out of the whole monarchy thing a couple hundred years ago.
35
@31, oh fuck, I was wondering when someone would pull the experience card about Obama.
I was just talking to a friend at lunch today who asked if it really was a good idea supporting a junior Senator without any large scale executive experience during 2008.
I couldn't respond except to say (rather weakly) that Hillary didn't have any either.
We really were fucked this time around before we even got out of the gate.
I was just talking to a friend at lunch today who asked if it really was a good idea supporting a junior Senator without any large scale executive experience during 2008.
I couldn't respond except to say (rather weakly) that Hillary didn't have any either.
We really were fucked this time around before we even got out of the gate.
38
@18 Right on.
@26 - I agree completely. There were simply too many people like @9 who were either naive or willfully ignorant and thought that by simply electing the better presidential candidate, all of their progressive dreams would come true.
I can't help but wonder if part of that sentiment could be attributed to the post-Bush hangover. I wonder if some people saw Bush abuse his power to further the neoconservative agenda and started to think that abuse of executive power is an acceptable norm, and why can't Obama run roughshod over the proper limits of executive power to push through a progressive agenda? I don't know, it's just a theory.
If eight years of Bush wasn't enough to motivate us to get our shit together and stop being nothing more than the party of in-fighting, I don't know what will. The way that Dan Savage (and others) talk about Obama you'd think they're looking forward to President Palin in 2012.
@26 - I agree completely. There were simply too many people like @9 who were either naive or willfully ignorant and thought that by simply electing the better presidential candidate, all of their progressive dreams would come true.
I can't help but wonder if part of that sentiment could be attributed to the post-Bush hangover. I wonder if some people saw Bush abuse his power to further the neoconservative agenda and started to think that abuse of executive power is an acceptable norm, and why can't Obama run roughshod over the proper limits of executive power to push through a progressive agenda? I don't know, it's just a theory.
If eight years of Bush wasn't enough to motivate us to get our shit together and stop being nothing more than the party of in-fighting, I don't know what will. The way that Dan Savage (and others) talk about Obama you'd think they're looking forward to President Palin in 2012.
39
@26: Yeah, it's the same sort of thing as in 2000. Liberals cast some votes for Nader because they didn't want to settle for the lesser of two evils. Well, the rest is history. But then again, if Gore had won, we'd have had Joe the Bummer as veep for at least 4 years, so that's at least one thing Dubya saved us from.
40
I pretty much agree with @2. The Slog, and you in particular, Dan, have done nothing but talk shit about Obama for the last year straight. People who read Slog regularly have been worn down by your relentless ambivalence.
Also -- you do know we're on the other side of the country, right?
Hey, here's an idea -- if you want people to support the President, maybe you should start doing that yourself. Maybe give him the benefit of the doubt and allow that he may need to finish his historic health reform bill before he starts spending political capital on gay civil rights. But no, that just wouldn't be Dan Savage. So congratulations. You're officially a voice of leadership in the political process, and what you've been saying since the day Obama got into office was, "Meh."
Also -- you do know we're on the other side of the country, right?
Hey, here's an idea -- if you want people to support the President, maybe you should start doing that yourself. Maybe give him the benefit of the doubt and allow that he may need to finish his historic health reform bill before he starts spending political capital on gay civil rights. But no, that just wouldn't be Dan Savage. So congratulations. You're officially a voice of leadership in the political process, and what you've been saying since the day Obama got into office was, "Meh."
41
Congratulations, Dan.
A year of endless bitching has sucked all the life and energy out of the whole crew.
Slog doesn't really need a conservative troll- Dan can handle the dirty work all by himself.
We did tell you Obama had NO experience.
Even the troll would rather have seen Hillary, you kids may not remember Carter but it wasn't pretty and the world is a meaner place this time around and Obama is even worse than Jimmy.
A year of endless bitching has sucked all the life and energy out of the whole crew.
Slog doesn't really need a conservative troll- Dan can handle the dirty work all by himself.
We did tell you Obama had NO experience.
Even the troll would rather have seen Hillary, you kids may not remember Carter but it wasn't pretty and the world is a meaner place this time around and Obama is even worse than Jimmy.
42
Once again, Gay Inc gets behind a Democrat (this time in Massachusetts), telling us we HAVE to get her elected... or else. One of the lessons we've learned over the last year is that voting for Democrats is NOT the same thing as advancing the struggle for lgbt equality. And we are all familiar with "fierce advocates" who, once in office, forget about us. There are already many many organizations, in Massachusetts and across the country, who are working to get Coakley elected. Obama even sees fits to move on this (while continuing to ignore our rights). We should keep in mind that there is a backlash against the Democrats (and this is why Massachusetts race is so close) precisely because the Democrats who were elected last round haven't met the needs of the people (lgbt people included) who voted for them. Build the movement and let the Democrats WIN something for once before we support them.
44
Obama needs to stop being Mr. Low Key Nice Guy, and become a sunshine spewing, morning in America, diehard idealist on the order of a Librul Reagan to start winning back the hearts and minds of voters.
"Things are hard" was a nice dose of mature realism after Bush and during the economic collapse, but voters are now turning to any jackoff who blows enough sunshine up their asses.
"Things are hard" was a nice dose of mature realism after Bush and during the economic collapse, but voters are now turning to any jackoff who blows enough sunshine up their asses.
45
@43 Agreed that the health care legislation as it now stands is far short of ideal but basing that argument on a criticism of the cadillac health plan tax is rather dubious. If union members or the companies they work for don't like getting dinged with the tax then maybe they will have incentive to go shop for a cheaper plan, an incentive that they probably don't have presently, and maybe that might contribute to holding costs down.
There is nothing America loves more than a free lunch and everyone thinks they are more entitled to it than everyone else. It would certainly be better to soak the rich but is that going to get past buttwipes like Lieberman? Doubt it. In any case just about anything is better than nothing here and most on the left who belong to the 'reality based community' will tell you just that. Check out Krugman's column a couple weeks back about the legislation that passed the Senate. Legislation is pushed through and the dems can claim a major accomplishment. It can be tweaked later. Those on the left who are single payer or nothing fantasists will get precisely nothing forever. This is a right-wing country, it ain't going to get much better than it is currently. That's reality.
There is nothing America loves more than a free lunch and everyone thinks they are more entitled to it than everyone else. It would certainly be better to soak the rich but is that going to get past buttwipes like Lieberman? Doubt it. In any case just about anything is better than nothing here and most on the left who belong to the 'reality based community' will tell you just that. Check out Krugman's column a couple weeks back about the legislation that passed the Senate. Legislation is pushed through and the dems can claim a major accomplishment. It can be tweaked later. Those on the left who are single payer or nothing fantasists will get precisely nothing forever. This is a right-wing country, it ain't going to get much better than it is currently. That's reality.
46
I have to agree with Catalina Vel-DuRay @18.
All you people who feel so betrayed by Obama--you, dear people, are just about as gullible and ill-informed and self-centered as the tea partiers and Ron Paul libertarians and Rush's dittoheads.
Just consider health care/insurance reform. If that legislation still manages to pass (even in the watered-down form of the Senate bill), it will be the closest thing there is to a modern-day legislative miracle. And all the credit in the world goes to the three most vilified people in Washington: Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid.
Especially Reid. The man had zero margin of error in the Senate, he was utterly at the mercy of Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson, and still he managed to hold the Democratic caucus together. Because of this, historians will look back at Reid as one of the great legislators in American history (and probably also an electoral martyr).
No, health reform will not include the public option. But even if Barack Obama had turned into a combination of Ralph Nader and Martin Luther King and the Incredible Hulk, it wasn't going to. And do any of you low-information ideologues know what it does include? Why do progressives like Ezra Klein who have studied this issue far more than you have consider this legislation a potential major victory?
All you people who feel so betrayed by Obama--you, dear people, are just about as gullible and ill-informed and self-centered as the tea partiers and Ron Paul libertarians and Rush's dittoheads.
Just consider health care/insurance reform. If that legislation still manages to pass (even in the watered-down form of the Senate bill), it will be the closest thing there is to a modern-day legislative miracle. And all the credit in the world goes to the three most vilified people in Washington: Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid.
Especially Reid. The man had zero margin of error in the Senate, he was utterly at the mercy of Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson, and still he managed to hold the Democratic caucus together. Because of this, historians will look back at Reid as one of the great legislators in American history (and probably also an electoral martyr).
No, health reform will not include the public option. But even if Barack Obama had turned into a combination of Ralph Nader and Martin Luther King and the Incredible Hulk, it wasn't going to. And do any of you low-information ideologues know what it does include? Why do progressives like Ezra Klein who have studied this issue far more than you have consider this legislation a potential major victory?
47
Maybe this is old news... but I just learned it:
"In the June 1982 issue of Cosmopolitan, Brown won the magazine's "Sexiest Man" contest and posed for several shots, including one in the nude."
Yeah... Brown's my man alright...
"In the June 1982 issue of Cosmopolitan, Brown won the magazine's "Sexiest Man" contest and posed for several shots, including one in the nude."
Yeah... Brown's my man alright...
48
I hope this ass hat wins with a stunning majority. Obama, Reid, Pelosi...the whole lot of spineless loosers can go rot in hell.
Let the Republican tidal wave begin. We might just as well hand this leaking, stinking, rot infested, shit-hole schooner back over to the scum who ran her aground.
Let the Republican tidal wave begin. We might just as well hand this leaking, stinking, rot infested, shit-hole schooner back over to the scum who ran her aground.
49
Why are you berating us? We can't create threads...
Yell at your lazy, pot-addled, cock-addicted staff.
This shit didn't happen when ECB was on the watch...
Yell at your lazy, pot-addled, cock-addicted staff.
This shit didn't happen when ECB was on the watch...
52
Rhizome @45: There is nothing America loves more than a free lunch and everyone thinks they are more entitled to it than everyone else.
Rhizome, I think you've captured something. If there's one fundamental principle of modern-day movement conservatism today, it is that there is such a thing as a free lunch. That's one reason this health reform bill is so galling to the right. But the left is guilty of its set of free-lunch myths, especially when it comes to health reform. Look at the rest of the industrialized world. You can't have real health reform:
* Without an individual mandate.
* If you give tax incentives to employers to give their employees more and more expensive insurance plans.
* If you think everyone has a right to unlimited medical treatments, no matter how questionable the effectiveness.
I could go on. Of course, in other countries, they have a public option or single payer or the health insurers are highly regulated non-profits or they just have one single-stop health care/insurance system like the UK. We're not going to have that, at least not yet. But unless you think Barack Obama was going to go Jack Bauer on Joe Lieberman, we were never going to, no matter how hard Obama tried to channel his inner Nader.
Rhizome, I think you've captured something. If there's one fundamental principle of modern-day movement conservatism today, it is that there is such a thing as a free lunch. That's one reason this health reform bill is so galling to the right. But the left is guilty of its set of free-lunch myths, especially when it comes to health reform. Look at the rest of the industrialized world. You can't have real health reform:
* Without an individual mandate.
* If you give tax incentives to employers to give their employees more and more expensive insurance plans.
* If you think everyone has a right to unlimited medical treatments, no matter how questionable the effectiveness.
I could go on. Of course, in other countries, they have a public option or single payer or the health insurers are highly regulated non-profits or they just have one single-stop health care/insurance system like the UK. We're not going to have that, at least not yet. But unless you think Barack Obama was going to go Jack Bauer on Joe Lieberman, we were never going to, no matter how hard Obama tried to channel his inner Nader.
53
I voted for Obama just so I wouldn't be embarrassed next time I meet with friends in Le Marais. I guess the loony left didn't realize Obama was a moderate? my, you are useful idiots.
54
I'm far less charitable than you are. It's blatant hypocrisy. Liberals rage against Republicans who abuse power to achieve their objectives, but, as soon as we get our man into office, liberals rage if he doesn't abuse his power. Check out Cato's many past comments to that end.
Few people in this country have any respect or patience for the political process, which fully explains why so much power has been concentrated in the hands of the executive. I've been disappointed by Obama on a number of issues (especially his timid handling of the economy), but his respect for the balance of powers is not one of them.
I wonder if some people saw Bush abuse his power to further the neoconservative agenda and started to think that abuse of executive power is an acceptable norm, and why can't Obama run roughshod over the proper limits of executive power to push through a progressive agenda?
I'm far less charitable than you are. It's blatant hypocrisy. Liberals rage against Republicans who abuse power to achieve their objectives, but, as soon as we get our man into office, liberals rage if he doesn't abuse his power. Check out Cato's many past comments to that end.
Few people in this country have any respect or patience for the political process, which fully explains why so much power has been concentrated in the hands of the executive. I've been disappointed by Obama on a number of issues (especially his timid handling of the economy), but his respect for the balance of powers is not one of them.
55
I have to say, living in Massachusetts, we're not a whole lot more active and engaged in our OWN special election -- at least, not the bit of it I'm in.
57
The super-majority wasn't used? Heh? I'm wondering how many of you just dropped in from Oz or what. How many presidents have tried to pass meaningful health care legislation and failed? I think the commentary on Slog pretty much establishes once and for all that the right does not have a monopoly on ignorance in this land.
58
@57: So what did they do with it? Was there some great progressive legislation passed that I missed?
59
It really is so upsetting, after Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas and Joe Lieberman of Connecticut BEGGED Obama to do away with Don't Ask Don't Tell, then INSISTED on single-payer health care, DEMANDED a complete withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan and staged a SIT-IN ON THE CAPITOL STEPS insisting on nationalization of the financial industry. . . . and our President (who is, like a monarch, single-handedly able to pass legislation without the approval of Congress) STILL DOESN'T GET IT. Well, Sloggers are here to punish him for that.
60
YGBKM @31:
Hilarious! Romney/Brown 2012!!
It would be hard to argue that a Republican that can win in Massachusetts wouldn't be contender.
Hilarious! Romney/Brown 2012!!
61
If the good people of Massachusetts erect this Naked Brown shitbird, they will have erected the leader they deserve.
If Naked Brown does get in, it's not a National Referendum on Obama's leadership.
If Naked Brown does get in, it is a smack in the face to Massachusetts Democrats.
If Naked Brown does get in, he's going to find it hard to keep that seat representing the sanest, most progressive state in this weird experiment we call America.
If Naked Brown does get in, it's not a National Referendum on Obama's leadership.
If Naked Brown does get in, it is a smack in the face to Massachusetts Democrats.
If Naked Brown does get in, he's going to find it hard to keep that seat representing the sanest, most progressive state in this weird experiment we call America.
62
@38 and @54: In the entirety of Senate history, the filibuster has NEVER before been used to force the ruling party into a 60-vote coalition on EVERY issue. The last time the Dems were in the minority, they used it to stop some particularly egregious Bush appointees from getting confirmed. If anything, we'd be better off now if they HAD used it more frequently.
The Republican tactic of filibustering practically everything (thereby deadlocking government and making sure policies never change from their time in power -- basically pretending they didn't lose the last election) is a NEW phenomenon. So if Obama started twisting/breaking a few arms (like he should) to get things back to the presumption of majority rule that has always been the default, it would in no way be hypocrisy or abuse of office.
The Republican tactic of filibustering practically everything (thereby deadlocking government and making sure policies never change from their time in power -- basically pretending they didn't lose the last election) is a NEW phenomenon. So if Obama started twisting/breaking a few arms (like he should) to get things back to the presumption of majority rule that has always been the default, it would in no way be hypocrisy or abuse of office.
63
"Tomorrow in Massachusetts, the Democrats are set to suffer a stunning defeat in the race for the US Senate; a race that, if lost, will largely be because of lack of enthusiasm by the party base for what a liberal agenda actually looks like when it is forced to abandon its fantasies and instead confront the actual problems our country faces and deal with them using the political process as it exists."
Yup
Yup
64
Aside from the fact of his racial background, Obama was always a conservative, faith-based politician, not terribly distinct from the "Blue Dog" Democrats some like to contrast him with, except that they tend to be white. Why would one expect anything different of him? Eugene Debs, he ain't.
66
Let's face it, if it kills the insane Senate cloture rule that allows 10 percent of the US population and their 40 US Senators to stop the Senate from doing business, it's all good.
People have had enough with Dems being wussy and the insanity of the Republic Party of No.
People have had enough with Dems being wussy and the insanity of the Republic Party of No.
67
People expected too much from Obama. All that dancing in the streets, that was so naive. There was not going to be any big change, just enough that maybe we can begin to fix things slowly. What voters need to understand is there are those who suck and those who suck even more. The ones who suck the most have been sucking the most long enough that they are firmly attached to the beast and there is no hope for them. That pretty much describes most Republicans in Congress. Just keep working to undermine them and get them out (including Lieberman & Nelson). Then maybe things will get better, but not great.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
NYC Man Ticketed for Not Riding in the Bike Lane by Jonathan Golob
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (68) RSS