Skip to main content

I've been away from my computer quite a bit recently - that's what moving your own furniture into a Manhattan apartment will do to you - but upon catching up on the news tonight, I've become convinced that the blogosphere will always let perfect be the enemy of good...or even great. Yes, it's true that Barack Obama's positioning towards the center in preparation for the general election pisses a good deal of us off. Whether it has been his unjustified remarks about FISA or Supreme Court decisions (both of which relate to constitutional law, something that he ought to know a thing or two about) or his willingness to throw anyone who goes off-message under the bus, so to speak (such as MoveOn or Wesley Clark), Obama has tacked much further from his primary positions than many of us would care.

That being said, I'm really sick and tired of people - particularly prominent bloggers who should know better - bitching and moaning about Obama's imperfections as a general election candidate.


The answer's simple: nobody's perfect. I challenge any of you to find a 'progressive' or 'liberal' politician who would be perfect to you.

Russ Feingold may have been the lone voice standing up to the first Patriot Act, but he voted for the confirmations of John Ashcroft and John Roberts.

Paul Wellstone was a strong liberal voice in the Senate, yet he voted for DOMA and the Patriot Act.

Dennis Kucinich, aside from being on the political fringe, was a lifelong pro-lifer until he decided he wanted to run for president.

Chris Dodd may do quite well on constitutional matters, but he voted for the Iraqi war, the Patriot Act, and is too beholden to the big banks and the hedge funds which he oversees from the Senate Banking Committee.

Howard Dean may have generated the first Internet-powered campaign and spoke out forcefully against invading Iraq, but he was a centrist governor who reluctantly allowed for civil unions in Vermont (and only because by a court decision, he was forced to).

Sherrod Brown is widely liked for his populist pitch, but he voted for torture in 2006.

I won't even bother to recount how many times Jim Webb or Jon Tester have disappointed us, despite getting substantial support from the local netroots scene to help them score upset victories in their respective primaries.

The point is this - and the story is quite familiar already: the netroots become enamored with a particular candidate. Said candidate does something contrary to what conventional wisdom as dictated by a small coterie of prominent bloggers agrees with. Netroots becomes angry, throws up hands in the air, pounds keyboards angrily, fills up pixels with frustration, and does very little to influence the debate. I agree with Booman that no one takes progressives seriously because...well, there isn't such a thing as a progressive. Or at least that's what many who hold candidate purity above winning with a candidate who broadly shares your views would have you believe.

While Obama's recent moves are causes for concern, they don't change the fact that he is substantially better positioned to not only win the presidency, but to be able to get progressive policies enacted - whether it's expanding health care availability to the entire population, getting us out of Iraq, protecting our civil liberties, or finding alternative sources of energy to help us ease our dependence on oil and other polluting fossil fuels. If the netroots and other activists on the left continue to get hung up on every little last 'mistake' Obama makes (and there have been mistakes; I sent an email to the Obama campaign requesting that they return my donations and that I would not be contributing any more volunteer hours after his capitulation on FISA), then it doesn't do anything to help us win more - and it makes the netroots' influence on the debate even less than it already is on a marginal level.

In short, grow the hell up. If you can't get over being disappointed by your candidate in politics...well, you're going to be disappointed virtually all the time.

Originally posted to PsiFighter37 on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 11:15 PM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (483+ / 3-)
    Recommended by:
    Louise, Kitty, fladem, Superskepticalman, Ed in Montana, MichaelPH, SpyralPegacyon, DeminNewJ, sophie, Trix, Bailey, Sean Robertson, fcvaguy, Ray Radlein, Peace JD, nolalily, melo, GOTV, askew, Oregon Bear, oxman, Christin, Turtle Bay, Superribbie, 2pt5cats, obietom, droy20, mem from somerville, RunawayRose, jkennerl, Robespierrette, Yoshimi, RAST, herodotus, kpardue, Jay C, ablington, Midwest Meg, bawbie, eeff, iconoclastic cat, Mumon, Don MacDonald, bethcf4p, object16, bam bam, nanoboy, Lexicon, rasbobbo, housesella, Gustogirl, concernedamerican, cardinal, Mariposa, Dazy, anotherCt Dem, nyceve, understandinglife, mellowinman, jiffykeen, lwisne, IndigoBlues2, otto, LeftofArizona, peraspera, skertso, Boston to Salem, juslikagrzly, turneresq, itskevin, oceanview, Terre, bustacap, Yomberto, vogue500, dmsilev, terence, wader, DemocracyLover in NYC, iowabosox, mayan, Dube, Getreal1246, psnyder, nancelot, Urizen, wordene, BmoreMD, laderrick, TiaRachel, madame defarge, lezlie, ccr4nine, joemcginnissjr, Bulldawg, NYFM, niteskolar, joan reports, attydave, defluxion10, mcfly, papercut, onemadson, Pennsylvanian, Anna Luc, TheJohnny, Oaktown Girl, bwintx, JohnGor0, djtyg, randallt, KayCeSF, Vicky, CanYouBeAngryAndStillDream, SanDiegoDem, FenderT206, valadon, homogenius, eve, xndem, bibble, Timroff, jim bow, Hyuga, decitect, lalo456987, gnutpnut, Karma for All, Harkov311, kingubu, DianeNYS, Nadnerb in NC, enough, lilypew, africa, JanetT in MD, mjd in florida, BCO gal, Dave from Oregon, Luetta, citizenx, Markydeee, Brooke In Seattle, devadatta, boofdah, FrostyKotex, bleeding blue, cfk, hws, doberg, aaraujo, LABobsterofAnaheim, Inland, Fury, jmonch, miqewalsh, sunbro, bjedward, exmearden, Island Expat, LittleBit, sundancekid11, CSPAN Junkie, CWalter, Rosemary, dem4evr, leftynyc, sodalis, loggersbrat, Pluto, bookwoman, bluestateonian, ZinZen, Indiana Bob, tomzultant, Land of Enchantment, Sister Havana, StarkyLuv, begone, mselite, Mother Mags, LongTom, Uthaclena, ThaliaR, surferal, Audio Guy, occams hatchet, fbihop, highfive, virgomusic, BlueInARedState, mr crabby, rl en france, Prognosticator, desertjedi, Wary, tecampbell, A Siegel, dedmonds, nilocjin, Libby Shaw, Crashing Vor, LibChicAZ, real world chick, JVolvo, plf515, bleeding heart, Preston S, sscott1958, soccergrandmom, doinaheckuvanutjob, MBNYC, llbear, DemocraticLuntz, fezzik, va dare, ethanthej, djalix976, lynneinfla, lieblingskartoffel, kurious, Granny Doc, dochackenbush, Lurtz, slksfca, illusionmajik, AndrewOG, Grannus, Aaa T Tudeattack, Batbird, GoldnI, Terlis, Mike McL, Ken in MN, dotsright, Cronesense, Wanda517, RichardWoodcockII, dmh44, FWIW, Kathie McCrimmon, godislove, LV Pol Girl, dallasdave, yoduuuh do or do not, Wino, edsbrooklyn, LillithMc, Mary Mike, Duccio, kath25, profmom, operculum, silent no more, rkelley25, malharden, 99 Percent Pure, BobTrips, brentmack, Singing Lizard, vbdietz, BaritoneWoman, sabershadow, Moderation, Bridge Master, uciguy30, slowheels, LWelsch, Puffin, daybreaker, Darius Noir, LoLoLaLa, roycej, chicago minx, VA Breeze, Patricia Bruner, alkalinesky, Dem in the heart of Texas, DraftChickenHawks, oolali, dotster, brklyngrl, nycwahoodem, OleHippieChick, Art Tric, fromdabak, bythesea, brooklynbadboy, binkaroni, Mannabass, Pragmaticus, OWCH, sandav, royce, Haplogroup V, evora, icebergslim, wiretapp, Jeff Y, tkinsley, bflaff, envwq, noddem, KttG, JeremiahTheMessiah, JedReport, cottonmouthblog, kempsternyc, LCA, Abra Crabcakeya, luckylizard, TreeFrog, Progressive Traditionalist, Karl Rover, chauie, TKH, dont think, newton123, palantir, HoosierDeb, dmhlt 66, dzog, Diogenes2008, ibinreno, o really, maggiejean, Sun dog, McGahee220, beatpanda, cybrestrike, imgstacke, Mr Tentacle, rudewarrior, rsmpdx, txvoodoo, BoiseBlue, Kids For Edwards, Dmuse, Number5, dijo, eroded47095, cantelow, DemocraticOz, Eirene, ScientistSteve, RossBleakney, jodygirl, XerTeacher, Namtrix, Omo Plata, Last Years Man, shunpike, saintsaetia, zackamac, StuckBetweenStations, ahania, unspeakable, oak510, jlkenney, tatertots, zbbrox, ElizabethRegina1558, Beekeeper, mama hearts obama, The Great Gatsby, AvoMonster, Ivey476, Angry Mouse, Aqualad08, TheOpinionGuy, verily, heliosfootball, OReillysNightmare, soms, chinchin, lastman, obscuresportsquarterly, bearcatinNY, paintitblue, dotalbon, exregis, IDrankWhat, mikeplugh, sea2008, RadioGirl, 1 20 2009, ElizabethAM, PalGirl2008, FORUS50, RoCali, 57andFemale, Donise, Yougottahavehope, Katie71, ArthurPoet, louisev, fernan47, ayjaymay, EmmaKY, mertmh, Lord Sphere, loralei, maxxdogg, myelinate, Livvy5, DargInMS, TaryninCA, Rian Fike, Wisteacher, TenthMuse, chin075, collardgreens, sophistry makes me tired, FeverDream, LogicaLizE, greenmt, Clyde the Cat, GenXProgress, Julia C, Lauren S, Apocalypse Please, Norbrook, ladygreenslippers, Bull Schmitt, PrincessPinkyPie, YellerDog, unertl, mikesbuddy, rb137, SeaTony, sovery, Queenie68, gallimaufry, foolknot, ArtSchmart, stegro, ch ch ch ch changes, Shannon S, roselr, Commoditize This, dammit girl, amk for obama, Green Bean, tanyainsacramento, MVgirl, abbaks, Indie Tarheel, on board 47, Obamacrat, nlhmd, That Anonymous Guy, citizen31, Ace Pair, LeanneB, kemetcc, Liberal Humanist, Onkel Trygve, Krate, XajaX, LadyParadox, mjbleo, fortuna, katienne, blueisis, RJP9999, Faith in Tomorrow, NurseReek, Colonial82, pinkomommy, JoanMar, batchick, collidaescope, iRobert, Druid800, xhale, ThatDemGirl411, Scipione, Adesso, Lize in San Francisco, aggie98, boomonkey, Malum Prohibitum, jim283
    Hidden by:
    dhonig, Wilberforce, dark daze

    At some point, the gnashing of teeth that goes on in the blogosphere over these matters just becomes, as it was put in Macbeth, 'full of sound and fury, signifying nothing'.

    Gathering in a circular firing squad isn't going to do a damn thing to help us win in November - or improve Obama as a candidate.

  •  Welcome to NYC, PsiFighter (16+ / 0-)

    Watch out for the sewer alligators.


  •  New to me about Dean (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ray Radlein

    The court decision...gotta link?

  •  Agreed. (5+ / 0-)

    The point is this - and the story is quite familiar already: the netroots become enamored with a particular candidate. Said candidate does something contrary to what conventional wisdom as dictated by a small coterie of prominent bloggers agrees with. Netroots becomes angry, throws up hands in the air, pounds keyboards angrily, fills up pixels with frustration, and does very little to influence the debate.

    But I do think, as I said in another diary, that all of this sound and fury does signify a little something: that the netroots are a constituency that comes with its own demands. Basically? All of the outcry means Obama and the nitwits in Congress can't miss the fact that many of us are displeased.

    If you're a total cynic, you might even wonder if he's happy to lay down a Sistah Souljah on our asses. I think we're all a little angry that the Republican base is so catered to while we're so maligned. I can understand that anger, definitely, and even posit theories about why that's so—but it's all besides the point concerning your diary here.

    I guess what I'm trying to say is: let people rant, as it might amount to something worthwhile yet, and most of us will be pulling the proper lever come November, I'm pretty sure.

    •  It's a waste of time (9+ / 0-)

      It makes me cringe when I see a blog with thoughtful writers like Open Left get all tied up in knots over what Obama does. I know that Bowers and Stoller intended to have the blog have a more ideological focus, but I really don't see how they contribute more to the debate by focusing on Obama's faults. Furthermore, it's not helped when Stoller is effectively blinded from making anything remotely resembling an impartial statement when it comes to Wes Clark.

      Yes, the netroots is a constituency, but it has only proven its effectiveness at the primary level - and even then, it is almost always local blogs who help take the lead (My Left Nutmeg in the Lieberman-Lamont race; Raising Kaine in the Webb-Miller primary). National blogs have little to no effect on political outcomes, despite their exponential increase in readership.

      •  When I Was Growing Up in the '60's (15+ / 0-)

        the implicit assumption that I got from my parent's generation regarding politics - but especially Presidential politics - was that the center was the preferred place for our leader to be, because they were suppose to represent all Americans, not just one constituency.

        Of course, in hindsight, that's one of the popular American myths such as Young Mr. Washington being unable to tell a lie... but, there is an element of truth there. Like it or not, the President is supposed to represent us all. Even those jerks down the street from me.

        We're probably more trigger-wired and impatient than we might ordinarily be because of the lawless tyranny of the last eight years, so "Centrist" is still pretty conservative.

        But, 'eyes on the prize,' and all that. I do think that Obama will be a President with whom we can work, and if we don't get complacent, we can keep pushing things in a Progressive direction. But, we've got to get him elected, first.

        Hence, another contribution tonight, competing with the food and gas budget...

        "You measure a democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -Abbie Hoffman

        by Uthaclena on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 12:04:45 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Obama is a Progressive. (2+ / 3-)
          Recommended by:
          Kitty, Vicky
          Hidden by:
          MadRuth, Osiris, Prison4Bushco

          Of course how would I know.  I am only in a Progressive group in Illinois that Obama met with many times and worked on everything we asked.

          But I guess people here know better because TalkCrap, or BigDickDem say he is a centerist.

          I am really getting sick of labels and this site is now in the McCain camp.

          Enjoy eight years of McCain, dumbasses.

        •  I think the media being SO DISHONEST (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          TracieLynn, Uthaclena, Libby Shaw, slksfca

          has everyone really rattled.  I know it is my biggest concern and what in the hell am I doing up at 3:15.  It's time to go to sleep for God's sake.

          •  And giving them what they want (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            - Wes Clark's head on a platter - will only encourage them.  These media hissy fits do not spontaneously erupt, they are planned and coordinated.  Instead of knuckling under every time they do it, maybe we should fight back.  Wes Clark is good at this, that's why they have to neutralize him.

            "There are no happy endings in the Bush Administration". - Randall L. Tobias

            by MadRuth on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 04:26:10 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  The "center" is way right. (3+ / 0-)

          The rethuglicans have been pushing the center right for decades now through co-optive media narrative, while the left has been playing catch-up and feeling like they've had to swing right themselves to get elected.

          And this country is getting exactly what it deserves for it.


          Failing economy

          Failing education system

          Failing infrastructure

          Greater economic disparity

          The list can go on and on. The GOP machine has been grinding the middle class down and the democrats have been playing along in an effort to appear "Centrist"

          When do you suppose that should actually start to change? I mean, when do you all think progressive candidates should start standing by their beliefs and principals all the way through elections?

          Perhaps when one has a true grass roots progressive campaign on the march?

          •  As Everyone Knew Until FISA (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Pescadero Bill

            Everyone on DKos knew that "the center" was just rightwing code for "further right". Until Obama lurched further right with his FISA reversal, after the primaries were safely over, when all these DKosers started calling it "the center". Just like Republicans when they didn't care what they sacrificed to win.

            "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

            by DocGonzo on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 09:24:59 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  My understanding is that what is considered (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Pescadero Bill

            centrist in USA now is considered pretty far right by most Europeans. When i take a look at voting records of those pols now called "moderates" , which i assume means the same as "centrist" , I see right wingnuts.Not good. Not a millionaire , not greedy , not a suckup , so really not good at all for me or my family.

            •  Americans for decades now have been (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Abra Crabcakeya

              lied to, hoodwinked, suckered and overwhelmed with right-wing spin into believing the ruling elite's dogma, which -- as is coming to light now -- is not good for anyone's family but their own. One thing the right has been good at is taking advantage of the dumbed-down gullible American.

              As a 'for instance' their favorite topic of "this is so obvious" - the "free market", is in reality a system that works in favor of those with the most money and influence and in which most of the rest of us will be economically trampled with very little say in the matter. It will ultimately lead to the average person having a very little chance for a decent life and more and more so with every passing generation.

              It so pisses me off that they go unchallenged every time they blurt their free market bullshit.

              And as if on cue, I just got my Tomgramvery much related to the topic of American suckers.

              We can't let it stand anymore or the American way of life will be destroyed. And if that means taking it to Obama every once in a while to try and fight back against a strong media current that tends to push the elitist/GOP POV, so be it.

              He, more then anyone else, must challenge the status quo.

        •  Eisenhower, LBJ, Nixon (0+ / 0-)

          That 1960s conventional wisdom you just cited gave us Eisenhower, Johnson and Nixon (and Ford).

          Congratulations. You just gave us Vietnam, courtesy of "after the election" Obama.

          The rest of us learned something from the 1960s. And it wasn't "trust them to win, then trust them to listen after they don't need you". Extra credit in the 2000s.

          "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

          by DocGonzo on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 09:22:25 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Uthaclena , i think you are probably right , (0+ / 0-)

          although my own preference wuld be for the country to shift so far to the left I've never heard anyone holding national office speaking from over there.
          You are , I hate to say it , probably right.And even the wingnut bible thumping crazies do have a right to live , even if I'm not really in favor of that.  

      •  Sums up... (0+ / 0-)

        my thoughts exactly. Only after I rec'd this post did I realize that you were the diarist.

        It makes me cringe as well but maybe we need to realize that blogs will always be places to rant.

        I know where you're coming from but telling people to grow up just won't work in the blogosphere. We are forever destined to listen to every single thing that bothers a person about their candidate as if somehow ranting about it is an effective tool for political change.

        I'm sorry but I can no longer support our candidate based on the decisions he had made. As a result, I'm going to vote for...oh, nevermind!

        It would be nice if we could acknowledge our differences with the candidate's position without every single "dissenter" choking the blogosphere with their rant, I mean insights.

        "Once you go Barack, you never go back!"

        by desertjedi on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:11:46 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  All Hail the Great Leader (0+ / 0-)

        No, we can't focus on Obama's faults. Public discussion is for cheerleading. Yay, we're finally winning! Don't screw it up by pointing out how that's making us lose anyway. You might distract the quarterback from throwing to the wrong receiver. And though that might stop us losing the game, it would make our heroic quarterback look bad. Even if he is throwing the wrong way.

        Because we're cheerleaders. All we care about is cheering the hero.

        "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

        by DocGonzo on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 09:19:15 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  The Rethuglican base? (8+ / 0-)

      I think we're all a little angry that the Republican base is so catered to while we're so maligned.

      That's because their base punishes them when they don't tow the line, regardless of any bullshit excuses that might be proffered.

      Put another way:

      Mom:  "Now Timmy, you promised to clean up your room if I bought you that new toy you wanted."

      Timmy: "I got my toy.  Fuck you."

      [repeat frequently]

      The unforgiving god of realism is rarely tempted from his mistress of Real-Politik by eloquent sacrifices at the alter of idealism.

      by Johnathan Ivan on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 12:24:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Heh. (0+ / 0-)

        You went there. I didn't.

        I've been pretty vocal to all my friends and colleagues that I'm voting Democratic this year for one reason: SCOTUS. After that, we'll see.

        And, yes, this is coming from a registered Democrat.

        •  After the Presidential election.. I'm hoping (5+ / 0-)

          we can focus at the local level (state) and FORCE our representatives to fight for us by the use of primaries.

          A few successes and the rest should fall into line.  After all, most are cowards.

          The unforgiving god of realism is rarely tempted from his mistress of Real-Politik by eloquent sacrifices at the alter of idealism.

          by Johnathan Ivan on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 12:40:46 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'll give that to the rethuglicans (0+ / 0-)

            like bullies in the locker room, they towel-whipped the dems around for decades and got just about everything they wanted.

            While the Dems were forced to hide in basement meeting rooms for their committees.


            And even now our dem leadership continues, even though they have the numbers, to shriek and run from every little crack of a towel.

  •  Dean was a fighter, not an ideologue (12+ / 0-)

    I was one of his fans in 2004, not because I gave a damn about his positions. I didn't agree with half of what he said.

    I supported him because he fought.

    Howard Dean Will Fuck Your Shit Up (Redux):
    The Rude Pundit's said it before and he'll say it again: Howard Dean will fuck your shit up. Stand that motherfucker up at the gates of hell. Let that son of a bitch loose in the dainty Democratic china shop and let's break some fuckin' dishes. Howard Dean knows the score, man; he knows that the faithful, those who actually believe that the fight is not the path to surrender, want a spokesperson who's willing to pick up the unpinned grenade that just landed near him and shove it up the ass of the enemy who tossed it. Goddamn, it would have been magnificent to have seen him debate the President. On stage, Bush would have been begging for the privilege to lick the sweat off Dean's balls.

    Challenged on the Today show yesterday by Matt "Behold My Stubbly Mane That Indicates I Am a Grown-Up" Lauer, Dean picked up Lauer, slammed him on the faux coffee table and whispered, calmly, in Lauer's ear that Democrats are tired of being the bottoms of the political fuck machine. He said, "They have the agenda of the conservative Christians...the Republicans don't include people. Look, they are outside the mainstream." And Dean wasn't afraid to invoke truly inclusive Democratic ideas: "They have used words like quota to try to separate black from white Americans. They did scapegoat gay Americans by putting an anti-gay amendment on it--in 11 states where gay marriage is already against the law. And they are attacking immigrants. Two--two Republican congressmen, Jim Sensenbrenner and Tom Tancredo, have incredible anti-immigrant legislation. This is not the way America needs to be." Calling out motherfuckers for fucking their mothers is as brutally truthful as politics gets.

    Gephardt, Daschle, Gore, Kerry, Reid -- they're all spineless wonders united in their fear of offending a Republican by fighting back.

    Will Barack Obama be another spineless wonder?

    Spineless. Blue. Slow. Leaves trail of slime. Hit it with something - if it doesn't hit back, it's a Democrat. -- Bucky looking at a slug in "Get Fuzzy"

    by Lurtz on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 11:28:17 PM PDT

    •  Yeah, he was a fighter (12+ / 0-)

      But being a fighter alone doesn't do you much good unless you win.

      •  That's my point - our 'winners' are Losers (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Peace JD, Vicky, vacantlook, blueoasis, Uberbah

        Capital-L Losers.

        Let's support candidates that actually put in some effort for once.

        Spineless. Blue. Slow. Leaves trail of slime. Hit it with something - if it doesn't hit back, it's a Democrat. -- Bucky looking at a slug in "Get Fuzzy"

        by Lurtz on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 11:37:51 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Yery true... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        and thanks for your diary. I was thinking about all the times we have been disappointed when other heroes have  not done what we wanted, but I was too lazy to put the list together like you did. We need to remember that even our greatest presidents screwed up from time to time, and that Obama warned us he wasn't perfect and was bound to disappoint at some point.

        Of course you can always go with Nader, he never compromises.    

      •  He Won (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DavidW in SF, Lurtz

        Dean's DNC took over the Congress in 2006, an unprecedented reversal.

        It's about to increase that majority control. With a trifecta power monopoly.

        Dean started all that off by winning the DNC Chair itself.

        Which part of that isn't "winning"?

        "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

        by DocGonzo on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 09:27:23 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Exactly (13+ / 0-)

      I knew Dean was a centrist in 04 and I knew if he were elected he would piss a lot of his supporters off with his policies (I was still an early and staunch supporter nonetheless and I knew what to expect). Dean and Obama share the same experience of supporters projecting their desires for a progressive hero onto both of them, when neither really is.

      Likewise, I knew Obama was just as middle-of-the-road and non-confrontational as most of the current crop of prominent Dems when he entered the race. I have never had any illusions that he is going to be a great progressive fighter. And yes, I will vote for him anyway.

      So my disappointment with Obama and my criticism of some of his recent positions does not come from having "deluded" myself about who he is. It comes from knowing what this country needs and seeing what it's not going to get, no matter who wins. And considering where this country is right now, that's a scary prospect.

      Of course Obama will be better than McCain. I don't think you are going to find more than a handful of people currently criticizing him that would argue against voting for the man. But I'm not going to temper my criticism one bit. He needs to win, yes, but he also needs to be pushed into doing what needs to be done.

      "Don't Piss Down My Back And Tell Me It's Raining"

      by Helzapoppin on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 11:40:07 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  To everything there is a season... (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Vicky, Lurtz, geejay, PixyStyx

        Obama has been fighting the entire time.  Now, he's compromising, because that's how you win elections in the four months before the election, and he's going to win.  

        For years I've heard on Dkos, "Wait, we have to win the Presidency and have a senate majority before __________ can happen!"  Now that we're almost there we're suddenly going Veruca Salt.

        It's just six more months people.  We've waited eight long horrible years.  Be patient.

      •  Summed it up nicely. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DavidW in SF, Lurtz

        And there's nothing wrong with Kos trying to use whatever influence he has to get the attention of the Obama campaign and to get it to pay a little more attention to what he - being a pretty decent progressive spokesperson - has to say. Good for him for using his spotlight for our cause.

        And I think he's spot on with the inference that many in the grassroots are indeed getting a little peeved at some of the Obama positions as of late. Better we start airing our grievances now rather then sit back with a fake smile while Obama reacts to media driven false centrism.

    •  The pissing parade on Gore needs to stop. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      churchylafemme, Vicky, doglove, Lurtz

      Gore was as much a fighter as Dean. In fact, they are good friends and apparently draw inspiration from each other.

      Gore was out there trying to stop the fucking war:

      Gore's speech against the war, 9/23/2002

      Former Vice President Al Gore
      Iraq and the War on Terrorism

      September 23, 2002

      Prepared Remarks

      "If Saddam Hussein does not present an imminent threat, then is it justifiable for the Administration to be seeking by every means to precipitate a confrontation, to find a cause for war, and to attack?"
      "I believe we should focus our efforts first and foremost against those who attacked us on September 11th and have thus far gotten away with it. "

      "the coalition assembled in 1991 paid all of the significant costs of the war, while this time, the American taxpayers will be asked to shoulder hundreds of billions of dollars in costs on our own."


      October 3, 2002 (October 21, 2002 issue)
      Al Gore, democrat
      Eric Alterman

      But he sure galvanized Tom Daschle and other Democrats to face up to a frightening juggernaut for war they would have preferred to duck for the sake of re-election. Naderites take note. It was not "smart" in the Washington sense. It was not strategic. But damn it, it was brave. The victim of a stolen presidency demonstrated why democracy matters.


      Hardball College Tour: Al Gore

      Dec. 11, 9 p.m. ET Lehman College, The City University of New York
      Updated: 3:25 a.m. CT Nov 26, 2002

      MATTHEWS: But you would have voted against it.

      GORE: I would have voted against that resolution. I would have voted against it.


      See also:
      Gore's Other Global Warning: Iraq War
      Neck Deep Secret: Gore Was Right
      Al Gore endorses Howard Dean

      How DARE you call him spineless?

      He was out there against warrantless wiretaps?

      How DARE you call him spineless?

      He's fighting the assholes like the big oil and other denier that want to pollute the planet until it's screwed beyond repair. He's helped raise the political will to act on global warming and has been taken body blows in order give cover for politicians to take positions to reverse global warming.

      How DARE you call him spineless?

      Please consider helping retire Gilda Reed(D-LA-01)'s campaign debt by contributing here. Thanks!

      by NeuvoLiberal on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:40:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And, Gore even endorsed Dean (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DavidW in SF, churchylafemme, Lurtz

        the "establishment" idiots.

        Wy did he do that?

        Because of the war, because of Dean's ability to rebuild the Democratic party and for the good of the country:

        Al Gore endorses Howard Dean

        Gore also praised Dean's opposition to the U.S.-led war in Iraq. The former vice president called the Iraq war a "catastrophic mistake" by the Bush administration, a move that leaves the United States less effective in the nation's battle against terrorism. He said the United States is now in a "quagmire" in Iraq.

        "He was the only major candidate who made the correct judgment about the Iraq war," Gore said. "And he had the insight and the courage to say and do the right thing. And that's important because those judgments -- that basic common sense -- is what you want in a president."

        "Whether it is inspiring enthusiasm at the grassroots, and promising to remake the Democratic Party as a force for justice and progress and good in America, whether it is a domestic agenda that gets our nation back on track, or whether it is protecting us against terrorists and strengthening our nation in the world, I have come to the conclusion that one candidate clearly now stands out," Gore said.

        And contrary to the BS spin, Gore's endorsement gave Dean substantial gains in many polls.

        How dare you call him spineless?

        Please consider helping retire Gilda Reed(D-LA-01)'s campaign debt by contributing here. Thanks!

        by NeuvoLiberal on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:53:36 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  asdf (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          churchylafemme, Lurtz

          please read this phrase 'of the "establishment" idiots' instead as 'the anti-establishment candidate' (i.e. Dean.)

          Please consider helping retire Gilda Reed(D-LA-01)'s campaign debt by contributing here. Thanks!

          by NeuvoLiberal on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:22:42 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Gore circa 2000, who was a timid mouse (0+ / 0-)

            ...not the post-2000 Gore.

            Spineless. Blue. Slow. Leaves trail of slime. Hit it with something - if it doesn't hit back, it's a Democrat. -- Bucky looking at a slug in "Get Fuzzy"

            by Lurtz on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 10:14:00 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I disagree. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              churchylafemme, Lurtz

              Gore was hammered day in and day out by the media, RWNM, Naderwing, Drudge report. You name it. There were hardly anyone gettting his back (partly because the netroots hadn't emerged yet).

              Under those conditions, most people would become hesitant and perhaps a bit less confident than otherwise. I think you need to go through such an excruciating hammering to understand what Gore went through. Yet, he kept his composure enough to win an election (the popular vote and likely FL as well, except for the SCOTUS staying and stopping the recounts) that was handicapped to 15% deficit vs Bush when Gore began his campaign. Please see my notes here.

              Please consider helping retire Gilda Reed(D-LA-01)'s campaign debt by contributing here. Thanks!

              by NeuvoLiberal on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 11:40:49 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  also (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              you didn't make the distinction between the two periods and just slammed him as "spineless."

              Back in 2000, Gore was struggling to get his message across from clouds of smears they were lacing on him. Since 2002 when he realized that Bush was going on a dastardly path, he was the first and among the most consistent in taking on the Bush regime and to defend his country, the constitution, the planet and ideals/values.

              If you are going to insult and undermine a voice as important Gore's with ill-considered slams, then what incentive would Gore have to continue to stand up for important causes down the road. He might as well fold up the tent, forget about global warming, sit back and enjoy a cushy life the rest of the way.

              For that reason and in the interests of fairness and accuracy, we need to stop throwing people like Gore, Dean and Feingold under the bus as it suits our rhetorical needs. We need these guys and other similar voices to be around and making a difference.

              Please consider helping retire Gilda Reed(D-LA-01)'s campaign debt by contributing here. Thanks!

              by NeuvoLiberal on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 11:48:28 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  I'm not in complete agreeance (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Karma for All, soms

    but you've put forth your position so well that I'm definitely recommending your diary.

    Well put, psifighter.

    •  I don't expect people to be (8+ / 0-)

      But I think the blogosphere would be well-served spending its time on something it's better at - attacking Republicans - than on taking our own presidential nominee down a notch.

      •  I think both can be done... but in a (12+ / 0-)

        more productive way.

        We don't have to be unquestioning or undemanding of someone who is supposed to be heralding in a new brand of change in politics... but we don't have to be black/white/allornothing on the issue either.

        There is room to put Obama's feet to the fire while still supporting him and working for him as hard as ever to get him elected.

        The FISA vote has still not been resolved though so it's nothing to take the fire away from.

        There is only one candidate for president and every person here should be working hard for his election.  That's the bottom line and everyone should remember it regardless.

      •  On the other hand (6+ / 0-)

        Your title just adds fuel to the fire, to say the least.  Horrible title and I've actually reconsidered my recommend and removed it for that reason.

      •  They Should, They Won't (1+ / 1-)
        Recommended by:
        Hidden by:

        Wise words, but won't happen.

        This site will be the site of whiners.

        They want McCain too win so they can say, see, I told you so.

        You are dealing with five year olds.

      •  We're pushing Obama to stand tall (0+ / 0-)

        because he's painting himself another "man without principle" and "empty suit", and that will lose him the election. His kowtowing to the rightwing and adopting rightwing frames rather than standing for democratic (and Democratic) principles drains the juice right out of him and many of his supporters. He has demonstrated with his speech on race that he can talk with the country as adults about deep and divisive issues with eloquence, with principle, and that people will rise to the occasion.

        The ground has been prepared for a truly transformational election and historical epoch, and Obama seems determined to enter into it as weak as he possibly can be by ceding every inch to the right-wing. We can do better, and so can Obama. He'll take the easy way out if we let him. He has moved from a successful position of strength to pandering and retreating and selling out our most deeply held democratic principles. And he did it before June was even out.

        The country is screaming for change. 80% of the country says we're on the wrong track as a nation, voters are leaving the Republican Party in droves, Republicans can't get elected in solid Red States fer fuck's sake. They want honest and principled and resolute leadership. (I would guess that a pretty substantial portion of Bush's support is not due to policy but that he is perceived as "resolute". Funny, but people like that trait in a "leader".) So why the fuck is Obama pivoting to a position of "more of the same old vacant pandering bullshit"? That's not what the country wants, and that's not what will win him the election, and that's certainly not what will position him as a successful President. What happened to the strong and principled candidate of the primaries? He was pretty damned impressive.

        I want "change I can believe in" dammit, and so does the country. And you bet I'm going to push Obama to live up to it. So get used to it.

  •  In the realms of fighting (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vicky, Karma for All, lauramp, soms

    wonder how much of this is counterpunching and how much is just rope-a-dope (diminishing returns would suggest that if the same controversy comes up later, it would have less of an effect)

    Some people seriously need to chill out for a day or so. Relax, buy some fireworks, safely use them, and eat BBQ. A few days should put you in a good spot for namedropping Obama to friends at the 4th of July in an effective way.

    "Our country right or wrong. When right, to be kept right; when wrong, to be put right" - Carl Schurz

    by RBH on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 11:38:18 PM PDT

    •  It's pretty simple (10+ / 0-)

      At least in the Clark case - the Obama campaign is very focused on messaging, and it wants to focus on policy positions, namely that John McCain doesn't know jack shit about the economy and knows quite a bit less about foreign policy than he makes it seem. By trivializing his service, it gets the campaign off-message and forces it to respond to something that it hadn't planned for.

      Really, it's that simple. And if Clark knows anything about politics...well, the reaction shouldn't have been much of a surprise. I fully agree with him, but it's not in congruence with how Obama runs his campaign. Tough luck.

      •  Yeah (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mjd in florida, soms

        idk if Clark gets to be in a message loop or anything. But soundbitewise.. dropping that was lousy.

        "Our country right or wrong. When right, to be kept right; when wrong, to be put right" - Carl Schurz

        by RBH on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 11:45:24 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  yes, it is simple, and you're missing it (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        TracieLynn, yuriwho

        McCain's entire campaign rests on his "maverick" image and supposedly being Mr. Experience.  McCain has neatly taken out the former on his own, through his flip flops and double talk.

        Clark was working on knocking out the latter, in a completely fact-based way that honors McCain's real sacrifices.

        But nope, we've got to leave that alone and run on "issues", which has been a losing formula (see: Gore and Kerry).

      •  I tend to think Clark knows a great deal about (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Vicky, antboy

        politics, and that Obama does too.  To me, the entire thing worked out perfectly.  Clark can take the heat, he's taken a lot worse than this...and I think he's doing so willingly.  Just my conjecture.

        •  exactly, that's why you have surrogates basically (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Vicky, Karma for All, Osiris

          The surrogate that is loosely attached to the campaign  goes after the other candidate's strong points aggressively, if he/she goes too far, the campaign distances itself. It'd be nice if the Obama folks had at least attempted to shift the frame a bit rather than accepting the right-wing's twisting of Clark's meaning. The media is not going to get it right, because they basically work for the other side.

          Honestly, Obama has had very few aggressive surrogates so far. It sounds like he discourages them (the "new politics"). Personally, I'd like to see more surrogates out there correcting the corporate media's smears and blunders and right-wing frames, rather than the usual Repug m.o. of smearing the other candidate. There's nothing conflicting about that and "new politics".

          •  I've been thinking it possible that Obama lets (0+ / 0-)

            the dust settle and asks Clark to take the VP spot...just entertaining the idea.  What do you think?  He lets the ideas Clark planted sink in, maybe Clark even comes out like next week or something and says his words were poorly chosen or some such thing just to cycle it back up in the news...then coverage of Clark's credentials again, and he's the VP nominee.  It would be an amazing coup d'etat.

            •  maybe. seems obama campaign would defend more tho (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Karma for All

              i have trouble imagining the obama camp would accept the ridiculous criticism thrown at clark right now if they are planning to bring him on. Clark may essentially be auditioning, and Obama then waits to see if the media do ever pivot to questioning McCain's use of p.o.w. status to explain his health care plan. If they do, Clark has proven his ability to change the conversation.

  •  Not enamored (4+ / 0-)

    I have never been enamored. I remain undecided.

    I am unaffiliated. I don't "just want to win." I'm not running for anything.

    I paid all my "lesser of evils" dues in 2004...with interest.

    I agree with Molly Ivins. When it comes to evaluating a candidate, there is his track record, and there is his track record. And then there is his track record. Obama's track record is nothing to get excited about, IMO. And I don't care what he says.

    So that leaves me with only what he does between now and November. When November comes, I'll review what he's done, and then I'll make my decision. There is a lot of time between now and then, but most rcently, he has not been earning any points with me.

  •  The point of this site... (21+ / 0-)

    has always been to bring along "more and better Democrats."  Better Democrats means pushing our leaders away from our Party's recent but painful history of spineless, finger-in-the-wind, play-it-safe non-leadership.  The follow on lesson has been that milquetoast behavior doesn't inspire anyone over time, and is a great way to lose elections.

    Spinelessness today is called having an "imperfection."  And calling spinelessness out is today apparently being a "Purity Troll."

    Well, the very best of this site has been about not just accepting our leadership's decisions but instead doing our best to lead the leadership toward doing the right thing.  No one during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq just said "aww heck, guess we just have a difference of opinion and we should let 'em do their's just an imperfection."  We knew they were wrong and we've kept saying so for 5 years now. Now we know Obama & Co. are wrong on FISA and related issues, and they need to keep hearing about it.

    No way we should just abandon the point of this site just because Obama has gone into play-it-safe spineless mode.

    •  New and better Democrats (5+ / 0-)

      I agree in principle, but in this Presidential election, the time for that has passed. We no longer have a choice. The primary is over and we have our candidate. It's Obama or fail, and whoever wins gets 4 loooong years. So we need to reconcile ourselves with that reality, and ask if attacking Obama hard from the left at this point really does him (or us) any favors.

      I don't think you can make a worthwhile argument that there is anything more important than Obama beating McCain, and to the extent that this is true, we need to do what we can to ensure that it happens.

      I really don't want to watch the next four years go down the crapper in order to send a message to the Democratic Party, even if so many of its members are crap. Especially when Obama looks like a cross between George Washington and JFK compared to most of them.  

      •  which is exactly why we're stuck with... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Sparhawk, TracieLynn, doglove

        ..."spineless, finger-in-the-wind, play-it-safe non-leadership."  Republicans never fuck with their base because their voters would rather see a Democrat in the office (to be defeated in the next election) rather than a shitty Republican.  Our "leadership" keeps egg timers so they don't forget to shit on us periodically.  Because they can count on the Democratic base to sit down, STFU, vote, and like it.

    •  If I could recommend this twice (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I would

    •  The larger goal has been for years to have a Dem (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Nadnerb in NC

      in the Presidency and a majority in Congress first.  This is what we've been waiting for.  On January 21st I will be right with you lobbying the hell out of these people to come through with what they've promised.  For now, we all need to relax a bit and let the politics play out.

      •  Re: (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DavidW in SF

        For now, we all need to relax a bit and let the politics play out.

        On a political blog?  Not bloody likely.  

        I called it: a summer of bitching about Obama caving and going right (even more so then I expected of him, or even what I would have expected from Hillary, for that matter) followed by countless SYFPH/Grow up diaries like this one.  

        Am I the only one who sees the disconnect here? It's a political blog.  It's where people bitch, talk and argue about politics.  It's not the frakking cheerleading section of the Democratic Party. It wasn't a cheerleading squad for Kerry and it isn't going to be one for Obama.  

        I fear Obama will discover something most of us have known for a long time--politicians are not the only fickle participants in the process.  And woe be it to any politician who takes the support of their base for granted.  Ask Hillary Clinton how that tactic worked out for her. And McCain -  alternately pissing off and pandering to the base.  Wonder how that's going to work out for him. The center isn't where DC thinks it is.  Too bad Obama doesn't see that.

        As for the diarist -  asking for your money back because of FISA and lecturing people to grow up? You might want to take a look in a mirror. I'm pissed at Obama too, but I'm not going to demand a refund (and I could use the cash) just because he's being a cowardly (cheerleader translation - "pragmatic") pandering, shortsighted jerk at this moment in time. IMO, of course.

        News Pundits - The Dopplerless weathermen of our time. Jon Stewart

        by mentaldebris on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 10:12:48 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  spinelessness is proven bad politics (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Being spineless and triangulating has been proven to lose elections over and over. How did we get stuck with this leadership? They're better than the alternative right now, but I was sort of hoping Obama would lead us out of this weak democrat meme. Maybe he will after elected, because the alternative is a McCain administration using fear and bluster to whip our current leaders back into spineless mode.

      •  That dang Gandhi. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        He was such a loser.

        To say nothing of Martin Luther King, Jr. What did he ever accomplish?

        •  Wow - MLK and Gandhi were spineless! (0+ / 0-)

          I never knew.  Here I thought that they used the method of non-violent resistance in support of indefatigable and strong principles, even in the face of firehoses, lynchings, machine guns, beatings, and imprisonment. I thought they stood strong for eternal principles. I guess I was wrong about that.

          Barack Obama disavowing Wes Clark because John McCain pouted is just like MLK marching in Selma and Gandhi standing up against the British Empire. Wow!

          You've. Got. To. Be. Kidding.

    •  It's the whining and hand-wringing, gnashing (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Vicky, PixyStyx

      of teeth, posturing and drawing of lines in the sand that is so frustrating. I am old enough to remember how President Carter got beat up on the left and the right for not leaving the White House during the Iran crisis. There were even comedy sketches on SNL about it.
      Now we have a man in the White House who spends all of his time at a ranch in Texas while our sons and daughters in uniform laguish away in Iraq and Afghanistan. We can register our concern to Senator Obama without cutting him off at the knees or acting like bad boyfriends by holding him emotional hostage.

  •  Perfection is a Straw Man (22+ / 0-)

    Nobody is arguing that candidates ought to be perfect.

    I think most progressives would like to see candidates that are good.

    A number of Obama's positions, most notably on FISA and the potential use of force against Iran are troubling not because they are imperfect, but because they are very bad.

    On the other hand, Obama is still less bad, arguably even on these issues, than McCain.

    Diaries such as this enact a ritualized shell game that progressives should be used to by now since we've seen it so many times before.  

    Move One:  An Appeal to Hard-Hearted Realism

    [N]obody's perfect. I challenge any of you to find a 'progressive' or 'liberal' politician who would be perfect to you.

    Move Two:  Promises of Ponies

    While Obama's recent moves are causes for concern, they don't change the fact that he is substantially better positioned to not only win the presidency, but to be able to get progressive policies enacted - whether it's expanding health care availability to the entire population, getting us out of Iraq, protecting our civil liberties, or finding alternative sources of energy to help us ease our dependence on oil and other polluting fossil fuels.

    There is, needless to say, a certain tension between these two rhetorics.

    And the clever thing about this diary is the way PsiFighter37 couches his promises 'graph:  Obama is "substantially better positioned to..," i.e. "he's less bad than McCain."  This is, of course, true. But it won't get you out of Iraq, give you health care, or restore your civil liberties.

    Nobody is disputing the fact that Obama is less bad than McCain.  On the other hand, it is truly foolish to see Obama as a defender of your civil liberties. He simply is not.  This is not purism, it's just a clear-eyed understanding of his stand on FISA.

    The real purists here are those who are demanding uncritical support for Obama in the name of a phony realism.

    And lesser evilism, while a necessary short-term tactic, especially after two terms of a president like Bush, is a suicidal strategy in the long run.

    This nicely summarizes what's wrong with American political life today. (Source)

    by GreenSooner on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 11:53:09 PM PDT

    •  Here here! (0+ / 0-)

      As I commented in the KO diary, blind uncritical obedience is the highest and most damning form of purity.  If anyone needs to grow up, it is this latter form of purity troll that thinks legitimate criticism should be stuffed in the name of "electoral success".  Hogwash.  If anything the flip-flop on FISA is the kind of thing that is gonna reduce Obama's electoral prospects and not because progressives are criticizing him for it.  Voters are gonna respond more to a strong stand on principle with a compelling argument rather than a waffly "move to the center" that is no such thing and has failed over and over and over again.  All that does is validate the stupid right wing frames in the media and minds of low information voters.  Those frames need to be attacked head on and pulverized, not reinforced.

    •  Respectfully disagree. (0+ / 0-)

      I sincerely believe Obama is going to become one of our greatest Constitutional champions.

  •  Obama won't fix all the problems on Earth? (8+ / 0-)

    Fuck it then. I'll vote for McCain. He will, at least be consistent in his problem fixing. It is the single thing he never flip-flops on.

    The plural of anecdote is not data.

    by bobinson on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 11:55:14 PM PDT

    •  Yes, its a bitter pill to swallow...Obama is not (7+ / 0-)

       PERFECT PRESIDENT will we ever go on?  how will we ever...get over ourselves.....I'm sick of it to tell you the truth.

       I've never seen so many dilettantes......geeze its 4 very short months to election day, and so many are wasting valuable time, when we should be working like we were 40 points behind.

       Today I read about a series of TV ads that are being put out by the Black Republicans that are the most racists ads to date. The I read about the NRA gearing up to come down hard and heavy with a campaign against Obama, and of course the new 'Swift Boat Book" is already out written by the same buy that trashed Kerry.....

      But hey, who needs all of these people when we can do a better job here at Kos.  Some of these people sound like they are about 16 years old and who knows maybe they are, but we better put a stop to this shit. We don't have the luxury of losing this time....if we do, it is no one's fault but our own...Welcome John McCain, welcome WWIII. That's the bottom line here folks.

  •  Good lord. (18+ / 0-)

    I just don't get all this hand-wringing about the hand-wringing.

    The netroots has ALWAYS been big on "heat of the moment" nonsense, always flipping out at the drop of a hat only to get back in the fold after they've calmed down.

    Obama's done some shit recently that deserves criticism. "Other politicians have done it, too" doesn't mean we can't yell about it, nor does the yelling mean we won't support him.

    The people screaming that Obama's dead to them and they'll never vote for him almost certainly were never going to vote for him anyway.

    I understand your point and the point of the many others who have said the same thing, but I just don't get this sort of meta.

    Let's all relax and see the obvious: people who are really pissed off lash out in unproductive ways, but when they cool down, reason returns.

    "Someone wants a knife fight; someone I'm lookin' at." --Master Shake

    by TheBlaz on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 11:55:34 PM PDT

  •  What about John Edwards? n/t (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    The modern news media draws half its power from coils placed around the spinning in Edward R. Murrow's grave.

    by aigeanta on Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 11:55:50 PM PDT

  •  Sure, I'll vote for Obama. (4+ / 0-)

    Like I said in another topic though, I don't trust him. If he does anything hypocritical and/or morally bankrupt, then I will protest him the way I do Bush. I hope that the rabid herd mentality around Obama's candidacy doesn't carry over to his presidency.

    I'm not thrilled about voting for Obama. My vote is a reluctant one. I still don't accept Obama as a genuine progressive. If he does great things, truly progressive things that is, while he's president then okay I'll accept him. If he goes for the Republican-lite route then I'll hold this site and the Democratic Party in contempt for the rest of my life.

    Obama already comes off as a John Kerry clone to me. The main difference is that Obama's public relations is much better and he has a higher chance of winning.

    Essentially I agree with Glen Greenwald. It's nice that Obama is better than McCain, but it's certainly not enough.

  •  Obama kind of brought this on himself (16+ / 0-)

    He claimed to be a different kind of candidate who was gonna change Washington and people actually believed him. I think some disappointment when he starts running a Gore/Kerryesque campain is allowed.

  •  when Obama is in office, (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    malharden, bflaff, soms

    I would bet a lot of money this site looks a lot then like it does now. There will be calls for primary challenges, third parties, etc. If the 2012 re-election looks like an easy match, these people will find a way to make it tough.

  •  Amen (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Prognosticator, soms

    Clark spent the last year ripping Obama.  So Obama has to defend him.  Yeah, OK.

    John McCain is qualifed, Wes.  Don't matter if he ordered someone to drop bombs, or whatever.  He is the Republican nominee.

    So either talk about the issues that Obama outshines McCain on or shut up.

    Obama has more to worry about then defending every moron that goes on TV and says stupid shit.

    •  Clark didn't say that McCain is not qualified (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      but that his military service isn't the only qualification -- because he knows that the Republicans are going to hit Obama hard on his lack of military background. With the economy in the dumper, all McCain's got is the security card, and they're going to pull out all the stops.

      Too many people are buying into the meme that Clark is disrespecting McCain's service, by pulling a single line out of context. We've had plenty of Presidents in the past who've never had military service, some of whom have had far more critical wars on their watch than the one that never needed to be fought in the first place, and they handled themselves admirably. The President isn't going to be setting battle plans anyway -- he'll be appointing generals to handle that sort of thing. I trust Obama's judgement far more than I do McCain's in selecting generals and advisors who'll tell him the truth, not just what he wants to hear.

      "Old soldiers never die -- they get young soldiers killed." -- Bill Maher

      by Cali Scribe on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 09:01:47 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Obama, Clark (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Karma for All, boofdah

    Debate is heathy. We don't have to disrespect one another. That said, has Obama not said 'I am not a perfect man' and asked us to 'hold me accountable.' I find Obama and Clark to have varying opinions and would hope they can still live with that. I agree with clark's statemant and haven't wavered on Barack.

  •  i expect my candidate to resemble my party's base (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TracieLynn, alivingston, Uberbah

    however.  i also expect some people here, at kos, to act like they are when they're not.

    re: obama, it is what it is.  what we're going to do about it?  who knows, but i sure as hell aren't going to pretend it ain't happenin.

    62169 - which apparently means A LOT.

    by jj24 on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 12:11:02 AM PDT

  •  OBAMA!!! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vicky, boofdah
  •  I disagree, the right wins when they toss (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lurtz, Uberbah, DSinIA

    their ideological purity at us and we think about how we need to consider their ideas in the debate. John McCain wins when someone at a town hall asks a politically biased and nasty question and he gives a non-answer then says "thanks for your question ya little jerk". I am tired of fighting for compromise. I want a candidate I can say is solid and is willing to differentiate between a swiftboat attack and a realistic opinion.

    If this is the way to a progressive I feel just like Chief Joseph did when he penned his surrender speech:

    "Tell General Howard I know his Heart. What He told me before I have in my heart. I am tired of fighting, Looking Glass is dead. too-Hul-hul-sote is dead. The old men are all dead. It is the young men who say yes or no. He who led on the young men is dead. It is cold and we have no blankets. The little children are freezing to death. My people, some of them have run away to the hills, and have no blankets, no food; no one knows where they are--perhpas freezing to death. I want to have time to look for my children and see how many of them I can find. Maybe I shall find them among the dead. Hear me, my chiefs. I am tired; my heart is sick and sad. From where the sun now stands I will fight no more forever."

    "lovely little thinker but a bugger when he's pissed"

    by yuriwho on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 12:12:11 AM PDT

  •  This Is Nothing New... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    eltee, leney, soms

    Hell, the level of invective here used to browbeat posters who dissented from supporting the S-Chip bill was, if anything, more strident.  If one dared to demur on the suject then, that person was automatically labeled as an opponent of universal health care, an enemy of children everywhere, and -- shudders and gasps -- a closet tobacco smoker!

    It doesn't matter that the S-Chip bill, as written, was simply a poorly conceived electoral gimmick which was intended more to embarrass the administration (an intrinsically worthwhile goal, I'll admit) than to solve any pressing medical crisis in our nation.  As a matter of fact, it had the potential to postpone the actual reformation of the institutions responsible for the very real health insurance crisis by projecting an assurance to the public that positive steps were being taken to address a systemic problem, which was of course pure horseshit.

    Well, all this bluster and outrage over the FISA bill has exactly the same feel to it.  The answer to this very real constitutional crisis is not to be found in any stopgap measures.  We all know that the way to make the Telecom companies accountable for their actions lies in separating them from their patrons in the government.  It is an institutional, rather than a legal, problem which must be addressed by systemic change, which begins with the political will and electoral mandate to effect such a change.

    No.  This outrage is not about the first or the fourth amendments.  It is about how a handful of activists can flex their muscle with the Party Establishment, especially now that it has changed hands.

    It is to be expected for humans to push the envelope whenever there's a new sheriff in town, and I'm not faulting people for doing it.  But what I do object to is all the sanctimonious rants about the FISA bill.  Yes it is bad legislation.  Yes it is dangerous legislation.  Yes it needs to go the way of the Alien And Sedition Acts....YES, YES, YES.

    But the way to do that once and for all is exactly the way Jefferson did it in 1801.  Get the electoral mandate to overturn the legislation, then overturn the legislation.

    See, no rant needed.

    I could see all this breastbeating and sackcloth if it appeared that we are doomed to permanent minority government.  But, alas, it is probably a much better investment to work toward November's election than it is to lobby the increasingly impotent Harry Reid or shame the increasingly isolated Mitch McConnell.

    So, then, we are left with the question about the FISA debate, Qui Bono?  Could it be the guys who might find themselves on some MSNBC or CNN panel of "experts"? Hmmm, I wonder.

  •  Maybe this is something to think about: (9+ / 0-)

    If we were all absolutely pie-eyed gobsmacked in love with every single thing my Senator Obama said and did, the far right could easily convince moderate Republicans and conservative Democrats that our Presidential candidate was too far to the left to be trusted.

    So, purity trolls: whack away.  Hate good and loud.  Do it everywhere.  Don't expect me to read you or heed you, though.  

    Possum for Congress Make Peace Possible. Jerry Northington.

    by llbear on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 12:20:07 AM PDT

    •  What makes you think that they won't do this (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TracieLynn, Janet Strange

      anyway, using any of a number of tried and proven methods? If anything has been proven these past few election cycles, it's that repudiating your base and pandering to the illusory center simply does not work. Swing voters aren't impressed at all and view it for what it is, pandering, and interpret it for what it means, weakness and lack of conviction. And your base ends up unenergized and disappointed. Non-conviction, pander-based politics doesn't work when the left does it. Only the right can pull it off, because they're much better at it.

      Sic transit gloria mundi - ancient Roman proverb

      by kovie on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 12:50:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  No, since O's very character is being impugned. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Vicky, Melchuck29

      O's taking moderate positions; in order to HURT him enough to change, the purists are accusing him of flip flopping and lying and being whatever.

      That sort of character assassination is being picked up by none other than Charles Krauthammer and the LAT who cite leftists as authority for Obama's lack of character.

      That doesn't attract independents.

      It's a people-powered movement of individuals. So just say it yourself and stop calling on Obama to be your puppet.

      by Inland on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 05:13:29 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  And not one Senator (6+ / 0-)

    Not one. Not Feingold. Not Wellstone. Not Kerry.

    Not even Ted Kennedy

    stood with the Congressional Black Caucus to challenge the Gore v. Bush "decision" in 2000. They were right there in the Senate, with still VP Gore presiding, and not ONE of them stood up.

    They should all be renounced and repudiated. And then primaried out.

    (snark...I think...)

    "If impeachment is off the table, so is democracy." -teacherken

    by offgrid on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 12:24:37 AM PDT

  •  Of course Obama is the best pick... (10+ / 0-)

    ...but don't expect me to forgive him or be happy about his Fisa vote.

    I'm sorry, this isn't trivial enough for me to have to "grow up". I take civil rights as a key issue and expect all politicians I support to respect and protect them.

    Will I vote for Obama? Of course I will. But pardon me if I don't shut up about basic constitutional law. Sheesh.

    -7.5 -7.28, What's a guy gotta do to get impeached around here?

    by Blueslide on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 12:33:49 AM PDT

  •  Excellent diary! (4+ / 0-)

    This has been on my mind and I've been thinking about writing it as my first diary; but I don't have the guts to go through with it. Thanks for having the courage to do it.

    You're not to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it or says it.---Malcolm X

    by Queenie68 on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 12:37:08 AM PDT

  •  Damn, you kick ass (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vicky, boofdah, DC Scott

    And I didn't know most of this, and I needed a boost.


  •  Huh?!? (13+ / 0-)

    So because they're not perfect we should just lay off of them? That's IT?!? This is the sum total of your advice? Just accept their inherent and unavoidable imperfections and SHFPH?!?

    Um, no. The inherent and unavoidable imperfections of human beings is precisely WHY you criticize them when they screw up, so that maybe they won't, um, screw up in quite the same way again. Or at least know that not everyone's ok with it, or didn't notice it. Sure, one should always use one's own judgement and not overreact, and make sure that one is sure that they did in fact screw up. But to keep silent when people screw up--especially people who might be our next president--is to insult the very meaning of what Democracy is all about.

    I'm with Thomas Paine & Co. On this. Bring on da pie fights, bring on da noise. We are, after all, Democrats, not Republisheep. It's what we do, and why we're called Democrats.

    Sheesh, the panic attacks we collectively go through when disagreements emerge.

    Now go have a beer and just relax. Having moved and helped friends move into Manhattan apartments years ago, I know from firsthand experience that it can do stuff to one's head.


    Sic transit gloria mundi - ancient Roman proverb

    by kovie on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 12:42:12 AM PDT

  •  I'm confused by your diary (8+ / 0-)

    If the netroots and other activists on the left continue to get hung up on every little last 'mistake' Obama makes (and there have been mistakes; I sent an email to the Obama campaign requesting that they return my donations and that I would not be contributing any more volunteer hours after his capitulation on FISA), then it doesn't do anything to help us win more - and it makes the netroots' influence on the debate even less than it already is on a marginal level.

    Who is the straw man you are complaining about if your response to Obama's FISA capitulation is acceptable in your own eyes? Or, are you condemning your own actions?

    It's not that I disagree with what you did in response to the FISA position (i.e., holding Obama's feet to the fire and letting him know it.) I just don't understand what you're complaining about.

    I'm definitely voting for Obama in November. I voted for him in the California Primary after my candidate (Edwards) dropped out. I had incredibly high hopes for Obama based on his stated stances on issues I care deeply about. He has now reversed (unnecessarily) those stances. This was especially disillusioning for me on FISA, as it hits Fourth Amendment and Rule of Law issues in a serious way, and accrues further power to an out-of-control executive. Obama's endorsement of John Barrow was insult to injury.

    I've sent contributions to any number of progressive candidates who will hold Obama's feet to the fire, and who will displace BushDogs or Republicans. I'm holding off sending Obama any more money until he demonstrates he's a candidate worth investing in.  I belive he is capable of being a great President, but only if we show him tough love.

    I expect that he'll have to make some stands that I'm not happy about (paying obeisance to AIPAC, watered-down healthcare proposal, etc.) But these are things that have no practical effect until such a time as he can act on them, which leaves him much flexibility later versus current rhetoric. I can live with that. However, selling out the Bill of Rights with his FISA vote is not something that can easily be undone, and in the wake of the USA PATRIOT Act, MCA, etc. that strip away our Constitutional rights, I'm actually horrified that Obama would pander with his vote on something so essential and irreversible. This has undercut my support for him drastically. He can repair that breach, but he needs to take positive action to do so.  I'm hearing a lot of similar voices on this matter here.

    And as sure as I feel that Obama will win in November, it's no guarantee. (And he's not helping matters any by capitulating again and again to the Right Wing. After all, it worked so well for John Kerry.) And I wouldn't even trade our basic rights away if I were dead certain it would guarantee us a win. He needs to change his stance and fight against the FISA bill, and I reserve my right to push him to do so.

    •  I was an Edward's supporter too (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      but I really like Barack.....everything except his FISA stance and his statement on Clark's comments. He's been pretty much spot on with everything else which is pretty impressive in my book.

      I will vote for him and will urge all my friends to vote for him this fall. But I will call "a spade a spade" when I see it (pardon the racial ref). I want him to be a president who says what he thinks and does what he means, regardless of what the mediocrasy spews forth on any given day.

      I grow tired of follow the polls, follow the media mentality. We need conviction of belief to rule the day, and I'm not talking about religion. I'm talking about common sense by someone with a broad knowledge of the world, law, politics, science and children.

      "lovely little thinker but a bugger when he's pissed"

      by yuriwho on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 01:43:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Obama's words: (6+ / 0-)

    dissent does not make one unpatriotic

    Dissent regarding Obama and his policies does not make one a traitor when it comes to being a Democrat and progressive.  Yet too often it results in people being labeled as trolls or insulting replies.

    Perhaps his hard core adherents at this site should take his words to heart.

  •  So just grow the hell up (8+ / 0-)

    and support Obama no matter what he says or does, goddamit!

    I'm in awe of the profundity of the diarist's spiel.

    You've got to vote for someone. It's a shame, but it's got to be done.--Whoopi Goldberg

    by Libertaria on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 01:09:29 AM PDT

  •  great (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sparhawk, penguins4peace, DC Scott

    We should all be a bunch of fucking sheep and not criticize a candidate when some of us feel he deserves it. Newsflash Psi, he's a big boy and pretty damn sharp and I think he can handle a little heat from the left. So save the insulting lecture.

    •  As a matter of fact, (0+ / 0-)

      if he's playing chess, as many here claim, then he has taken into consideration the uproar that would be coming from many Democrats when he took these steps.  So, I wouldn't want to mess up his plan by being quiet.  :)

      The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. - 9th Amendment

      by TracieLynn on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 06:24:30 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Rightward tack understandale but dispiriting (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Limelite, alba

    Team Obama's electoral prowess seems inarguable.  It was no mean feat to take down the Clintons, something I thought impossible.  So, given that display of puissance, I'd be inclined to withhold judgment on strategy decisions made by his campaign. That does not mean that I'm not saddened by some of the decisions.

    Putting aside questions of principle, I am still dispirited by what these decisions mean about where the electorate is today.  If the electorate is still unconcerned about untrammelled government spying and sympathetic to extending the range of capital crimes, it is an electorate with which I do not have much in common.

  •  Just what Daily Kos needs! (10+ / 0-)

    Yet another diary in the top ten in which the diarist feels obligated to severely chastise anyone who dares think Obama merits some criticism on the FISA issue.

    How many more times will this diary be written? It's already been posted several times, by several authors, with varying degrees of condescension. How many more times will someone try to put out this particular fire with gasoline?

  •  I'm With You--Well Said (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vicky, rl en france, sephius1

    Hope you have a water view :)

  •  Politicians pander by definition (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vicky, sephius1, alba

    All you can do is hope they pander according to some principle. Netroots are merely complaining about pandering only because he is not pandering to them.  

    Well, pandering to a humongously anti-Republican web community is prob. very low down on Obama's to do list headed by 'get elected as President during an ongoing war when security and being a war hero is the other guy's strong suit'.  

    Sorry to be crass but Obama is also prob. seeking out to chip off a bit of the right leaning independents to offset what he will lose among the Democrat base due to his skin color.

  •  I love this community (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    boofdah, DC Scott

    I actually agree with kovie and the other folks who think this diary and those like it are rather over the top and also redundant/repetitive, but you know what, maybe it's the Belgian beer I just had, but I just love this website, largely precisely for all the bickering, finger-pointing, hand-wringing, mutual recriminations, insults, occasional collective hugs, more bickering, sniping, hand-wringing, back-and-forth denunciations renunciations and polemics, and so on and so forth. It's all a very healthy sign!

  •  Purity (5+ / 0-)

    I was going to write a diary about famous Americans who were pure in thought and deed.

    But the rules forbid blank diaries.

  •  Strawman city. n/t (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dhonig, BentLiberal, pylonsound

    "Surrendering and fearful: that's the face of the Democratic Party. It's how they show they're not weak." -- Glenn Greenwald

    by expatjourno on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 03:32:25 AM PDT

  •  This diary contradicts itself (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Christin, TracieLynn, BentLiberal

    first, you tell people to grow up (not a nice way to talk.... it may excite people who agree with you, but it isn't going to convince anyone who disagrees with you)

    then you say that you wrote to Obama asking for your money back

    I wrote to Obama, too.  I told him that I thought he was wrong on FISA, but that I would continue to support him.  

  •  BRAVO nobody is going to be everything ... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bustacap, Vicky, Karma for All

    to everyone!! ease up!!

    "Be yourself; everyone else is already taken." Oscar Wilde

    by bloomster on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 03:40:12 AM PDT

  •  Growing up ... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bustacap, inclusiveheart

    Means that we should be able to see the whole, even while looking at the parts. We can pressure and push to bring focus on issues of concern.  

  •  The enemy of the good, or great? BULLSHIT (3+ / 2-)
    Recommended by:
    Limelite, Osiris, kck
    Hidden by:
    Sean Robertson, vertexoflife

    what is great, or even good, about selling out the Fourth Amendment?  What is great, or even good, about supporting the Death Penalty?  What is great, or even good, about expanding George W. Bush's theocratic "Faith Based" programs?

    I EARNED my right to give a damn about the Constitution, and until you show me you did far more than tappity-tap on a keyboard, well, you can fuck the hell off for having the absurd temerity to tell me to grow the hell up.  Got it?

    Done with politics for the night? Have a nice glass of wine with Two Days per Bottle.

    by dhonig on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 04:06:15 AM PDT

  •  if we do not hold our candidate to a (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Limelite, sephius1

    higher standard he is sure not to disappoint...

  •  Grow the hell up means shut the hell up (5+ / 0-)

    I disagree with a major premise of this diary, that imperfections are inevitable and have to be accepted.

    Repudiating the great Eli Pariser is a choice.  Betraying the party and proving you're a weenie on defense by floating a Republican for SecDef is a choice.  Going back on your word on FISA ia a chouice.  It's ridiculous to think Obama inherently had these "flaws."

    I'm not immature, not in the least.  I've been stabbed in the back, it's obvious.  I've been abused.

    Furthermore, everyone including me is so positive I'll vote for Obama--just because he isn't McCain.  I'm being used, I'm a liberal tool to manipulate and blow off, but my vote is so counted on.

    I'm supposed to grow up?  I see.

    •  Well, maybe what psi means is that Obama (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      actually has some sort of compulsive disorder that drives him to make bad choices and we should forgive him for that?  No.  On second thought, that wouldn't be a good argument in favor of his candidacy.  I think he needs to stick with the STFU line - it is the least bad of his options at the moment.  /half snark

    •  and this is exactly why (0+ / 0-)

      we should have gotten solidly behind Kucinich (or Dodd) rather than drink the Obama walks on water kool-aid.

      At least our consciences would be clear.

      Of course, this may just be Obama saying whatever he needs to say to get elected, but I thought that was Hillary who did that :-;

      I hate to vote for someone hoping they would change their stance once elected, but I guess my choices are pretty limited at this point.

  •  Now is not the time....? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sparhawk, MichiganGirl

    When George H. W. Bush launched Desert Storm there had been heated debate in the U.S. about the necessity of it all.  He appeared on television with a call to end the debate saying it was time "to support our troops".  What he was really saying is that it was time to support him and his decision.

    Those who insist that Obama not be criticized for his stances, seem to me, to be using the same tactic.  My question is this:  When will it become acceptable to criticize Obama when he is making a mistake.  If criticism is wrong because it endangers his effectiveness, and we would never want to limit his effectiveness, then we should never criticize.  

    I know.  Since it is so important that we win the WH in November, how about we encourage all of the current Obama supporters to STFU for the next 8 years while we also encourage Obama to adopt republican stances.  That way, he will earn the republican vote (fat chance) and most certainly be able to occupy the office while doing nothing but catering to the republican vote for 2012.  
    Seems like a winning strategy?  (SNARK!)

    -4.63, -5.59 The Right-wing Noise Machine is SOOO much better at controlling the debate than we are.

    by Divertedone on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 04:21:27 AM PDT

  •  Claim was Obama was "different" (0+ / 0-)

    The charge has nothing to do in my opinion with all politicians, what one should expect, etc. It has to do with honesty and to a large measure trust. Will Obama "do the right thing" .... probably as he is moving more to the right every day  ;-). But in all seriousness, it is not just a question of where Obama stands it is a question of does he really have any steadfastness. We can talk about judgement and Obama may do well (although surogates like Clark certainly don't show much judgement in my opinion) but a president needs a spine.

    •  To anyone that was paying attention in the past (4+ / 0-)

      it is clear that Obama isn't "moving to the right" now that he's got the nomination locked up and that's because he was never a flaming liberal or even very liberal at all to begin with.

      Senator Obama always has been and always will be a centrist. His voting record in the Senate puts him almost directly in the center of the pack in the current United States Senate... A Senate that is made of almost exactly half republican and half Dems... and he's literally almost exactly in the center.

      He's no James Inholf or anywhere close to it, but neither is he Bernie Sanders or even anywhere close to being Sanders... Instead he's about midway between the two.

      I sincerely think this entire dust-up could have been avoided with a little less hero worship.

      Many in the netroots have built Obama up in their minds to be an entirely different person and politician that he truly is and now it seems they're blaming Obama for not living up to the fantasy they've created, which I think is extremely unfair.

      Everyone thinks he's letting us down and betraying us... When in reality he's merely behaving exactly as he always has in the past and I have no doubt will continue to behave in the future.

      He's not betraying us and that's because he was never with most of us to begin with... Most of us are WAY to left of where Obama is at, we always have been, we always will be and we're just setting ourselves up for (hopefully!) 8 years of disappointment if we think otherwise.

      So Senator Obama is to the right of us?

      Well McCain is a hell of more to the right than Obama's ever going to be and those are our choices right now... For me, it's not a difficult choice or even a choice at all.

      I'm not saying that Obama's immune from criticism, I plan to criticize the hell out of him every time I feel he needs it... but I'm not going to feel betrayed by him and that's because I never thought he was going to be with me on every issue to begin with.

      I understand he's no Bernie Sanders or Ted Kennedy and I'm not going to be surprised or betrayed when he doesn't act like Ted and Bernie.  

      "It is through disobedience that progress has been made, through disobedience and through rebellion." Oscar Wilde, 1891

      by MichiganGirl on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 09:03:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That the way (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Vicky, MichiganGirl

        I see it as well. Politicians should never be looked at through the unrealistic lens Obama has had focused on him. A realistic approach will keep us firmly grounded in the understanding that we will not get 100% of what we want, maybe 80-85%. In this way we can approach his candidacy the way it should be, as someone to cajole, bargain, compromise, and finally hammer very difficult questions out with.

        That being said, I'm 100% behind Obama even as others are wringing their hands because his candidacy is to be celebrated. I still think he is extraordinarily talented and will learn from his mistakes (that we must realize he will make).

        I just hope others will start to realize nobody is perfect, and in that way we can help guide him (like right now giving him a taste of our FISA mentality) so he can chart a reasonable course.

        "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act."-George Orwell

        by Babsnc on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 09:49:39 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  How I see all this (4+ / 0-)

    I know, you've just been waiting and praying for this, right?

    I've been astonished at the level of what I termed blind enthusiasm for Obama.  That can only end one way.  

    Obama is a politician.  He will disappoint, he will stumble, he will do wrong things.  And if you go into a campaign with blind enthusiasm it easily transmutes into blind rage, easy disillusionment, and bitterness.

    No, this will not help us win the election.

    Grit your teeth, people.  He is not the Messiah and the New Jerusalem is not where we're going.  At best, politics will be only moderately satisfying.  

    Adrenaline, winning, is not the point.  If that's what you're after, try sports.  This is about incremental long-term change borne on the backs of human beings.  

    "Republicans are poor losers and worse winners." - My grandmother, sometime in the early 1960s

    by escapee on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 04:47:32 AM PDT

  •  Debating on BLOGS is now too much? (2+ / 0-)

    So, now, even people diarying or posting comments on a f***ing blog -- and yeah, believe it or not, Daily Kos is still a politics blog last time I checked and not the National Office of Happy Time Democratic Compromise -- is too much?

    If people have any space whatsoever, any place, anywhere, any time for them to angrily dissent with leading political candidates, this is immaturity?

    Jesus Jiminy Cricket, you blog types need to get the frack over yourselves.

    It's not only our electoral priority but the entirety of our existence to measure our words & thoughts by what will help Democratic candidates?

    Well, then, where?

    Where is it okay for people to express honest disagreement, dissent, even bitterness?


    Just their private homes in whispered conversations?

    Or is that too much too?  Are our times still too crucial to allow honest reactions?

    •  Debating isn't the end in itself. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bustacap, Vicky, malharden, cybrestrike

      The end is electing, specifically, Obama.  Elections matter.  The fact is, people aren't properly weighing the value of "debate" (by which I mean to excoriate Obama for perceived faults) with the value of electing Obama over McCain.

      IOW, the importance of the election is part of the debate too.  Debate isn't limited to a commenter's purity on a single or two or three issues.

      It's a people-powered movement of individuals. So just say it yourself and stop calling on Obama to be your puppet.

      by Inland on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 05:08:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No, the end of 100% of life is NOT electing Obama (4+ / 0-)

        Each election hangs on a blogger's comment?  Times are too tough, too close for people to figure out what it is they care about, what it is they want, and who it is that is advancing that?

        Sure, an end is electing Obama.  Elections do matter.  And if that's not only part of why Daily Kos exists but the absolute, 24 hour / 7 day a week entirety of it, then you and the other Kosites need to clarify that that in fact is the purpose of each and every diary and each and every member and each and every comment and I will gladly leave you alone to pursue that goal.

        Talk about purity concerns from the 1960's, as another blogger was -- it was always too much of a crisis time with the (anti-war movement / civil rights movement / women's movement) to allow you time to think, speak, debate.

        If this is what you think wins elections and develops a healthy populace able to participate in a political life, you're wrong.

        •  What's point of participating in political life? (6+ / 0-)

          Endless debate?  Losing to McCain?

          In this democracy, there's got to be an election at the end.

          I don't know if the election hangs on every bloggers comment, but when bloggers start saying that their intention is to hurt Obama until he pays them closer attention, I assume that that's their intent and that if they fail to hurt Obama, it's not for lack of trying.

          Because I too have a right to the debate, I get to say how fucked up that is.

          It's a people-powered movement of individuals. So just say it yourself and stop calling on Obama to be your puppet.

          by Inland on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 05:34:40 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Blog comments= "participating" in political life? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            I don't know if you noticed, but this is, in fact, a politics blog, and not a local organizing meeting.  

            People can simultaneously throughout the course of a day do a range of activities -- say, leave angry blog comments if it helps them understand something, and later donate money or time to some other cause.

            The notion that it's SHUT UP SHUT UP AND ELECT OBAMA on a political blog is silly.

  •  Imperfection does not require hypocrisy (0+ / 0-)

    Yes, a lot of liberals and progressives made votes we don't like. How many of them spoke out against the position they voted for beforehand? We rightfully skewered torture voters Warner and McCain for talking one way and voting another. Why should Obama be immune from these criticisms?

    '1984': "Big Brother is watching you". 2008: You're going to end up on YouTube.

    by jhecht on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 05:03:30 AM PDT

  •  right on....... (0+ / 0-)

    but seriously, you requested your donates returned? I hope you plan to redonate those because that kind of goes directly against what you said in your blog, it is about winning this thing, I agree, so draining your candidate of much needed funds is not conducive to winning.

    I'm hoping it was just a flash of momentary anger that you later regretted..

    John McCain's priorities: Endless war = Good; Healthcare for children = Waste of money.

    by THEpersonal ISpolitical on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 05:13:44 AM PDT

  •  Obama has never campaigned (5+ / 0-)

    as a leftist so to speak; he has always talked about reaching out to the center.

    What was different (and continues to be different) is his bottom up style; that is, we, as a whole, aren't going to get anything that we don't agitate for.

    I knew this about him even in the primary.  I backed him anyway, knowing that, with him, I'd be getting 70-80 percent of what I want.

    When liberals saw 9-11, we wondered how we could make the country safe. When conservatives saw 9-11, they saw an investment opportunity.

    by onanyes on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 05:17:22 AM PDT

  •  Obama v Kos. (9+ / 0-)

    And you think  defending Clark would have a very good move?
    So the media narrative and faux outrage at what Clark said could have dragged on for weeks and months?
    And it would have.
    They know they're full of shit - but they do it to drive up ratings.
    Just like they knew they were full of shit that every primary starting March 1st was a game changer for Hilliary.
    Most of them refused to acknowledge the numbers - that Obama's lead was insurmountable. But it drove the story to say  it was a horserace.
    And they also knew damn well what Clark meant - but the more screaming, ranting and raving they do, the more people leave the channel onto the station that has a breaking b.s. story.
    And it gets more clicks on a web site too.
    Things were getting boring out there in cable land.

    So if Obama would have come out and tried to defend Clark yesterday - it would have never. Ever. ended.
    But many of this site,  wanted him to do just that.
    So we could have heard all Summer long that Obama agrees with Clark that McCain's military record is in question.
    Even though Clark said nothing of the kind, by ten am. yesterday that was the running theme, and they were not going to stop doing it.
    So we would have gotten what we wanted - and Obama would have started dropping as the idiot low information voters started to agree with the MSM.
    Because that is what they do - if they keep hearing it enough - they agree.
    Proven time and time again.
    9/11. Iraq had something to do with it.
    WMD's. Yes. They have them.
    70 percent of Americans thought so.

    And Obama being a netroots hero and trying to explain what Clark meant would have only    made inroads here
    You guys all keep forgetting how very small we are.
    I can't find anyone at my job who reads Kos or the blogs. They all go to the gym at work and watch CNN and MSNBC while they're on the treadmill
    They all get the NYT and the WSJ and listen to the radio
    It scares me how much impact the MSM still has on their thought process.

    I am horrified that the most intelligent people I know parrot the talking points of the day given out by the networks.
    Yeah - their ratings are dropping are newspaper ciruculation is in the toilet, only because now people just hear the soundbites or read the headlines and the first paragraph.

    Wes Clark can take care of himself.
    He didn't rise up in the ranks because he didn't.
    He's not a gentle fragile soul who can't deal with this.
    As a military commander, he knew what the plan here was. And he can take Obama distancing himself, while giving him the green light to say what he has to say.

    We are not political strategists. We have no idea how to play this game.
    How to win.
    Made obvious by the constant declarations that Obama must come out and defend every single issue that may invite dissent.
    I mean some people seriously think the road to winning the White House is to defend child rapists?
    Or to say something about McCain's service?
    Nothing should ever leave Obama's mouth on McCain serving other than what he's doing Honoring it.
    And I say that as someone who'd damn sick and tired of using his service as a means to get him a free ticket to 1600 PA Ave.
    My brother served and you have to pull it out of him to talk about it.
    He doesn't use it to get himself a free cup of Starbucks if he has too like McCain does.

    But Obama is not me. Or you. And he's not just running to make the netroots feel good.
    He has to get inside those doors first.
    And considering how damn hard that is in a country full of people who pay more attention to flag pins than the price of this war, why is that so hard to understand?
    Republicans understand this.
    And though they may have fumbled in the past few months - I think they're getting ready to unleash a disgusting, filthy dirty war against Obama of such magnitude that we won't know what hit us.
    I think David Plouff knows it's coming.
    And so does Axelod. And do does Obama.
    And they don't this distraction.

    This crying by the R's and the MSM over what the General said is just the tip of the iceberg.
    Maybe that's a good thing.
    It's only when BO is getting his ass kicked by everyone else that this community knows how to focus on who the real enemy is.

    And how anyone didn't know who Obama was - when he made his speech about how there are no blue or red states -
    What part of compromise did not you see there?
    He will reach out and talk to them as much as he reaches out to us.
    I do think there are red states and blue states.
    I want nothing to do with their regressive laws and policies and thoughts.
    I live in a very very blue state, and wish we were our own country.
    But I knew from Day One that Obama did not agree with that.
    And anyone who didn't know that - was not listening.
    They truly were blinded by this "fancy speeches and big rallies ".
    Which I completely understand.
    Feeling hope again, smiling, cheering him on, feel good - after this horrible almost going on eight years was a high like no other.

    But I respectfully suggest you read his speeches, away from the cheering crowds and the noise and the euphoria of the masses, and just really ingest what he has been saying all along.
    He's going to be a President that wants the votes and the support of the very people we disagree with so profusely.
    If you guys do not want that - this blog should have been out in full force for Dennis Kucinich.
    But was ridiculed and derided almost every day on here.

    Sometimes, I don't get this place at all.
    I thought we knew the dirty, ugly crap hole that politics is.
    But it's clear to me in the past two weeks that we can be just as naive as my Mom
    Who thinks that if politicians just spoke the truth - they would win in a landslide.
    Yeah - maybe if you only allowed those who passed a political SAT test to vote.

    I'm resigned to the fact that if I continue to read Daily Kos throughout the Summer -
    I can look forward to many "Obama throws (insert an issue here that pisses us off) under the Bus. "

    "Oh changed your hair color? It's just so dark. You like it? And with your skin tone?" My Beloved Mom, December 25 2007, once again on notice.

    by Christin on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 05:17:53 AM PDT

  •  telecom amnesty (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    smkngman, agnostic

    Obama is like all the rest

    he will say anything to get elected then screw us over.

  •  You lost me at the end. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Christin, goObama, dave1042

    This seems quite contradictory.

    I sent an email to the Obama campaign requesting that they return my donations and that I would not be contributing any more volunteer hours after his capitulation on FISA),

    On the one hand, you ask those who express dissent to move on, but then you demand your money back and refuse to volunteer any further. That is your choice but it is difficult to demand others grow up while you undermine his candidacy.

    •  I'm willing to believe that he meant to write ... (0+ / 0-)

      "If" since as a rhetorical device he already used If in the previous sentence, and it makes more sense that way.

      Read it again and see if you agree.

      I agree with his whole diary. No candidate is perfect. Lincoln oftentimes was seen as an imperfect president because he couldn't keep all of the constituent parts of the REpublican coalition happy all of the time. But precisely because of that, big-picture-wise, he turned out to the one of, or perhaps even the, greatest of presidents.

      Likewise, it is unlikely that Obama will ever say ALL the right things, ALL of the time, to ALL people. The sum of the parts of the candidate Obama - and soon-to-be president Obama - needs to be taken, not merely the parts.

      "You want tact? You call a tactician"

      by mierts on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 05:48:47 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  OK (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        goObama, Vicky

        I read the diary again. I should probably state up front that I agree entirely with the jist of the diary. Dumping Barack for moving toward the center to win the general election only defeats our own agenda.

        My issue is that PsiFighter then goes on to state that s/he already sent an email requesting their donations be returned and vowing not to volunteer any further. This appears to undermine both the argument in the diary and Obama's campaign.

  •  So, you like having your cake, (4+ / 0-)

    and eating it, too, huh?  So do I.

    You have the temerity to tell us to grow the hell up after demanding your money back?  After refusing any more volunteer time?

    That is EXACTLY the position so many of us here have staked out while you were moving.  Sorry, friend, we're days ahead of you.

    If you're going to lecture people like they are your children, you should be more consistent, or us kids aren't going to pay any attention.

  •  Yuck. (7+ / 0-)

    I despise "shut up and fall in line" diaries.

    Get over to the Green Mountain Daily! What are you still reading this sig for?

    by odum on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 05:25:40 AM PDT

  •  Bravo!!!! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Babsnc, Vicky, cybrestrike

    Thank you for this diary! You've summed my feelings up perfectly!

    Let America be the dream the dreamers dreamed...

    by langstonhughesfan on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 05:27:47 AM PDT

  •  Perhaps it is you who should grow up (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    two roads, KS Rose

    If you can't get over being disappointed by your allies in politics...well, you're going to be disappointed virtually all the time.

  •  You seem a bit insecure with this democracy thing (6+ / 0-)

    Here's a good question: just what are we voting for with BHO at the moment?  Given that, at the very least on the surface, he's wrong on FISA (one of the dreaded flip-flops), and now (again, superficially) way off on "condemning" the comments of Clark, just what can we expect from him?  If he can't stand up to the repub dead-enders......

    For the vast majority in the progressive world, I see nothing wrong with directing our support to our own surrogates, who can temper donations to BHO with the power of numbers.  Down ticket candidates who take it to the repubs' strengths.  Move-On (who was a major factor in BHO winning the primary).  Feingold, Dodd, and most importantly right now, Wes Clark.  If Obama thinks he can win with the late adopting "middle", fine.  I'll vote for him regardless.  But I'm convinced, like Arianna Huffington, that running to the center is a losing strategy when there isn't any respectable party on the right.  They will trash BHO no matter what he compromises. Rove/Cheney need to crushed first to allow reasonable voices to reassume control over there.  When the criminals are removed, we can talk about bipartisanship.  

    No one likes a coward.

  •  The ends justify the means eh? No thanks -nt- (2+ / 0-)
  •  Of course no one's "perfect" so OK to complain (3+ / 0-)

    when they mess up. Criticism is legit. It's how we keep our leaders on the straight and narrow.

    1. FISA - idea of secret court is creepy but FISA bill was to reign in out of control exec. and make clear criminal charges can be applied. Seemed like progress but I can see folks complaining about telcom immunity.
    1. Clark - not supporting Clark when the attacks on Clark were clearly EXACTLY the kind of attacks on the patriotism of any critic was poorly done by Obama. People can fairly feel disappointed he did not make one his articulate speeches to educate the public on why Clark was not denigrating McCain's record but was legitimately question McCain's claim that McCain's military experience qualified him to be president.

    FISA and Clark were both items where it would have been better for Obama to make strong, well defined stand are articulate why. He can compromise when he's president now people need clear definitions.

  •  Disagree with you on this (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichiganGirl, two roads

    I love the quote from my favorite "prominent blogger"

    If you want sycophancy, this isn't your place.

    * 4113 *

    by BDA in VA on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 05:38:40 AM PDT

  •  One more thing: (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Babsnc, Vicky

    Politicians, in the course of their business, really do the political equivalent of triple bank shots to get what they want.

    Sometimes, it might appear to be backstabbing to you, or it might appear to be a violation of principles, but it's because you don't know the rules and strategy and tactics of the game.

    I know; I've done it myself in my own business-political life.

    That's why when Kerry said what he did, my first reaction was, "So what?"

    "It's better to realize you're a swan than to live life as a disgruntled duck."

    by Mumon on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 05:39:45 AM PDT

  •  Well "Nobody's Perfect" Is A Slightly Different (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Tune than anybody was singing during the primary.  The reason Obama had so far to fall (especially here at DailyKos) was that support for him was never actually based on much he said or did in the first place.

    But this will pass.

    ---- now they sit and rattle their bones and think of their bloodstone days...

    by TooFolkGR on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 05:44:03 AM PDT

  •  So many times (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vicky, alba

    I see an attack on McCain here, or elsewhere in the liberal blogworld, that I think is simply stupid. The "when did I stop beating my wife" one springs to mind.

    It's not a slur. No matter how outraged you want to be about it. But I leave it alone, because it's election season. Every headline on that references "John McCain's controversial Wife-Beating comment" will make somebody less enthusiastic about him.

    Conversely, every, "I'm not sending Obama my money because he didn't kiss's ass this afternoon" headline or post knocks our enthusiasm down a notch.

    It's an election. Do you want to fear President McCain's phone tapping programs, or do you want to partake in President Obama's green resolutions?

    Yes, grow up. I'm mad, too, and will post all kinds of shit in January.

    klaatu barada nikto

    by JohnGor0 on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 05:50:26 AM PDT

  •  Here, here. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:


    Having credibility when making an argument is the straightest path to persuasion.

    by SpamNunn on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 05:51:53 AM PDT

  •  Thanks (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Letting perfect be the enemy of good has, since the dawn of this medium, been one of the major issues.  

    As much as I have a certain set of policy preferences, I realize that they will never be taken up in full by any one individual.  

    I just got to meet my rep when we were in DC recently.   It seems to me that we have to distribute our desires across a spectrum of govt.  reps.  That way, we are likely to get one or two to support each of our political ideals, because we are unlikely to get one who will support them all.  

    I'm resigned to the fact that no single politician will completely agree with my political ideals.  

    "Treat them with humanity. Let them have no reason to complain of our copying the brutal example of the British army."

    by otto on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 05:53:31 AM PDT

  •  The Diarist is Right! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    he/she didn't say STFU...he/she said GROW THE FUCK UP!

    Arianna may have a point about no payoff for moving to the center, but she isn't correct all the time either. She's a former Repub who married a guy who ran for governor as a Repub and who turned out to be gay or bisexual.  Didn't she know?  Where were her perfect instincts when she married the dude?  Wasn't she once a follower of "guru" Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh? I mean, come on.  She who has never made a bad decision shouldn't throw stones.  And keeping her married name couldn't have anything to do with the fact that "The Huffington Post" sounds a lot more mainstream and acceptable to certain factions of the population than "The Stassinopoulous Post" could it?

    I love Arianna and have forgiven her her wingnut past, but these are Obama's decisions. I trust he and his campaign staff know things that we do not, and believe this move to the right on SOME issues is necessary.  They may be wrong, but that's what they believe is necessary to win, so let's support them.  Without the power we can't make change. We've experienced that the hard way for 7.5 years.

  •  Biological fact: Wallet and Mouth are connected. (4+ / 0-)

    You ask me to open my wallet, expect my mouth to open also.

    You want my money? Expect to get my opinion too.

    You want me to stuff envelopes? Expect my analysis of your opinions in your mailbox.

    You want to "compromise" previously stated principles? Expect me to "compromise" my level of support ... openly.

    Now, isn't that how compromise works? The candidate buys money and support with his/her support of the issues those supporters feel are important. Isn't that how politics works in the pragmatic world?

    Diarist, I'm just being pragmatic, so, DON'T FUCKING TELL ME TO SHUT MY MOUTH!

    If seniority equated to good judgment, John McCain would be appointed president.

    by Juan4All on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 05:57:37 AM PDT

    •  He didn't tell you (or anyone) to (0+ / 0-)

      ... shut your fucking mouth, so get the stick out of your ass.  He told you to get a grownup sense of perspective ... there's a huge difference between the two statements.

      i am jack's complete lack of surprise -- fight club

      by bustacap on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 06:49:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Read this (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Sparhawk, TracieLynn

        That being said, I'm really sick and tired of people - particularly prominent bloggers who should know better - bitching and moaning about Obama's imperfections as a general election candidate.

        That sure looks like an admonition to shut up to me. The diarist thinks we shouldn't be "bitching and moaning". He is pretty clear he doesn't expect us to cheer Obama's FISA cave-in. So if we can't "bitch and moan" and we needn't cheer, what's the remaining possibility?

        I guess what you are telling is, don't shut up, just grow up ... silently. That's Bullshit!

        Hard as this may be for some to understand, it's possible that adult pragmatism involves personally applying the "compromise" we should expect for the candidate. Our personal compromise would be to donate money, time and effort in direct proportion to the candidate positions we agree with. That is, if I agree with 80% of Obama's platform, I provide 80% of the resources I have available. That sounds pretty grown up don't you think?

        If you think that is reasonable, do you think I should only talk about the 80% I agree with, or, could the candidate possibly benefit from knowing why he is not receiving all I have to offer? Of course, that would involve speaking the double-secret, coded truth of what parts I disagree with.

        I don't need children telling me to grow up OR shut up.

        If seniority equated to good judgment, John McCain would be appointed president.

        by Juan4All on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:29:39 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Do you see the words "shut up" or "stop talking" (0+ / 0-)

          ... or "stop debating" or "stop discussing" anywhere in there?  Not if you have an ounce of reading comprehension, you don't.  You see a diarist expressing his frustration at seeing people throwing tantrums because they think they're not getting everything exactly their way.

          I'm personally sick and tired of the hysterical drama myself and have said so.  That doesn't mean that I (or the diarist for that matter) am trying to stifle dissent.  It does, however, mean that the site of supposed adults behaving with all the stultifying self-possession of thwarted toddlers is extremely annoying.

          i am jack's complete lack of surprise -- fight club

          by bustacap on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:24:43 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Headline: Toddlers Protest FISA Complicity! (0+ / 0-)

            So neither you nor the diarist are telling people to shut up. You're only expressing disdain for dissent.

            Of course you're not telling people to shut up when you tell them their dissent is counter-productive, right? Is that what you're trying to say?

            Sure sounds like a claim that you didn't say what you actually said, simply because you didn't use the words "shut up." That's Bullshit.

            Now let me explain something to you as an adult. I really don't care how much you want my complicit silence on efforts to further dismantle our Constitution.

            I've seen what silence, complicity, and blind trust do to our nation. You can waffle on down that road if you want, but expect to get more of the same regardless of who gets elected.

            On the other hand, I am part of a large, growing number of people insisting on change. Obama claims he represents that change and wants our dollars to finance it. I expect some action that proves he means what he says. If that action is not forthcoming, he will hear increasingly loud protests until he learns who is feeding his campaign. He made the choice to accept our financial support. Our mouths are attached to our wallets. Both open at the same time.

            Now, it's time YOU grow up an accept those facts. Your frustration means nothing to me or any of us who value the Constitution over triangulation. So grow up and accept those facts.

            If seniority equated to good judgment, John McCain would be appointed president.

            by Juan4All on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 09:21:28 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  I was prepared to pack it in on this topic (6+ / 0-)

    and get back in line.

    But then this diary happened...

    I was surprised to learn that Barack Obama was human, too. But I am okay with it now.

    by cskendrick on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 06:01:27 AM PDT

  •  Blah, Blah, Blah (3+ / 0-)

    You should realize by now that when you yell at people to "get over it", it just makes them mad.
    Why write such a thing?

    The bottom line is that the politicians are NOT standing up for civil liberties.  It's them that are willing to trade off civil liberties for a flawed notion of "security".

    Maybe this is not an overall right wing fascist plan and then again maybe it is. But, irrespective, it's inevitable that the day will come where we will regret not fighting for our civil liberties.

    I salute all that stand for civil liberties.  Something that is so damned hard to do these days. Keep fighting!

  •  Tell it like it is! Enough already! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Bob Marley: Don't let them fool ya. Or even try to school ya...

    by JoanMar on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 06:06:45 AM PDT

  •  I'm pretty flexible (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TracieLynn, two roads

    But at some point, all these "little disappointments" start to add up.

    My latest "disappointment" is Sen. Obama's incessant pandering to evangelicals... in this case more faith-based initiatives.

    No! Not one more fucking dollar to religious institutions. Period.

    I don't care that they are supposedly doing good works... what people don't understand is that spending dollars = power and influence for that organization.
    That's what is at stake here... My tax dollars going to raise the influence of a Religious institution.
    Oh, that and that pesky unconstitutional thingie.

    How much do we let slide before we realize that a candidate really isn't who we thought they were?

    If Obama keeps outpandering McCain in regard to evangelicals, I may just get confused and pull the wrong lever. I've been cutting him a lot of slack, but this one is close to a deal-breaker for me.

    "As God is my witness, I thought wingnuts could fly"

    by Niniane on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 06:08:45 AM PDT

  •  Wake the hell up (3+ / 0-)

    Politics is more than just winning elections.  It is trying to change things, and standing for something.  Not just engaging in an exercise in political expedience.

    Steny Hoyer is a tool.

    by Paleo on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 06:11:26 AM PDT

  •  Haha, great blogroll (0+ / 0-)

    And well said. But, seriously, you asked for your money back and will no longer volunteer? Doesn't that go against all the rest of your diary? Or is the point that you did that in a moment of anger and have, as you put it, "grow[n] the hell up"?

  •  Amen Brother! (0+ / 0-)

    Can you spare a dime for gas? It's $4.30 down here in Kentucky.

  •  IMHO... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    ...To be disappointed in Obama is like to be disappointed in Gorbachev because perestroika didn't save the USSR.

    The real battles are still in the future.


    by Lupin on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 06:18:56 AM PDT

  •  When a diary has "grow the ---- up" in the title (9+ / 0-)

    or body, you can pretty much safely assume that it is a poorly thought-out tirade about a nonexistent strawman mad up by the diarist, which is supposed to represent the 'other' in dailyKos.

  •  Why is it that (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vicky, AyersTeach

    The Democrats are never happy.
    I think the democrats have a hard time compromising or finding common ground. They want it all and they want it right now, and if they can't have it all now, they bitch and moan and trow in the towel.
    In order to have a purple United State, we must be able to find common grounds and be able to meet in the middle.
    I realize that the FISA bill as it is right now is not perfect. But it's a hell of a lot better than the one they had last year. And it's not permanent.
    So, please lets take one step at a time. Let's please be patient.

    •  Interesting (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LeftOverAmerica, ZAP210

      I realize that the FISA bill as it is right now is not perfect. But it's a hell of a lot better than the one they had last year.

      Perhaps you can illustrate for me exactly how the current FISA law is better (from a progressive viewpoint, not a omg we are all going to die unless... viewpoint)?

    •  Understatement of the month: (0+ / 0-)

      the FISA bill as it is right now is not perfect.

      "as it is right now" implies that this peice of shit legislation could somehow be made "perfect" with a thoughtful amendment or two.

      "One step at a time." Step one: insure that your congressmen, senators and presidential candidate know that our constitutional rights are as important as electioneering. Step two: rinse and repeat until said legislation is passed or overturned.

      Paul Park - "expedite the inevitable"

      by ZAP210 on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:47:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I guess we can all STFU now (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LeftOverAmerica, wils02

    that you are sick and tired.

    what is it about us that somehow makes us believe that everyone should stop arguing because we are sick and tired?  why must we ask everyone to grow up?

    Whatever is wrong with letting people have their say? From wanting the primaries to end as soon as I made up my mind, to everyone else STFU because I am sick and tired, to everyone needing to get behind the candidate because we now have a nominee....

    Textbook narcissism.

    Can we please make our points without asking others to shut up?

  •  I agree with everything here (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    ...except the angry tone.  I'm more angry at the people who are angry at the people who are angry at Obama--as if Obama's campaign wasn't strong enough to handle it.  People have the right to be angry at Obama over his disgusting capitulation on FISA.  Just let them vent, and then we can all move on.

    Vote John Edwards and break the corporate media stranglehold on American politics.

    by Subversive on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 06:34:51 AM PDT

  •  Hear hear (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vicky, on board 47

    Some kossacks no doubt feel a bit Sister Souljah'ed by Obama right now. Well you know what, my brother-in-law comes back from Iraq next month. As long as he never has to do a second tour over there Obama can Sister Souljah me all he wants between now and November.

  •  Thank you, Psi. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Granny Doc's diary has too many comments for my computer, so I couldn't comment there.  I've pretty well had enough of this stuff myself.  We need Barack in the WH.  We need to help him get there.  No matter what, McCain is worse--whatever we feel about Obama's recent comments/positions, we owe it to ourselves, each other, and future generations to elect him President using every resource we have available.  He should be held accountable.  But he must be elected.

  •  I think I'm reaching the age where I don't grow (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    on board 47

    anymore, I just get more bitter.

    Obama is, has been, and always will be a politician.  However he's way better than the other politician.

  •  Obama is NOT an activist (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vicky, Rappaccini

    People need to realize that. He's the Democratic candidate for President, and he would never, ever win by embracing the far-left position on every issue.

    I agree with PsiFighter37. People need to grow up and drop the childlike naivety about politics.

    "An inglorious peace is better than a dishonorable war." -Mark Twain

    by humanistique on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 06:45:27 AM PDT

  •  u ppl are so stupid (0+ / 0-)

    how the hell u goin to vote for a man that wanna stay in iraq for 100 yrs u know what i hope all u idiots voting for mccain over obama get a chance of spending 10 bucks on a gallon of gas. clinton supporters u dont wanna vote obama then cool but dont cry when obama voters vote for someone other than hillary no ny senate no governor of ny bloomberg is fine where he is

  •  Is this diary snark? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    goObama, doglove, Mr Littlejeans

    Seriously, you're telling people to GTHU and to stop complaining, you're also advocating witholding your support?  WTF?!?!.  The netroots firestorm is damaging BECAUSE so many are advocating withdrawal of support, but the criticism in and of itself is healthy.

    This diary is ridiculously ass backwards.  Ideally, we'd have a situation where constructive criticism could thrive without descending into loss of enthusiasm of support.  I have no idea wtf you want.

    Thumbs down.

    "Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." - George Carlin, R.I.P. (1937-2008)

    by Alfonso Nevarez on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 06:49:31 AM PDT

    •  Yeah, that really confused me too (0+ / 0-)

      What this diary seems to advocate is that now that we're in the general election, the netroots should prove our worth by delivering the vote, not by being a fickle band that bails on anything less than perfect.

      And then the diarist mentions that he/she does exactly the opposite and withdraws support because of imperfection.  Is the call to grow up a self-reflection or a scolding or both?  Or is it just ironic?  

      psi, I'm genuinely curious about this apparent paradox in your argument here.  

      Being angry that the captain isn't doing enough to stop the sharks is no good reason to harpoon the lifeboat.

      by Sun dog on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:01:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  My sentiments exactly (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Thank you.  People who whine about Barack Obama not being "progressive enough" without even having defined for themselves what being a "progressive" means and apparently without having much knowledge of Barack Obama's positions over his political career should read more and post less!

  •  Get off this diary & go to one that is doing (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Nadnerb in NC, LeftOverAmerica

    something (a diary of one of the pissed off bloggers.)

    The Canary in the Coalmine is available for purchase at

    by Jesselyn Radack on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 06:53:37 AM PDT

  •  Eyes on the Prize (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vicky, dotalbon, citizen31

    First we win then we influence. Dissenting voices are still a fine thing though lest the candidate thinks to stray too far.

    Time waits for no one, the treasure is great spend it wisely.

    by mojavefog on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:10:13 AM PDT

    •  Thank you for stating the OBVIOUS (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      You don't bitch and moan about your party "deserting its base" etc.   until the party gets elected.  THEN you hold its feet to the fire.

      I don't know why Dems run away from this simple truth like stampeding lemmings when election time rolls around.  The Republicans figured out long ago when to STFU and when to pressure their party leadership.  Notice how often they've won the White House in the past thirty years?      


      "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." (Frederick Douglass, 1857)

      by dotalbon on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:42:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Politicians are going to lie (0+ / 0-)

    lie, lie.

    It must a requirement.

  •  Hillary supporters really feel fucked over now.. (0+ / 0-)

    They bashed Hillary for doing "whatever it takes".. now, Obama takes a hard right and it's all ok.. "he's not perfect".. "winning is everything".. fuck that!  Why didn't he share these views with us during the fucking primary? huh?

    Can you tell I'm a Hillary supporter?

    "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others." - G. Marx

    by Skeptical Bastard on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:11:14 AM PDT

    •  because (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      it was a primary and he only had to appeal to democrats.

      wake up people! there are centrist democrats, and gasp!, right-leaning independents who we need to win in a manner that will give Obama a mandate to affect real change.

      i don't understand why this is so complicated for some people.

      •  So, the things you voted for him for (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        over Hillary don't matter any more? Is that what you are saying?

        It's not hard to understand at all.  Obama pretended to be one thing during the primaries to get the Dem votes.  Now Obama pretends to be something else to get the other voters.

        And you are encouraging him to pretend to be centrist or right leaning to fool those centrists and right-leaners just to get their vote, so he can turn around and fuck them also with his "real" progressive agenda?

        Will the real Barack Obama please stand up?

        "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others." - G. Marx

        by Skeptical Bastard on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:39:54 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  "wake up" your self (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AmericanRiverCanyon, ZAP210

        It's exactly the false belief Democrats should "move to the center" in order to win that has cost Democrats so many elections.  It's DC conventional wisdom at its worst.

        Obama is hurting his general election chances by reversing his positions and making himself appear cynical and dishonest.  He is tarnishing his brand as a new kind of politician.  Being a "flip-flopper" doesn't appeal to independent voters, because it makes you look weak and inconsistent.  Is that too "complicated" for you to understand?

        All the Obamabots need to "wake up" and realize that their messiah isn't being "pragmatic", he's just screwing up.  Now that he won the primary he has embraced the establishment thinking that has caused Democratic defeats in one general election after another.

        This country does not have the luxury to entertain idiocy as if it is reasonable. --Digby

        by Thought Crime on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:46:25 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You sincerely think Obama's going to win (0+ / 0-)

          a general election by running as a far-left liberal?

          •  define "far-left liberal" (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            The media has painted political positions supported by 60%-70% of the American people as "far-left liberal".

            Opposition to the Iraq war for one.  Opposition to domestic spying is another.  Support for universal health Care and strengthening Social Security are others.  When being a "far-left liberal" means having the support of the vast majority of Americans, then yes you can win elections that way.

            Also it's worth remembering that Obama is going to be labeled a "far-left liberal" no matter what he does.  So he might as well earn it by opposing unpopular legislation and supporting popular programs.

            This country does not have the luxury to entertain idiocy as if it is reasonable. --Digby

            by Thought Crime on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 01:07:17 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Don't many centrist democrats (0+ / 0-)

        and right leaning independents believe in preserving our fourth amendment rights? Aren't the majority of Americans opposed to retroactive immunity for telcoms? Shouldn't they also be opposed to the prospective immunity this bill potentially offers?

        BO has mad skills. He's shown time and again a remarkable ability to condense complex ideas into nuanced, concise, politically effective arguments. He could do the same with FISA and risk little.

        I'll begrudgingly overlook death penalty rhetoric, unified Jerusalem rhetoric, and most any other lane changes he needs to send a message to the right that they won't be forgotten.

        But FISA, as an act of legislation, legitimizes and legalizes the lunatic Bush power grab that this election is all about.

        I don't need to wake up. I need to voice my opinion against the FISA bill's passage as long as it's on the table. I'll enthusiastically encourage my presidential candidate to join me, and continue to support him whether he decides to or not.

        Paul Park - "expedite the inevitable"

        by ZAP210 on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:11:37 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Sit down, shut up, give money, and vote our way. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimpwatch, LeftOverAmerica, doglove

    At least, that's how I translate what you're saying.  So many people, including the diarist, have aims on developing a Democratic machine that rivals, and emulates, the Republican machine: millions of cash-giving sheep without any guiding principles, who blindly follow any candidate that happens to have the correct party designation after their name.  

    Well, it's never going to happen.  Do you want to know why?  Because we're right, and Obama's wrong.  If he insists on being wrong, he will hear about it from us.  Loudly.

    Thanks to the organizing and informational power of the internet, we trend towards a true representational republic.  Views such as yours are a relic of an earlier age.  

    They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin, Feb 17, 1755.

    by Wayward Son on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:13:05 AM PDT

  •  Expressing irritation isn't immaturity. (0+ / 0-)

    Yes, he's a politician first and foremost.  Yes, he's going to be a tremendous boon to the country, the world and history. But just because bees make delicious honey, are great for pollination, and do wonders for our ecosystem doesn't mean you can't be annoyed when they sting you on occasion.

    Obama/Clinton 2008. The likeliest ticket to win that won't happen, but it was nice to think about while it lasted.

    by alkatt on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:15:56 AM PDT

  •  Excuse Me, but No (3+ / 0-)

    I will continue to hold the Democratic candidate to Democratic principles.

    I will continue to dissent because in Sen. Obama's own words in a recent speech, that is the definition of "patriot."

    All too clearly, all too well, I remember the knuckling under of weak-kneed patriots, too many of them in high office in this land, who buckled when the present president began to point his finger at them and call them "traitor" for disagreeing with him on invading Iraq.  In fact, I even remember when getting us out of Iraq NOW was the policy issue for choosing a Democratic candidate.

    Where did that go?

    If our nominee can't get elected based on my objections to his short-fall from what liberal Democrats stand for, then so be it.

    Since when did Daily Kossacks move to the center, even right of center, because a Democratic politician did?  Since when did Daily Kossacks shift their positions because their presumptive nominee did?

    Wanting my candidate to be president isn't enough to turn me into a sycophant to Daily Kossacks who want me to curb my opinions when I find fault with my candidate who disappoints and turns away from what he himself formerly procalaimed he stood for.

    They burn our children in their wars and grow rich beyond the dreams of avarice.

    by Limelite on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:17:39 AM PDT

  •  I guess ... (0+ / 0-)

    This is NOT   the   C H A N G E     I expected

  •  Sorry, but I think it's the "grown-up" part (2+ / 0-)

    of me that doesn't like to see a good man like Wes Clark hung out to dry for no reason. Perhaps you should be advising people to be less grown up. Oh, and some of us are also pissed because we've been down this road before and it's a proven loser. I want to win as much as anyone on this site. Pandering and flipping does not signal strength or confidence.  

  •  Obama (4+ / 0-)

    has not drifted anywhere.  He has been a FUCKING centrist all along.  He's more Clinton than even HRC herself tried to be.  The criticism being leveled at Obama is the same kind of criticism he has been receiving all along and will continue to receive and rightfully so.  If we do not hold his feet to the fire who will?  The idea he only "drifted" to the center recently is absurd.  The fact is longtime Obama supporters need to come to terms with the simple fact that you got behind a centrist and now you're hearing about it on the blogs and elsewhere.  BTW I will vote for him in the fall, but that doesn't mean I can't criticize his decisions such as FISA.  

    I take political action every day. I teach.

    by jbfunk on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:27:00 AM PDT

  •  Is there any acceptable position between (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vicky, Prison4Bushco

    "my candidate right or wrong" and "he falls short, so I can't support him"?

    Yes. It's "he's wrong on some important issues, but easily the best overall candidate and I'm supporting him."

    That's where I stand, and where most who criticize Obama on this site stand.

    Obama and FISA is a dead issue (but Dodd and FISA - where's there's a tiny bit of hope is not.)

    So, let's keep the focus on the issues that voters care about and Obama can easily win on:

    the mortgage crisis
    gas prices

    When a government violates the unalienable rights of the people, it loses its legitimacy.

    by Rayk on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:27:19 AM PDT

  •  I'm so tired (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Prison4Bushco, pylonsound

    of these diaries with community chiding titles rising to the top of the rec list.

  •  Perfection is (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    only a concept. Nothing is perfect, and no one person is perfect, either. We work and live in the real world.
        And in the real world I have tremendous enthusiasm for Barack Obama's candidacy. He has passion and integrity-more than I've seen in a long time from any candidate. He has enthusiasm, honesty, and loyalty-he is a profoundly serious candidate for the presidency of the United States-and he gets my vote.
        I could not possibly not vote for this man. And I refuse to fall into the trap of nit-picking every word or gesture. Doing that will make you crazy between now and november. He's my candidate; and he gets my vote!

    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from a religious conviction." --Blaise Pascal

    by lyvwyr101 on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:37:26 AM PDT

  •  how dare you (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sparhawk, Rumi68, sorval, two roads

    "grow the hell up"?

    What in the world gives you the right to talk to any of us like that?

    For over a week now I've been listening to Obama's most sycophantic followers go on and on about how Barack is either perfect (and thus has a super-smart, super-secret plan to fix everything if we elect him) or that he is imperfect (and therefore should be forgiven everything).  And you have the gall to accuse his critics of being immature?

    Do you think we're just pissed that Obama hasn't taken our side on some issues?  If so, you should try listening to what people are saying instead of just reflexively attacking them for criticizing your Dear Leader.  

    This site was built on the principle of getting Democrats elected.  It was also built with the awareness that the habit of Washington Democrats to surrender to, and use, Republican rhetoric hurt them at the polls.  Our anger with Obama is that he is sabotaging his own campaign by making the Republican's arguments on FISA and National Security for them.

    Has it even occurred to you that the best response to Obama's recent moves towards the "center" is to raise our voices in protest?    If there is any one political truth it is this, "You can't always make a politician see the light, but you can usually make him feel the heat."  If no one takes Obama to task for behavior that will hurt him electorally then he'll just continue that behavior, and end up falling short in November and during the course of his Presidency.

    Do you think Barack Obama is going to get elected with any kind of mandate for change by running like a conventional DC pol?  Do you think a President Obama is going to get Universal Health Care passed without fighting for it tooth and nail?  Do you think a President Obama is going to get Alternative Energy legislation passed without fighting for it tooth and nail?  If you are so naive as to believe such things then all I can do is tell you to "grow the hell up"!

    This country does not have the luxury to entertain idiocy as if it is reasonable. --Digby

    by Thought Crime on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:38:37 AM PDT

    •  The fact that you are buying into this (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      elie, Melchuck29, spyguy999

      MSM spin:

      Has it even occurred to you that the best response to Obama's recent moves towards the "center" is to raise our voices in protest?

      Proves that you know very little  about Obama.
      He never "moved" to the center, period.
      He was never in the "left" period.
      He didn't misrepresent himself.
      You just chose to believe the MSM spin.
      Or you chose to believe you what you needed to.
      That he was the most liberal senator.
      That's your problem, not his.
      Read his books, read transcripts of his speeches, and you 'll see he was what he always said he was.
      Go raise your voice as loud as it has to be risen - but don't play this he left the left game.

      "Oh changed your hair color? It's just so dark. You like it? And with your skin tone?" My Beloved Mom, December 25 2007, once again on notice.

      by Christin on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:42:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  wrong (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        He promised to filibuster the FISA bill, now he's going to support it.

        He recently backed away from his attacks on NAFTA and described his own rhetoric as "overheated and amplified".

        These are real changes in position, not just media spin.

        You are right that Obama has always been more of a "centrist" than the media, and many of his supporters, were willing to admit.  But that doesn't change the fact that he is now distinctly shifting his positions on some issues to the right.  

        This country does not have the luxury to entertain idiocy as if it is reasonable. --Digby

        by Thought Crime on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:52:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  well, I'm of of those. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Cali Scribe

          , and many of his supporters, were willing to admit

          one of his supporters.
          not blinded by far.
          2nd time I'm bringing this up -
          when he talked how there are no red states of america, and no blue states, that should have given anyone all the information they needed.

          The FISA and NAFTA positions don't make me happy either.
          But I never thought he was the 2nd coming either.
          So when he moves, or waffles, or changes course, it's what I expect from all of them.
          I don't much care for this diary overall -
          but the one thing I appreciate is where psi points out now the most progressive liberal people on our side, have voted in ways that are appalling.
          Obama is no better than any of those guys.
          (Feingold, Dodd, ect.)
          It seems people here elevated him to this position of stature thinking he was going to be the uncola.
          In many ways he will be.
          That's why I support him.
          In many ways he won't be.
          The left - the progressives.
          Will never - in my lifetime, or yours, or the next - get what they are looking for.
          Because the overall masses who vote are in fact centrists, and they hold the power.
          Just the way it is.
          In my perfect world, Dennis would not have been laughed out of town.
          But I don't live in the Matrix.

          I chose to focus on the areas where Obama does not let me down - I take what I can get.

          "Oh changed your hair color? It's just so dark. You like it? And with your skin tone?" My Beloved Mom, December 25 2007, once again on notice.

          by Christin on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:07:19 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Absolutely. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      two roads

      Looks like you posted this just as I was writing something similar. You're absolutely right that the bigger, more disturbing picture here (when coupled with things like the Obama campaign's immediate denunciation  of Wes Clark for trying to put McCain's much-vaunted and often-overblown reliance on campaigning on his service record into perspective.

      We've seen this style of campaign before, most recently in 2004, and in the end it gets steamrolled.

      Obama may currently be up in the polls, but if his public image as being somewhat genuine begins to change due to his triangulating everything off of what he thinks the GOP might call him names over, I can see that image fading as the summer wears on.

      THAT'S the real problem here, as you point out.

  •  I agreed with you til the part about asking for (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    your donations to be returned. That's just petty. And debate about the issues is essential to a thriving, healthy republic. Isn't providing a forum for intelligent discussion the raison d'etre of Dailykos? I did rec you though, because most of your argument was sound, in my opinion.

    "Leave the gun. Take the cannoli." - Peter Clemenza

    by collardgreens on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:43:22 AM PDT

    •  not petty (0+ / 0-)

      it's called feedback.  If we're angry then we have to communicate that to his campaign.  The best way to do that and get the message through, is to effect the bottom line.

      This country does not have the luxury to entertain idiocy as if it is reasonable. --Digby

      by Thought Crime on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 01:09:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  We are not electing a Saviour (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Babsnc, Vicky

    Obama does not walk on Democratic water.

    We have to accept him as the politician that he is and if Clinton or Edwards had won the nomination we would still be going through the same thing. There is no perfect politician. Perfection does not exist.
    We don't have to STFU, but we need to GTFU or we will be F*cked Up for the next 4 to 8 years

  •  The disagreements you point out are true. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    two roads

    I confronted Russ Feingold at a listening session with criticism for his confirmation of Roberts, just as I am now criticizing Obama over his ever-growing list of positions which I oppose.

    Here's where the reactions diverge. Feingold did not attack me or my position as divisive. He thanked me for stating my beliefs, explained his, then pointed out the value of conducting open discussions. We still disagree, and we still respect each other and each other's views.

    I think that those who degrade criticism as no more than angry frustration should take a lesson from Feingold.  (I could have said,

    "grow the hell up"

    but that would have been angry.)

    Let's not give up debate (liberty) for the sake of Obama's candidacy (security).

    Or would you rather adopt the same position as George Bush and Samuel Alito that there exists such a thing as "irresponsible debate"?

    "Oh, boy, this is gonna be dark..." - TV's Frank.

    by jorogo on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:48:58 AM PDT

  •  Enjoy the McCain presidency (0+ / 0-)

    You probably will -- there will be plenty to complain about.

  •  I think this writer needs to grow (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sorval, Mr Littlejeans, two roads

    the hell up.  We still have free speech here in the USA, at least in theory, and that gives us the right to criticize anyone we want.


    by dancewater on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:51:45 AM PDT

  •  The Bill of Rights is really just playthings (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Of the elite, and we are all just children for trying to get our nominee to fight for these things.  Yet another Republican chiding diary that made it to the rec list again.

  •  How many times does the same message get (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sorval, MichiganGirl, two roads

    rec listed?

    Can someone at least use an expression besides "grow up"? That one has been beaten into the ground with overuse as people make exactly this point, over and over.

    "The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times." - Justice A. Kennedy

    by pylonsound on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:52:34 AM PDT

  •  Everyone (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    love an "us vs. them" around here and no one's brain can tolerate nuance.

    I sent $$ to the ACLU and this is what I wrote to a commenter:

    "I cant walk and chew gum at the same time?  Its all or nothing?  Should I not pay rent this month and give only to Obama?  

    Why do you people continue to only be able to black and white and not "grey."  I am still backing Obama...sending an email about his stance is not a big deal.  Relax.  The anti-purity troll people are becoming "purity trollish" themselves."

  •  Fully agreed (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I'm irritated with some of Obama's positions as well, notably his most recent statement that he'd continue Bush's "faith-based" initiatives.  But I agree that he's moving to the center to give himself the most possible leverage amongst the biggest possible slice of the electorate.  The bottom line is that Obama will be light years better than McCain on a whole host of issues, and as there isn't a viable alternative anywhere on the left, we have to accept his political maneuverings along with his greatness.  

    Back in my own purity troll days, I voted for pointless third party candidates.  In 2000, the first time I was eligible to vote for President, I voted for David McReynolds, who got 7,000 votes nationwide.  I was the only vote for him in my county.  What the hell was the point of that?  Course I was in Texas so it didn't matter who I voted for, but still.

    Perfect candidates never win, because they only appeal to a narrow slice of the electorate.  The best candidate will take the best from all possible sides and construct a decent platform that appeals to 270 electoral votes.  That is what Obama is doing.  Period.

    Visit Sinister, the home of a left-handed left-wing Okie Jew.

    by ethanthej on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:53:01 AM PDT

  •  Well said Psi (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    It is a times like this  I am thankful that the vast majority of Dems (and other potential Obama voters) don't tune in to our ramblings. Criticism is fine. As the old adage says, if you can't take it from friends...

    But please people be realistic. The bigger picture is too damn important.

  •  We do need to unite behind Barack, and I (0+ / 0-)

    completely endorse that.
    But we're leftists because we give a damn. Once elected, I believe that it's our duty to hold Obama accountable, and I think it's our dharma, here, to map out progressive goals and ideals for our Dems office-seekers and -holders.

    That, and the blogoshpere is the genuinely perfect place to do just that.

    I fear that we might elect people like Nancy Pelosi, who we endorsed for promising to bring the Iraq disaster to a close and to hold this criminal administration reponsible, only to have them attain a majority and, inexplicably, decide not to do any such thing.

    So, yeah, let's let Obama know. But let's not lose sight of the fact that he's the best chance we'll have in a generation to begin triage on the disaster Bush-Cheney have made of this country and much of the world and the global economy.

    If we were all singing Kumayah, here, I'd get bored fast   :)

    Obama in'08!!

    "They blamed it on the Islamic fanatics, at the time. [...] That was when they suspended the Constitution. They said it would be temporary." -Handmaid's Tale

    by Cenobyte on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:57:28 AM PDT

  •  You lose sense in there somewhere (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    You wrapped up your argument nicely with this:

    In short, grow the hell up. If you can't get over being disappointed by your candidate in politics...well, you're going to be disappointed virtually all the time.

    I'm fully capable of  "getting over" being disappointed in my candidate. My question to you and the rest in this is what does "getting over disappointment" mean to you? Exactly?

  •  And I thought the republicans (0+ / 0-)

    were the only ones to eat their own

    I belong to no organized party. I am a Democrat. Will Rogers

    by thestructureguy on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:04:16 AM PDT

    •  If you thought that you have never paid attention (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Eating your own is a tradition in American politics that has been with us since the first political party.

      Get used to it.

      The alternative is an unchallenged leader like George W. Bush, that can get away with anything.

      Don't trust Larry Johnson. He isn't a Democrat.

      by Beelzebud on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:15:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  When was the last diary? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    When was the last diary, particularly one from a 'prominent blogger' here at KOS, that complained about Obama and said they would not vote for him?

    When as the last diary where someone said they wouldn't work their hardest to make sure he was elected?

    Where is the see from which your outrage grows?  What continues to feed it?

    And please, don't point to known trolls.

    A lot of people are upset about FISA, but almost every one uf us who is upset will pull out all the stops to get Obama elected.

    Any individual here who says they will not vote for him should feel the full wrath of the community.  Electing Democrats is our cause, and he is our Democratic candidate.  Plus, he's awesome.

    But I will work my hardest to make a party and a community where legitimate, respectful dissent is still allowed.

    For the first time I have someone to vote for instead of vote against for President; although I still have that, too.

    by math monkey on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:04:55 AM PDT

  •  A lot of people are pissed (0+ / 0-)
    because they think what Obama is doing is tactically a dumbshit move, whatever you think about the rightness.  Running to the right and dissing the left hasn't worked out too great lately.  The Democrats may still be in DLC land and fighting the last war; if they are that delusional, they may find the base deserting them.
  •  One reason I am a Democrat... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    two roads that I don't let people tell me what to think, say or do.


    Go to hell.

  •  Bush and Obama are similar. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    doglove, thestructureguy

    Bush has supporters who will support him no matter what he does, and so does Obama. I don't think there's that much difference between one set of cult members and another.

  •  I take the opposite view. (0+ / 0-)

    The important thing is that yuou keep donating to and working for Obama.  Airing your differences of opinion is harmless and may give information to the campaign.

  •  Take a bit of your own medicine there, pallie. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    IndySteve, LeftOverAmerica, two roads

    (Or pallette, as the case may be.)

    I say this as somebody who supported Obama throughout the primary (he was my second choice until Edwards dropped out, but he was a CLOSE second even so) and who watched his infamous 2004 speech at the convention and said "That guy had BETTER be president, and as soon as possible."

    A fundamental element of this nation is that we are allowed to disagree.

    So if you have a problem with the fact that there are people hereabouts who are pissed off about Obama's FISA bill stance, then fine. But don't be a condescending schmuck/schmuckette about it.

    Opposing this abortion of a FISA bill is hardly childish, and it's hardly some far-left lunacy that we should expect a presidential candidate to run away from. Obama is supporting the expansion of the government's ability to spy on a whim on its own citizens, which is all the more problematic since a hallmark of the Bush administration has been that it's had no qualms about going outside the law to do this anyway - and Obama himself has been campaigning as the REMEDY to the excesses of the Bush administration, and not as the enabler of them that he's now pledging to be where this FISA bill is concerned.

    It's not just a matter of disagreeing with your candidate on some random farm bill. We're seeing Obama changing his position on a fundamental element of his campaign, and sadly it doesn't seem to be the only area where he's tossing his edge to the wind. Suddenly Wes Clark is being chastised for pointing out that it takes more than being shot out of the sky to be a qualified Commander In Chief.

    The Obama campaign is suddenly turning into something disturbingly akin to the Kerry campaign. And THAT'S what I think we should be concerned with. Not whether people are pissed about FISA. FISA is far more than a "disappointment" and it's really the first time that Obama has really lost me. Folks have every right to have a problem with Obama saying that the president should have expanded powers. That's something we've all been opposing as Bush has grabbed more power for himself, and it's still something we should oppose even when it's a Democrat who favors it.

    But the bigger picture here is, Obama's campaign is losing what carried him to his primary victory in the first place. It's not just the FISA bill, though that's part of it. It's the way his campaign seems to suddenly be letting the Republicans call the tune, and just dancing away to whatever they call. It's not AS bad as the Kerry campaign yet, but it's getting there.

    THAT is what we need to be concerned with right now, and what we need to refuse to support. If we can't "hold Obama's feet to the fire" on something as basic as his current tendency to run the same old losing campaign style as Kerry and Gore ran, then what CAN we try to hold him to?

  •  So we should treat him like the perfect candidate (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    It's funny that you chide everyone for wanting the perfect candidate, and then you ask us to treat Obama like a perfect candidate...  

    That line of thinking got us the W years.

    Maybe if Obama sees that we demand things, and are willing to stand and fight for them (even with our own party), it will make him a stronger leader...

    Of course we could just fall lockstep in line with everything he says, and pretend he's the perfect candidate, but then we'd be just like the republicans.

    Don't trust Larry Johnson. He isn't a Democrat.

    by Beelzebud on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:11:55 AM PDT

  •  I heard this sort of thing for eight years (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    First Light

    While Clinton was president. The whole point of the DLC and the Clinton presidency was to start every negotiation well to the right of the center, and move rapidly to the right.

    I can't believe we are now hearing this crap from Obama. Compromise may be necessary to govern, but it shouldn't start right of center. We've been there, and it got us NAFTA, Monsanto flacks appointed to key positions in FDA, WTO, Commerce - don't get me started. Clinton was the best Republican president we had had in many years. But he worked for corporations, not for the country. Do we really have to lie down for this from Obama?

    I'm not in the mood, thanks. Surrounding himself with the Clinton people and the corporate establishment, locking out the new voices all over the country who supported him in the primaries, will stall his campaign just when he needs the people who got him this far.

  •  FISA Position Change? (0+ / 0-)

    I just read this:

    Can anyone confirm this?  I can't call myself, being out of the country.

  •  I hear ya PsiFighter... (0+ / 0-)

    But listen, if we don't hold Democrats accountable for  flipping off their base when they're not needed, then who will?

    Politicians will always gladly accept activist help, but unless Dems come to fear the base, the better Democrats will be few and far between.

    This is a case where we can learn a lesson from the evangelical movement. Despite having views consistently out of line with the majority of Americans (and often blatantly unconstitutional), their party is nearly unanimous in supporting their general agenda. Why? Because they are organized and hold their elected leaders accountable. When relatively moderate Republicans like Wayne Gilchrest are primaried for failing to toe the party line, it sends a message to his colleagues that they better vote the right way next time.

    "Are you ready for the real revolution, which is the evolution of the mind?" -Chuck D

    by optimo on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:14:10 AM PDT

  •  I've been involved in Democratic politics (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    two roads

    for about 40 years.  I'm as grown up as you're going to get.  I'm a strong Obama supporter who has signed up for a monthly contribution to his campaign.


    There are disturbing signs over the past few weeks that the campaign is taking pages from the old Bob Shrum playbook:  FISA, expanding Bush's "faith-based" initiative, and the Wes Clark controversy (that wasn't), for example.

    For those of you who don't remember, Bill Clinton's attack on strawwoman Sistah Souljah and his enthusiasm for executing a brain-damaged prisoner were not just tactical (as his passionate supporters told me at the time).  It turns out they were pretty good indications of how he intended to govern.

    I continue to have hope that Obama isn't just another "govern from the center", corporate candidate. He's been making it difficult lately to maintain that hope. - Kicking against the pricks since '98!

    by chuckvw on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:16:11 AM PDT

  •  Mccain: Obama fails to reject and denounce Clark (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    two roads

    The following reported by Halperin has not been classified under "Bus, throw under"

    Surrogates Sen. Lindsey Graham and retired Lt. Col. Orson Swindle hold 10:45 am ET media call to discuss Gen. Clark’s "continued attacks" on McCain and Obama’s response to them.
    McCain camp preempts call with morning statement: "It’s clear that the Obama campaign isn’t telling Wes Clark to apologize, and are either encouraging or tolerating his attacks on John McCain’s military service."
    Comes after Clark stood by his view that McCain’s role in Vietnam did not require good judgment, though it did show "courage and character" on ABC’s "Good Morning America."

    'John Mccain gets it'-David Duke

    by Bob Sackamento on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:17:46 AM PDT

    •  BUT McCain is not running an attack campaign! n/t (0+ / 0-)
    •  exactly (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Bob Sackamento, two roads

      this is the problem with caving.  Obama is a fool if he thinks he can "take an issue off the table" simply by appeasing the McCain camp.

      Fer chrissakes, the GOP is wildly unpopular right now!  The time for cautious steps is not now!  Now is the time to rout the fleeing disgraced politicians of a failed regime!

      Obama could have stopped this nonsense simply by saying that Clark had never questioned the value of McCain's service.  End of story.  As for the question as to whether McCain is qualified to be 'commander in chief', isn't that the reason Obama is running?  I thought that a central premise of the Obama campaign is that McCain is not qualified for the Presidency.


      Don't drink and blog. Think of the children.

      by RickD on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:55:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  This is why we mostly get Republican presidents. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Someone is going to get elected president--and the default vote in our country is conservative, reactionary and not particularly informed.

    Yes, be idealistic.  Yes, state your opinions and what is important to you.  But you know the John Lennon saying that life is what happens while you're busy making other plans....

    Well, presidents like Dubya are what happens while you're too caught up in notions of purity to work passionately for the best alternative.

    •  Kate, we get Repub Prez because candidates listen (0+ / 0-)

      to idiotic DC Consultants and run gutless, wimpy General election campaigns. Let Obama be himself, explain his positions to the AMerican people and he will win.

      Start parsing and shifting positions to "win" an election, and he will lose. You've got it backward.

    •  oh really? (0+ / 0-)

      the default vote in our country is conservative, reactionary and not particularly informed.

      Learn a little more about politics and history.  Kansas used to be one of the more progressive states in the nation.  Nixon was further to the left than Obama is.

      There is no "default vote".  People vote based on the ideas that they are accustomed to.  When the so-called leaders of the left never actually stand up for any ideas left of center, then the right wins by default.

      Sometime in the mid-80s, Democrats simply stopped fighting for progressive ideas.  That is why the right keeps winning elections.  It's not because 'Americans are by default right of center'.

      Americans are not biologically different than Europeans in any meaningful sense.  But Europe is much further to the left politically than the US.  But it wasn't always the case.  

      Politics change.  People change.  Attitudes change.  What really grinds my gears are the people who presume that their own opinions about the inevitability of certain directions in politics are somehow superior.  Everything is negotiable.

      Every actual conservative I know is completely fed up with the Republican party right now.  There is a historic oppurtunity to achieve meaningful reforms.  But it will not happen if there is no leadership to accomplish those aims.    

      Don't drink and blog. Think of the children.

      by RickD on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:52:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  To avoid honest criticism, don't paint yourself- (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    IndySteve, RickD, two roads

    as the "change guy" and then triangulate your way back to the center to possibly appease some swing-state moderates. That's the "politics as usual" (similar to the examples you mention) that he chastised during the whole primary.

    As Obama supporters, I would say it's our responsibility to vocalize concerns about his positions. We will be the ones who deal with the actual policy positions, as opposed to those who use issues to spin character attacks. Of course Obama is not perfect, and of course we'll never agree with anyone (much less politicians) 100% of the time - that is overtly obvious.

    However, I would say that anyone who doesn't respect people standing on principle and vocalizing concerns, and instead uses self-serving circular logic to demean those who do needs to grow the hell up. And stop bitching.

    Fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous communist plot we have ever had to face.

    by Mr Littlejeans on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:18:18 AM PDT

  •  Yeah (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mr Littlejeans, First Light

    Grow the hell up.

    Just because Obama opposes the Fairness Doctrine, lied about his support for NAFTA, said Rumsfeld was "mainstream," Supported Cheney's Energy Bill, Voted for Bush's Class Action Fairness Act, has voted for Iraq Funding Bills since being in the Senate, Supports amnesty for telecoms that spied on Americans in violation of the law, is going to expand Bush's faith-based programs, lied about casting 6 "mistake" votes in the Illinois senate, lied about his close association with Tony Rezko, lied about his close association with Rev. Jeremiah Wright, lied about the "ministry" of Trinity United, saying it wasn't particularly extremist, lied about his long-time working relationship with Bill Ayers, and his wife's association with Wal-Mart, invited homophobic gay-baiter Donnie McGlurkin to campaign for him in South Carolina, supported disenfranchising 2.3 million Democrats in Florida and Michigan, has divided the entire Democratic party, and then tossed supporters at DailyKos, and Gen Wes Clark under the bus, just after he called his own grandmother a racist by saying she was a "typical white person" who was afraid of every black man she saw on the street, it's not a problem. You're going to be disappointed sometimes.

    So what's yer problem!? Grow up. As was once said, "he may be an evil bastard but he's OUR evil bastard!"

    Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur: "The world wants to be deceived, so let it be deceived."

    by SignalSuzie on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:19:41 AM PDT

  •  Recc'd because while I don't agree with the title (0+ / 0-)

    I agree with much of the reasoning.  I like the issues Psi points out which many of the "progressives" have.  Having been a small player in local politics, I know there is a lot more compromising needed than one might wish to get anything done.  That said, some things should not be compromised on and I think fisa is one of them.

    Also, I read this:

    ... I sent an email to the Obama campaign requesting that they return my donations and that I would not be contributing any more volunteer hours after his capitulation on FISA), then it doesn't do anything to help us win more


    ... IF I sent an email to the Obama campaign requesting that they return my donations and that I would not be contributing any more volunteer hours after his capitulation on FISA), then it doesn't do anything to help us win more

    which I hope was Psi's meaning.

  •  Should we just genuflex before you? (0+ / 0-)

    I love Obama.. but I will call him out on his imperfections just as I would you and you would me.. If you cannot handle that then you too must grow up...

    Should we just assume that all politicians are misrepresnting thier positions to us? Is that the lowest common denomiator that we should expect? Great then.. when are you running.. Sorry I think far to many people here are moneing because some of us want someone we can believe in that will not jerk us arround like the same old politicions we have come to loathe... you know the ones that cave on the war, Cave on universal health care, civil rights, etc.. ad nausium..

    You folks who want us not to expect a higher fiber of char in our politicians are the same people who want us to vote for imperfect canadages.. what do you think we are nuts.. we know everyone and thing is perfect and wonderful.. etc..

    No we have intimate knowledge of human imperfection.. and it only takes reading a bit here to see it...

    That bieng said I am no better than you.. perhaps worse.. but at least I want to stand for something.. I want to stand for holding my politicians up to a new standard of honesty.. integrity.. a nd not what we have been getting for so long..

    WIll I ever see it no.. but if we demand it.. then somenene might just try.. even if in an imperfect way.. and we will vote for them because of it.. and love them for it.. and chide them when they fail.. and lift them up when they reckognize it..

    well my rant is done.. flame away if needed..

    •  So you are better than him (0+ / 0-)

      According to you.

      but at least I want to stand for something.. I want to stand for holding my politicians up to a new standard of honesty.. integrity.. a nd not what we have been getting for so long..

      And that's what it's about: you.  All about you and you being able to feel good and principled and better than someone else.  Who cares that people who thought like you acted as allies to the GOP in 2000, making an election close enough for Bush to steal?  No, you want to feel good, and you want to feel better than others who are working their asses off to get a Dem elected.

      •  Yes it is all about me (0+ / 0-)

        Because me and you and a bunch of other mes are what make up the people who consent to be rulled under the Constitution of the United States..

        You cannot have we without a me.. so yes.. it is about me.. and you and others.. But without the principles of our government and to allow them to be redifined away and just expect us to be silent and accept it.. Thats not me.. Nor should it be you.. because if I tell you that Free speech is now only non desenting speach then you may disagree with me.. that is fee speach.. It is also the principle of me.. I have these certain self evendentury rights.. that well are MINE.. not my countries.. nor yours.. but MINE... this is the foundation of Civil society as we have..

        To tell me to not care about ME is to deney the principles of the Republic and its founders.. Its about self intrest.. that moves to self sacrifice for others.. this is the heart of our country.. that all may form a more perfect union..  me and you.. together.. not just Us but a buch of me and you.. working together based on certian principles.

        SO yes its all about me.. and I am better than him when it comes to this issue.. because I want him to protect the constitution.. and not just redefine th shrub did for the last 7...

        •  You act like you're talking to a sitting (0+ / 0-)

          president and not a presidential nominee.

          Can I ask you something: if the result of your current posture is a McCain presidency, will you feel remorse?

          •  I cannot speak to this hypothetical (0+ / 0-)

            It would take an miricle to not have an Obama president. Even repubs I know are going Obama.. and thats in Florida..

            I am voting Obama. But I can critisize him as a canadate, a person, a human, a politician etc..

            I try to be fair and honest.. but I will not be deferential at the expense of principle.

            •  That's what I thought you'd say (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              That because others are moving heaven and earth to get people excited about Obama, he's going to be elected, and thus you'll enjoy the luxury of believing that your purity remains uncompromised while the less principled do the work for you.

              Do you think this is fair?  And do you think this is reflective of the lessons which the progressive left should have learned in 2000?

              •  Its more than fair (0+ / 0-)

                I am doing my job. I am voting.. thats my basic right and all that in good consciense is demendaed of me.. I tried to find the rulebook on good political citizenship but somehow.. its not arround..

                I have also donated money etc.. but will be spending my money on Act Blue etc.. to stack more progressive canadates into office..

                I have done nothing inccorect.. I will continue to hold my politicians accountable.. if you don't you will get what you deserve.

                In the end I am responsable to act correctly in a way that is consitent with my beliefs... even if they are wrong headed..

                So is it fair? To me yes.. to you no.. because well I do not agree with you.. :)

                So you should compromise... and agree with

                •  I can't even though I recognize (0+ / 0-)

                  your good nature.  I resent you, and I believe there is more danger of a McCain presidency than is understood.  I resent people who want to take us back to 2000.

                  •  I am so sorry that you resent me. (0+ / 0-)

                    I cannot change that. But I will vote Obama.. so how is that to take us back to 2000.. and what does that mean anyway..?? You mean.. an rigged election?? I have not advocated a rigged election.. Gore won. I did my job.. your fear of Y2K is as unfounded as the IT fear of Y2K was..

                    Gore lost to Bush because of a rigged eleciton in Florida.. not because dems did not do thier jobs. also Liebermen helped lose that election too.. I think Gores decsion to have him as VP was a tragic error also..

                    But me or poeple like me causing a Y2K happening again.. absurd..

                    •  According to you, (0+ / 0-)

                      even thinking about a McCain presidency is a moot point because Obama will win.  I'm saying that this is very dangerous thinking, the type of thinking which produced a core of purity partisans in 2000, who spread memes and deflated energy.  They helped us get Bush.  I'm telling folks now, spreading memes and deflating energy will yield us McCain.  Plenty of people don't seem to care.

                      •  Listen Obama's positions (0+ / 0-)

                        are whats deflating energy if anything.. you need to adress this to him.. I am..

                        •  Yeah right (0+ / 0-)

                          He's reversed course on the lobbyists, on the war and economy?  Bunch of outrage junkies too busy looking for their next fix to effectively prioritize points of contention versus the exigencies of winning the presidency.  Just unreal.

                          •  Singular.. not plural (0+ / 0-)

                            I think your the your the one all bent out of shape that we will not just sit and worship aanything Obama says or does. Sorry I am the pragmatic one here.. I do not reward behaviour that is not good.. i.e. FiSA.. if he changes my mind on it then fine.. but he has not.. so your the one all bent out of shape.. You do not see me burning his effagy do you?? Resent me all you want.. It will not get my vote.. Only Obama can... and I am not running for office.. He is.. He needs my vote.. and I have not said I would not vote for him.. although if all the sudden he changes other positions.. I would think about my loyalty to him as bad judgment.. and have to change course.. but for now.. I am great with an Obama presidency.. but think his stance FISA is important..

                            I hope people like you do not cost Obama

        •  And I'll repeat something here (0+ / 0-)

          that I wrote in the silly "Don't donate to Obama" monstrosity inexplicably sitting on the front page of a website which considers itself important to electing Democrats:

          It's really messed up (0+ / 0-)
          Because I'm sure you don't agree 100% with every Obama move.  But you'll do your part, and more likely than not, we'll all get to enjoy a non-regressive in the WH because of it.  

          Meanwhile, the so-called "principled" get to run around here claiming that they're better than other people, because they refused to back down, blah blah blah.  

          Knowing full well that Obama will still probably win the next set of elections because people like you and me will cover their asses even as we're accused of sycophancy and cultish devotion and any other name they can come up with.  But we're supposedly the unprincipled ones and they're saving the country.

          I have never resented people here as much as I do now.  

          I have no respect for your stance, none.

  •  Ugh (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I do think the left is being too hard on Obama.  I think his recent positions reflect more of a RETURN to the center, and his pragmatism, than some kind of bolt there to get elected.

    Having said that, these "grow the hell up" diaries are getting old.  You sound sanctimonious and preachy. You sound like your  "shocked" after having been "away from  your computer" for so long to come  back and find this place has gone to hell.  And now you're going to put all of us in our place now that you're back.

    Here's a way to grow up...try respecting other  people's opinions and realize that this is a place for open debate, not falling in lockstep with whatever position X candidate happens  to be taking at the moment. And try to articulate disagreement without telling people to "shut the hell up".

    "I drank what?" -Socrates

    by BraveheartDC on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:26:48 AM PDT

  •  Here's my take (1+ / 1-)
    Recommended by:
    Hidden by:
    DavidW in SF

    Most of these people think that despite their posturing Obama will win the elections because people like me refuse to aid and abet the GOP and will get a Dem president in the WH come hell or highwater.  

    This is what they think: he's going to be elected anyway.

    And so rather than doing their part, they want to prance and posture and throw around masturbatory pronouncements that they're more honest, more ethical, and more protective of the Constitution than Obama.  Because it makes them feel good and they fully expect others to fend off the GOP while they bask in the glow of their own purity.

    I resent each and every fucking asshole who refuses to prioritize the unacceptability of McCain.  Each and every one of you fucking parasitic assholes.

    I know that was not the tone of your diary and apologies for the anger in my comment.  But this is absolutely sick and disgusting.  The GOP's left wing allies.

  •  Please, apply your own prescription... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    churchylafemme, two roads

    we have every right and responsibility to criticize Obama or any other politician who takes positions we can't tolerate. Don't let the intolerable be the enemy of the good, should be the phrase we use. Noone is demanding perfection.

    I will support Obama, even donated yesterday to the campaign, but I will not stop speaking out.

    In fact, I think the road he is going down is the road to defeat IF he loses credibility as the change and "new politics" candidate, and becomes just another politician trying to "win" elections.

  •  Don't tread on our freedoms, Washington assholes. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimpwatch, First Light
  •  Vote and then March with a sign! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Politics is about what governments do. Voting is only part of the process. In the 1930's workers didn't wait to elect politicians but instead went out on strike by the 100's of thousands to gain the right to organize. The same with the civil rights movements and the anti-Vietnam war movements of the '60's. Both had enormous successes because they focused on getting thousands of ordinary Americans mobilized in the streets.

    Vote for who you think best, but join the campaigns to bring the troops home now, win single payer health insurance, stop deportations of workers without documents, and so on.

  •  Why should we believe he will do (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    ANYTHING he promised. And he didn't reveal he was lacking a spine.

  •  PsiFighter... (9+ / 0-) and I have agreed on a lot these past few years, and while I know I am late to this party, I feel compelled to tell you where you can shove this sentiment of yours.

    Grow up?  What are you now, 22?

    I'm 40, and still have an enormous amount to learn, but when I was 22 years old I would have never had the arrogance to tell this community to grow up.  As you will one day look back and realize, you don't know jack shit, and won't until you're 30.  You have absolutely no idea, unless you've had some mighty rare experiences, of the maturity and strength some of your audience has had to muster simply to make it through life.

    Cram this, and come back a better and humbler person.  This really is shite.

    "A person is as free as they believe themselves to be off." - Fortune cookie

    by The Termite on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:36:42 AM PDT

  •  totally agree (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vicky, BirderWitch, FORUS50

    With this post. We have the best candidate that we could have now. No one is perfect and the list given supports that. The repubs love to see us squabbling about why our candidate isn't perfect and Olbermann's comment last night didn't help. I would have loved a vote against FISA but we have to put our trust in someone and Obama's it. Let's quit the distractions and focus on getting dems elected.

    •  This isn't about our support . . . (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      It's about holding accountable the candidate to whom we've pledged our support.

      Obama's run to the middle is dangerous; it's the type of tactic that emboldens McCain's image as a clear-cut maverick (even though you and I both know he is not). It's the type of tactic that didn't work for Kerry or Gore.

      Already the wingnuts talking points are painting Obama
      as unprincipled because of his softened stands on the issues of the past two weeks.  

      Of course Obama won't be perfect, but the moment we let his imperfections slide through the news cycles unchallenged, we lose our voice.  

  •  yes daddy (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    kiss my ass while you're at it.

    Don't drink and blog. Think of the children.

    by RickD on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:45:14 AM PDT

  •  qutie seriously (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    moira977, churchylafemme, chimpwatch

    Just what the hell is this 'diary' supposed to accomplish?  Telling people to 'grow the hell up'?

    There are legitimate questions about strategy and tactics here.  But you dismiss any serious question with your presumption of superior maturity and understanding of the universe.  

    Completely useless diary.  

    Don't drink and blog. Think of the children.

    by RickD on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:46:59 AM PDT

  •  Grown ups can see big picture AND its elements... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    churchylafemme, doglove, two roads

    ...and even posses multiple, sometime competing positions as they juggle what appears as the abstract with life and reality. This is a typical parental, paternalistic approach for you but  honestly the nuance of sincere constructive opinion is far more valuable for leaders than unqualified unconditional support.

    Surely those who, in my personal career, I listened to the most and accelerated the fastest were those who shared disagreements, had that ability to speak their truth to power without threat of division, and go on regardess of the final outcome.

    We are not Obama's peers reconciling compromises or collaborating. We are a community of progressive activists pushing to the left (usually), invested in maintaining our voice being heard, and the moment we are silenced or distracted the center moves right. Politics at the federal level is a matter of life and death. For those who respect the risks and the damage, usually conferred on others less fortunate, your scolding is noted and duly ignored.

    HR 676 is the best health reform proposal worth my vote.

    by kck on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:47:23 AM PDT

  •  I'm not disappointed in Barack Obama (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vicky, BirderWitch, FORUS50

    because unlike a lot of folks around here, I never saw him as any sort of progressive Messiah. I knew that he was going to make decisions as a Senator that were going to piss people around here off -- and maybe that's why it's so tough for Senators to get elected directly to the Presidency from the Senate, because the nature of their jobs means they're going to vote in ways that will piss voters off. (Or they could be like McCain and not bother voting at all, but that's another story.)

    But we need to face facts -- the primaries are over; if this issue had come out in February and March rather than June and July, we might be discussing the strategies of a different prospective nominee. Or we might not -- with the exception of Dennis Kucinich, Chris Dodd and possibly John Edwards, I can't see too many of the other Dem candidates making a different choice on FISA. Right now, Barack Obama is the best chance we have of returning the country back to a semblance of sanity. No, it's not going to be a progressive Utopia, but this country's been on the edge of a right-wing cliff for the past 7+ years, and just getting us back to the center is going to be an effort when faced with reactionaries and their media enablers who believe that anything left of Genghis Khan is "flaming liberal."

    Be critical when he and the Dems fuck up, certainly -- but when making your decision on who to support in November, remember the alternative; our lives literally depend on it.

    "Old soldiers never die -- they get young soldiers killed." -- Bill Maher

    by Cali Scribe on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:47:45 AM PDT

  •  Hmmm Excellent Diary (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vicky, BirderWitch, FORUS50

    I did not know that stuff about Feingold and Wellstone.  Its near nigh impossible to find a candidate that you agree 100 percent of.  I was a huge supporter of John Edwards ( still am) and was in huge disagreement with him about Iseral. In fact I am in diagreement with most democrats on that issue but it would NEVER stop me from voting for them.

    by GlowNZ on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:47:52 AM PDT

  •  Why isn't there a (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Stupid Diary button?

    It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are 20 gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. -- Thomas Jefferson

    by AtlantaJan on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:48:30 AM PDT

  •  Under the bus. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    There's a difference between throwing someone under the bus and not riding on that bus.  What Obama does is not let himself be defined by the comments of surrogates or supporters - that is not throwing anyone under anything.  

  •  This is why many Kossaks can't be trusted (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    ...not after the past few months.  To have demanded and ripped the place apart with demands for absolute purity from one candidate while now saying all things are good with another really just shows a horrific lack of principles.  

    Not on Obama's part.  Any rational person, any one who looked at his record, knew he is a standard politician.

    I'm totally fine with that.

    But hearing it from the crowd here?

    Yeah, people... whatever.

  •  I Don't Treat Any Candidate Like They're Perfect (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    two roads, BirderWitch, FORUS50

    . . . and anyone who does is a fool.

    Frankly, as far as any politician is concerned -- left, right, Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Libertarian -- it's the height of stupidity for any of their constituents to sit down and STFU. It's only by raising our voices that we can be heard over the sound of cocktail parties and cash exchanging hands.

    But, I'm also sick of hearing the rubric that now that Obama's campaign is in "general-election mode" that he has to track to the center. That might have been a lot more palatable 27 years ago, but not today.  Today, Eisenhower would be viewed as a moderate Democrat, and Nixon and Goldwater would be considered left-leaning Republicans.

    The only way the Democratic Party can stop being viewed as co-conspirators and enablers of the Neocon/Republican agenda is for their platform to begin pulling the "false center" back to the actual center, which at one time attempted to strike a balance between real Republican fiscal responsibility and real Democratic social responsibility with both parties supporting the US Constitution.

    I never thought Obama was the second-coming; Edwards-Dodd-Kucinich-Gore were my personal favourites. However, I had hoped that his actions and rhetoric in the primary would translate into an aggressive Democratic candidate in the general; what I'm seeing of late is just another DC politician.

    While I'll do everything in my power to stop McCain (or whoever the Repubs will actually run post-convention) from being elected, Obama's going to have to re-earn my vote as the Democratic candidate for POTUS.*

    (*Note: Obama will be on the Liberal ticket and the Working Family Fusion Party ticket in my state; he'll get my vote on the latter ticket. If he wants my vote on the Democratic ticket, he's going to have to prove he's worthy of it. I will not have my [Democratic party] vote taken for granted by any candidate.)

  •  Sez you. nt (0+ / 0-)

    McCain is a Chode.

    by dnamj on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 08:55:48 AM PDT

  •  What a bunch of sophistry (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    moira977, two roads
  •  The more Obama sides with Bush (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DavidW in SF, two roads, First Light

    The lower the turnout will be.  With FISA, Obama is siding with Bush and Obama is wrong.  This election is Obama's to loose and alienating voters by blurring the choice for President is a way to do it.  Barack needs to go back to what he was doing when he started.  The people will come out of the wood work for that guy.  People want change, not Bush lite or Bush lite lite.

  •  Another adult voice; Thank you PsiFighter (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Don't you people know that the Republicans like nothing better than a divided Democratic Party.
    Don't you think that they covertly are doing everything they can to divide us further.  They know that the whole thing can implode without them having to say a word, and you purists are playing right into their game. STOP IT NOW!!! Obama will make a fine President. He will not be a perfect President, but a fine President. Let's get him elected first and then worry later.

  •  Send your $100 back to Obama, Chump. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DavidW in SF
  •  What progressive agenda will he follow (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    two roads

    Obama he has pledged his support to AIPAC, pledged Iran will never have the bomb, pledged we will not exit Iraq until the generals on the ground say we should, said he was against gay marriage, did not take a stand on the Hand gun SCOTUS ruled on, and now he pledges to use MORE federal tax dollars for religious organizations.  Tell me one more time I sould grow up? Tell me one more time the progressive agenda he is going to implement?

  •  if there was a candidate... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    who agreed with me 100 percent of the time, even i wouldn't vote for them

    Politics didn't lead me to working people. Working people led me to politics. -- Barack Obama

    by JackieandFritz on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 09:02:22 AM PDT

  •  Wow. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    moira977, FORUS50

    I'm done with Daily Kos for a while.  Everybody has gone off their rocker over here, ideology aside.  The bitching and moaning over the same issue in a million and one different diaries is just beyond the pale because other varieties of good diaries fall off of the page.  

    Why can't somebody just stick a FISA thread at the top of the page and let everybody pitch a fit there?  

    I say grow the fuck up too--not for having grievances- but for failing to use the search function.  

  •  You know what's as bad as purity trolls? (9+ / 0-)

    People who think that anyone who criticizes is a purity troll.

  •  Isn't ironic that Obama... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vicky, BirderWitch

    delivered the wonderful speech announcing his run for presidency outside the Old State Capital in Springfield, IL. Of course this is the site Lincoln delivered his famous "a house divided against itself cannot stand" speech.

    I guess the same applies to us at the current moment.  When Obama wins the White Hosue...and he will and he must with all of our support and less of our complainign, we will have a roubust debate on ll f the issues that we differ on.  Won't that be a refreshing change we can beleive in!  

    Now, I'll step down from the soap box and get back to the work of getting Obama elected.

  •  I'm an American, dammit... (4+ / 0-)

    ...and that means I'm going let a candidate know when I'm pissed off at him/her.  I mean, that's what our political system is all about--making your voice heard.  I'm not going to "grow up" and just meekly accept who he's turning out to be, if I have an opinion to the cotrary.  He's going to be President on my dime, in part, so I have some say about how he conducts business.

    The America I knew and loved is finally dead at the hands of bipartisanship.

    by TheOrchid on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 09:07:48 AM PDT

  •  Bush Won, Get Over It (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sparhawk, two roads

    Thank you for rolling us back to 2001, as if we've learned nothing about letting a candidate reverse an essential policy once their accountability moment is past. We should all just be glad we voted for the winner, no matter what the winner will do with the power we gave them.

    Just grow up and get over it. In fact, it's inevitable, so just lie back and enjoy it.

    "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

    by DocGonzo on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 09:10:46 AM PDT

  •  Purity Trolls for Impurity Unite! (0+ / 0-)

    the Tent's big enough in the Democratic Party for any manner of Purity Trolls.

    It's just like a family:  crazy uncle to the left, school marm to the right.  But, I gotta love ya!

  •  Clintons=Evil...not imperfect. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    According to more Obama fans that I could care to note. The dissention has been there, since BEFORE Obama became the nominee. Why? Because Obama fans had satanized the Clintons beyond recognition for exactly these types of issues.

    I blamed the right wing...for taking these issues and blowing them up into complete lies. I blamed the people for buying into sound bites instead of doing their own research. I blamed the people for having black and white ideas of what a "good" democrat is. Many Obama fans were purity trolls in regard to the clintons. Now you don't understand why it is biting your candidate in the butt.

    Obama is my candidate. I don't care about money to faith based organizations, I don't care about his flip flop on guns. (I knew the gun lobby had him from hello).

    I care deeply about fisa. It's more important that war itself...because it redefines an act of war in the bill.

    Don't get over it...learn to distinguish facts from fiction. Get over the black and white thinking. Stop the projections on to each other and get busy learning about the fisa bill. Then do everything you can to influence Barack Obama, the candidate of choice to CHANGE his position.

    That's democracy.

    The greatest gift you can contribute to the goal of world peace is to heal.

    by wavpeac on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 09:15:43 AM PDT

    •  [raises hand as a serial Clinton satanizer] (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      guilty as charged, although I ardently defended them up until about late March, when something snapped in my mind.

      All in the past now.
      The snap has been healed.

      Part of this is the anonymity of posting under pseudonym. Although in "in-person" conversation I was quite brutal about the Clintons these part few months, I would have not posted as strong a vitriolic attack under my real name.

      I know this.

      The foibles of teh intarweb, the twisting of the tooobs ..

      Time to move on.

      "You know what the real fight is? The real fight is the definition of what is reality." Bernie Sanders

      by shpilk on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 10:03:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  refreshing response. (0+ / 0-)

        Peace. Now let's get the fisa bill stopped, and apply the rule my mother applied in child rearing.
        "will it still matter ten years from now?"

        On fisa...yes.
        On handguns...No...that changes with the wind.
        On money to faith based organizations? NO

        Let's all pick our battles carefully and understand that what is important to some might not be as important to others.

        WE are democrats supposedly because we see truth in many different positions like gays, and eastern religion and peace.

        We have to be able to disagree and learn to do it respectfully.

        The greatest gift you can contribute to the goal of world peace is to heal.

        by wavpeac on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 10:12:36 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Your Handwringing (5+ / 0-)

    Said candidate does something contrary to what conventional wisdom as dictated by a small coterie of prominent bloggers agrees with. Netroots becomes angry, throws up hands in the air, pounds keyboards angrily, fills up pixels with frustration, and does very little to influence the debate.

    Wrong. That's not what's happening.

    Obama did something contrary to his own correct policy, to the Constitution, to the vested interest of every American, to the rule of law and the Constitutional privacy protections.

    A broad group of regular people are very disappointed, and that naturally shows up in blogs.

    Where people can debate it with each other. And which debate the campaign watches (or is really disconnected, dangerously).

    If what you said was right, you'd be right. But it's all wrong. And we all know it's wrong.

    If you're going to lie about what's happening to everyone involved, right to our faces, you're not going to convince anyone. You might have a new venting point for the people who agree with you who are ready to lie about the most self-evident facts, but if that's all you win, who needs it?

    "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

    by DocGonzo on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 09:16:35 AM PDT

  •  There are blogs that continue (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    shpilk, BirderWitch

    to campaign against Obama, yes Democratic blogs. Just Google for them.

    This blog is mild compared with the other anti-Obama democratic blogs.

    What are they doing?! Obama on his worst day is better than McCain on his best day.

    This above all: to thine own self be true...-WS

    by Agathena on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 09:25:24 AM PDT

  •  If Obama's wrong, I'll shout it from the rooftops (5+ / 0-)

    I'm not a party man.

    I'm not a good little soldier.

    I don't owe a damn thing to Obama.

    At this point, Obama is revealing himself to be just another opportunistic, unprincipled egomaniac, although a vastly more palatable one than that odious phony John McCain  

    "Men use thought only to justify their wrongdoing, and employ speech only to conceal their thoughts." Voltaire

    by chimpwatch on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 09:28:22 AM PDT

  •  Obama's run to the middle (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DavidW in SF, dhonig, Naturegal, two roads

    is an uninspiring sprint to a bunker of political safety 100 meters below the surface of the campaign I fell in love with.

    I've said this before, but this discussion (and the preceding two weeks' events) isn't really about our support for Obama at the polls in November - it's about our weakening expectations for a truly bold, truly different candidate. It's about challenging him to vocalize the policies and principles he already said he believes.      

    I find it frightening so many recommend a diary vociferously endorsing the silence of dissent, of debate, of honest disapproval of our candidates tactics. Isn't that what we are here for? Or are we suppose to turn a blind eye, and follow our leader right or wrong?

    I am not the one who needs to grow up - and I would never claim that anyone who speaks their discontent needs to.

  •  Look, I don't want to upset anyone (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vicky, BirderWitch

    during this passionate discussion but honestly, would any of us ever in a second vote for a Republican scumbag after 8 years of W. and Dick?  McCain is a combined clone of W. and Dick.  

    Is our candidate perfect.  Of course not. Does he have to move to the center to get elected?  Yes. Period.  Do we like it?  No. But there are not enough of us to get a President elected, at least not yet.  

    My son is a field organizer for the Obama campaign.  He started as student volunteer in NH, then in GA., NC, here in Texas, SD and now in VA.  He'd come home between assignments and tell us extraordinary stories about the voters he spoke to either on the phone or when banging on doors.  As a college student brought up in a liberal home and attending a more liberal university, he was astounded at some of the comments and ignorance expressed by many American voters. I will not repeat some of the awful things said by racist ignorant morons about Senator Obama but I am sure you all know what I am talking about.

    Most Americans do not live in the liberal northeastern U.S. or in progressive areas of Calif. and the Pacific Northwest.  Most of us live in a vast middle of red, purple and blue U.S.  In Texas we have to fight hard for every blue vote.  It's tooth and nail, but we're fighting our hearts out and Democrats will never give up.  We also knows what it means to move to the center.  

    Obama knows he can count on us, even if we are displeased at times.  He cannot necessarily count on the purple regions which he needs to win.  It will be a hire wire act that will require a lot of patience and support, especially from us on the left.

    The media has a love fest going on with McCain, obviously, now that they're swift boating General Clark. All of the screaming heads will be shouting about every Obama mis-step or perceived flip flop.  Obama is going to have to take shit from all directions all of the time.   FOX will spew its hateful garbage 24/7.  

    It's going to be tough. And mean.  And ugly.  The Republicans will not give up w/o taking us all straight to hell if they have to.

    Despite the odds, we will win, but we must stick together, not like a bunch of blindly led Republican sheep, but as members in a big family that is committed to higher principles and ideals.

    •  I don't think anyone who challenges Obama would (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DavidW in SF

      disagree with anything you said. I don't see how people read these discussions and think Obama is bleeding votes because of some "netroots" schism. We are merely demanding that he returns to his bold message and ideas  and not settle for politically muddied, so called "safe", positions.  

      By silencing our valid criticism of Obama's run to the middle, we would become the very thing you warn against : blindly led sheep.

  •  yes we need more sanity and realism on this site (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vicky, BirderWitch

    nicely said and recced

  •  'Tis a sad day (4+ / 0-)

    When shredding the Bill of Rights is considered under the rubric of "nobody's perfect!"

    This isn't a minor issue.  This is THE big time.  This is "You no longer may be secure in your person, effects, things, etc and the Gestapo can AND WILL rifle your life whenever they fucking well please!  For your own good, you understand."

    Any other issues, issues not directly tied to the friggin' Constitution/Bill of Rights and OK, I'm with you, but that isn't the case here.

    Mustn't INSIST on the 4th Amendment!  Or the 1st ("Free Speech Zones"...including those of chicken wire and chainlink to be setup for the goddamned DNC protesters in Denver!).  How many other Amendments must go before the perfect is no longer the enemy of the good?

    Reichstag fire is to Hitler as 9/11 is to Bush

    by praedor on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 09:34:28 AM PDT

    •  if you think FISA (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      shreds the Bill of Rights, you probably don't realize how full of holes the 4th amendment is already.

      •  By all means (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        two roads

        Let's just go on our merry way and blow the rest of it away.

        I didn't say the latest FISA abortion shredded the entire Bill of Rights.  It DOES shred almost all that's left of the 4th, and by extension, the 5th.  That is quite enough for one bill, I should say.

        Obama should know better having once taught Constitutional Law.  Clearly he does NOT know better, and cares even less.  Just another skin suit in Congress that considers the oath of office to be a mere hazing ritual of hocus-pocus one needs to do to get into the posh seats!

        It's all about the Benjamins...and the power.

        Reichstag fire is to Hitler as 9/11 is to Bush

        by praedor on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 09:53:05 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  um...what? (0+ / 0-)

          Perhaps we're working with difference versions of the constitution because I fail to see how FISA undermines the 5th amendment.

          •  Warrantless spying (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            Secret evidence, etc, means no protection from self-incrimination.  Also, the big corporate telecoms get immunity while any commoner must bear the entire force of government thugery for the slightest infraction of the law.  That is most assuredly NOT equal protection under the law, that is one set of laws for the big money, another set for the little people.

            THAT is where the 5th gets to the grinding wheel.

            Reichstag fire is to Hitler as 9/11 is to Bush

            by praedor on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 10:07:14 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  there are (0+ / 0-)

              no self-incrimination aspects of FISA.  The government can still not compel you to testify in court.  They can still not use force to compel a confession from you.  To the extent that the evidence in a FISA court is secret, this is not new.  The court has always been secret.  However, if any charges are brought against you, they won't be brought in the FISA court which is a court of extremely limited jurisdiction.  The evidence will be presented against you in a district court and you will be free to confront it.

              Finally, while I don't support retroactive immunity for the telecommunication companies, there are certainly no equal protection complaints.  I can't even begin to conceive of how that argument is supposed to unfold.

              •  Greenwald himself (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                among others has gone over this.  It means that certain rich, powerful entities get special favor in the law (immunity, freedom to break the law and go free and clear WITH the government covering their back) while the rest of us would rot in the court system under its full punitive weight.

                Perhaps you should try breaking the law sometime and demand retroactive immunity because it would be "ruinous and unfair" to you?  Wonder how that would would fly very well if you were a big, rich, high-donation-giving corporation of other fatcat.

                Reichstag fire is to Hitler as 9/11 is to Bush

                by praedor on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 10:20:35 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  The equal protection clause (0+ / 0-)

                  is about preventing the government from creating separate classes of citizens and applying different laws to each.  I fail to see how that's occurring here.  There is no aspect of this law that says rich people can now violate the law to their heart's content in the future.  The law doesn't even allow telecommunication companies to do so in the future.  It immunizes their actions during a narrow time window  that has already passed, motivated by a belief that exigent circumstances existed.  While I'm not in favor of it, it's quite a stretch to say that equal protection is being violated, given the history of court cases on the topic.  

  •  I am a little late to this party (5+ / 0-)

    there being over 600 comments at all, but I think you miss the boat.

    Obama is sevrely lacking in the experience category.  During the primary, he really didn't take any position on the issues, preferring golden rhetoric.  When you brought this up to Obama supporters they said, he is so smart, you have to recognize his judgment.

    Well, now he has started to talk about the issues.  FISA - wrong.  Death Penalty - wrong.  Fiath Based Initiatives - wrong.

    In my opinion these aren't difficult issues.  They are the bread and butter of a democratic platform.  If the Democratic Presidential candidate isn't fighting to defend the 1st amendment, who is?  The Republicans?

    The appeal of Obama, I thought, was that he was going to win this election by being proud of being a democrat and fighting back when people take him to task for democratic policies.  Instead, he caved on FISA, he got swiftboated on Clark and he turned on Moveon.  Not to mention his historic support for the death penalty and "Charitable Choice."

    You telling to and people who think like me to "grow the hell up" is incredibly condescending.  My response is to tell you to wake the hell up.  These issues are important to me.  They may be the most important issues in the elction for me.  There are people who have worked their whole lives fighting the death penalty and incursions on the 1st amendment.  I know that I for one have earned the right, as if I had to, to base my decision on these issues.

    No candidate is perfect, I agree with you there.  However, it is up to each individual voter to decide for his or her self which deviations from perfection they are willing to accept and which ones they aren't.

  •  Another vulgar, abusive-parent style diary (7+ / 0-)

    It's demeaning, hypocritical, tiresome and doesn't help. Perhaps counseling is the way to go.

  •  This is all true, which is why (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vicky, two roads, Frances Nicole

    we should work to take the power away from the imperfect federal government and give more rights and power to the individual.

    Since the days of Lincoln, the federal government has been concentrating its power, and it took racist Rhenquist to recognize the huge power of the commerce clause and swing the pendulum back.

    As long as the fed concentrates, we will see more Bush-like power grabs, and it will be too easy since it's all in Washington.

    We need to take the power back - and it starts with reducing the power that exists.

    My password is: "transparency" This is a communal account. Everyone may play, few will win!

    by nanobubble on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 09:37:18 AM PDT

  • need to grow up yourself and take (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    shpilk, Nancy in LA, derpified

    your own advice.

    I sent an email to the Obama campaign requesting that they return my donations and that I would not be contributing any more volunteer hours after his capitulation on FISA.

    How the fuck does doing this assine stupid purity-minded thing do anything to help us win more?  

    I agree, we all need to grow up, but so do you.  Write a letter to Obama retracting your request, and just help Obama get elected.

  •  damn Unity Trolls (7+ / 0-)

    are driving me bonkers.

    I will not stand idly by while our government willingly, repeatedly, and flagrantly violates the Constitution. I will do this regardless of who is in power and I hope all those unity trolls out there wake up and join this fight for the Constitution.

    You can support Obama AND criticize him(and the party) at the same time. It's not very complicated.

  •  Bernie Sanders :) (0+ / 0-)

    "You know what the real fight is? The real fight is the definition of what is reality." Bernie Sanders

    by shpilk on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 09:55:50 AM PDT

  •  I love how (4+ / 0-)

    every time someone here criticizes Obama he or she is now a purity troll or a compromise troll or some such BS.


    Recommended by:
    Vicky, BirderWitch

    Otherwise we have no luxury of arguing whether his policies are progressive enough.

  •  I'm a Whistleblower and I'm OK (0+ / 0-)

    'It is the infrastructure for a police state.' Mark Klein, AT&T Engineer/Whistleblower on FISA Bill

    by Frank Onion on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 10:14:21 AM PDT

  •  Insistance on PURITY got us George W. Bush! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chicago minx

    Many of in 2000 Gore was atleast 66% of what we progressives wanted but many of us rejected Gore for Ralph Nader in the name of purity.  Who did we end up with?  You guessed it.

    NEVER again will I be so blinded by purity of pragmatism!

  •  very bizarre diary (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dmsarad, hardtoport

    Telling people to "get over it", while you childishly request your money back from Obama for his capitlation on FISA, is ridiculous and bizarre and completely undercuts your argument.  When you gave the money you were ok with giving.  If everybody did what you did, then your entire thesis would actually produce what you are decrying against.

    If you want Obama to win, then do everything you can, donate, volunteer...

    but my goodness, do not lecture people to get over it, while you are out there sabotaging the Obama campaign.

    I have commented on how i disagree on Obama's decision, and yet at the same time, have donated money.

    Unlike Kos, rewarding only "good" behavior, is not possible right now. We need Obama to win regardless of his positions, because as has been stated on many diaries, he is light years better than McCain, no matter where his positions land.

    What if the very money you took back or didn't send in, or that Kos doesn't send in, or that any of us didn't send it is the money that was the amount needed for Obama to win.  So now, because we don't reward bad behavior, we tip the election to McCain.

    The one thing i find so hard to believe is that people actually recommended this hypocritical diary.

  •  your money back? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DavidW in SF

    Was this a joke you threw in just to see if we were paying attention? --

    (and there have been mistakes; I sent an email to the Obama campaign requesting that they return my donations and that I would not be contributing any more volunteer hours after his capitulation on FISA),

    I hope you sent a second email and told them to keep your contributions, because you unfortunately overreacted -- kinda spur of the moment -- to the FISA story. Personally I find that it helps if I just work on my own faith-based approach to Obama's candidacy. Got an email from Plouffe last night asking me to send in the difference between what I've already sent and the $2300 we're all allowed to give. I was slightly shocked, but sent in some (not all) of it anyway. Peace.

  •  I don't remember all these condemnations (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    EdSF, Frances Nicole

    of purity in the primaries when "I can't vote for anyone that voted for the war" was the battle cry of the Obamanist's. Now today we get the news that Obama will expand Bush's Faith Based Programs. The dive to the center didn't work for Gore or Kerry why will it work for Obama?

  •  Oh look, more meta-hand-wringing. [yawn] n/t (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I also believe we must impeach Antonin Scalia for protection from his inhumanity.

    by SciVo on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 10:41:52 AM PDT

  •  So we just "Shut up and sing"? is that is??? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    there's nothing wrong with pointing out the bullshit of politicans, and Obama has his manure pile, like any other.  Perhaps not as large, but its there.  
    The real question is what will yo do about it?    If you are going to stay home or vote for Nadar, Paul, Bennet or, god forbid, McInsane, then hey, I agree--Grow the fuck up and get some perspective on the bigger picture and what's at stake.

    All that said, it is important to keep the heat on Obama and the feckless spineless corporate ass-weasel Democrats.  Make the changes in the a party and force the rest to toe a better line to the spirit of the party.  Things don't change by shutting up and accepting the status quo, you know.

    You don't negotiate with fascists, you defeat them in the name of democracy. --Ambr. Joe Wilson

    by FightTheFuture on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 10:54:17 AM PDT

  •  Until We Win (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Unless he wins won't have the luxury of arguing whether his policies are progressive enough!

  •  Okay, Mom. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    What next, clean my room?

    (Hence forth my posts should eb considered an 'Internet Nanny-Free Zone')

  •  I dunno... (0+ / 0-)

    I seem to recall that John Kerry attempted to run away from his ideology in order to stake out a "centrist" position for the General in '04.  I also recall that the "flip-flopper" label really damaged his campaign.  And what did George Bush say on the campaign trail just a week or two from the election?  Something to the effect that people may not always like it, but at least they know where he stands (presumably on the issues).  I think overall, these subtle shifts in position end up hurting Democratic Presidential candidates in the long run.

  •  Seriously, Chicken Licken, much? (0+ / 0-)

    There seems to be a real panic today on the part of our "pragmatic" diarists. Relax, no amount of single issue disappointment with the Democratic nominee is going to have us flocking to the polls to vote for McBush. As a gay man, I was disappointed with Obama's sad performance in the McClurkin affair, but I voted for him in the CA primary. Since then, I had really come to support him more strongly, that is, until the recent past few weeks. Will I and the vast majority of progressives vote for him in November? You bet. My only regret is that a candidate who seemed to be (for the first time in 40 years) a real profile in courage has gotten "pragmatic" enough in the last few weeks to compromise the Constitution, fail to defend Gen. Clark who said nothing wrong, in short, to go DLC in a hurry and that means, like so many Democrats before him, he will be the lesser of two evils. So don't panic, Chicken Licken, he'll get our votes and become another mediocre President  and that's better that than an evil Bushite.

  •  Gosh, Glenn Greenwald can't grow up either (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I'm with Glenn.

    The Obama Campaign's past two weeks
    (from today)

  •  What is up with this part? (0+ / 0-)

    I sent an email to the Obama campaign requesting that they return my donations and that I would not be contributing any more volunteer hours after his capitulation on FISA

    It ruins the whole message of the diary. Maybe you should grow the hell up.....

    Please join me at Kids For Change. Change the World!

    by Kids For Edwards on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 11:28:58 AM PDT

  •  Finally! Someone who thinks on all cylinders! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
  •  Its not the chatter, its the attitude (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    moira977, 3goldens

    Disagreeing with each others opinions is natural.  Its the "from on high" tone in which these pronouncements are delivered that grate on my nerves after awhile.  

    Having an activist parent whose political views are the polar opposite of your own while growing up helsp to develop an ability to disagree without calling the other person stupid.

    The name calling can be fun, though - I do it myself when I don't have enough time to be fair-minded and balanced - but in the end, it means we can't talk to each other.


  •  Thanks for this... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I would add, as an addendum to the following:

    I challenge any of you to find a 'progressive' or 'liberal' politician who would be perfect to you.

    ...Who could also get elected!

    The reality of the game is that sometimes a politician has to play some of the game to get in.  It's what they do once IN that we need to wait and judge, not what he/she says on the way there.



    "...That's wonderful. But I need a majority..." Presidential Candidate Adlai Stevenson in 1956, when told that he had all the "thinking people" on his side.

    by sophistry makes me tired on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 11:52:20 AM PDT

  •  Grow the hell up? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Frances Nicole

    Is that supposed to be an appeal to maturity?

    I don't have a problem with Obama's approach, I predicted as much, and I always felt there would be gnashing of teeth when people here started to realize he was right of Kucinich (though comfortably left for me).

    That said, it's amusing to see the same kind of apologies put forward for BO that used to be made in reference to Hillary, to a chorus of opprobrious responses and shoutings down. I kinda predicted that part too.

  •  Obama's the last man standing (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew, BirderWitch

    after a brutal primary fight, so everything he says and does will be picked over, dissected and analyzed.  He's the only one left on the radar.  There will be a great deal of outraged pronouncements, a lot of "so there!"   I'm just going to roll my eyes, enjoy the summer and look forward to Obama's decimation of John McCain in November.  

    John McCain: Vowing to connect real leaders with real bowels

    by chicago minx on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 12:10:32 PM PDT

  •  . (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Thomas Jefferson is quoted: - "Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day But a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period, and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers, too plainly proves a deliberate systematic plan of reducing us to slavery."

  •  Better Than Bush is OK with me (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    fortunately we've got FAR BETTER THAN BUSH....

    simplicity is the most difficult of all things

    by RichardWoodcockII on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 12:39:21 PM PDT

  •  You know what? Seriously? BLOW ME! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:


  •  F U pal (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimpwatch, 3goldens, doglove

    I'll grow the hell up around the same time I 'get over' the Supreme Court's Bush v Gore. Save your authoritarian brow beating for talks with yourself in the mirror.

    Who controls the past, controls the future. Who controls the present, controls the past. George Orwell

    by moon in the house of moe on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 01:34:18 PM PDT

  •  Nice title. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Frances Nicole

    To paraphrase:  If you don't agree with me, you're acting childish.

    Why does this have to be such an either/or issue for so many people?  The perfect being the enemy of the good is exactly the same as the good being the enemy of the tolerable/mediocre.  It all comes down to where one personally comes down on the spectrum.

    Of course, you, in your infinite wisdom, fall in the correct place on that spectrum while anyone who is willing to voice doubts on Obama is in la la land.  Got it.

    Politicians cannot be depended upon to act in the interests of the public in the absence of collective pressure.

    by Reframing the Debate on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 02:00:29 PM PDT

  •  I never thought I would see the day (6+ / 0-)
    when the supposed progressives are responsible for the rise of fascism in this country.  This is scary if people here feel that people shouldn't express their opinions or criticize the candidate.


    What is going to happen when he is president.  Are we expected to be like the rethugs and not criticize him then because it weakens his power?  We allow a fascist takeover through the back door?


    Dissent is good, criticism is good.  If you cannot see this, then you need to work for the other side, because they have quashed dissent until it killed their party.

    Hero worship is neither good for the hero nor the worshiper

  •  Great diary! You are right, no politician can be (0+ / 0-)

    all things to everyone.  

    John McCain, serial flip-flopper.

    by mishiem on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 02:08:39 PM PDT

  •  I thought this was part of the compromise (0+ / 0-)

    the Democratic Party was going to undergo to come together to elect Obama.  What is the matter with discussing our differences and preferences.  I don't consider it a compromise to support positions I do not agree with when I get nothing exchange.  that is just capitulation.  Do I have to watch yet another Democratic capitulation.  I have watched the Democrats move to the right for my entire life (born in 1943) so I don't like the looks of this rightward slide AT ALL.  

    PsiFighter37, I am grown up, so get of that authoritarian kick.

    We must be free not because we claim freedom, but because we practice it. -- William Faulkner --

    by Silverbird on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 02:09:52 PM PDT

  •  what is the "political fringe"? (0+ / 0-)

    Can you define that for me? Anti-war? Pro human rights? Pro privacy? Pro environment? Pro freedom of and from religion? Pro equal rights for all, even homosexuals? What is the difffernce between progressive politics and political fringe? I really need to understand this.

    by Jean on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 02:37:54 PM PDT

  •  Bingo, Psi... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    and good to see you again :-)

  •  This is entertaining as hell (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Catalino Jacinto

    Thanks for making my day, folks.  Now get the weed-whackers out mow each other down.  

  •  Congrats Psi (0+ / 0-)

    on being linked by Andrew Sullivan

    Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle. --Martin Luther King

    by BlackBox on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 05:32:49 PM PDT

  •  Sounds like a great thing to tell the (0+ / 0-)

    victims of Abu Ghraib ..... Nobody's Perfect .... which meanwhile would set a judicial precedent for letting W off the hook in war crimes trials .... Sorry, I don't like the box canyon this line of reasoning leads into from this diary. Joining in the dissent.

  •  Grow up, yourself (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    doglove, Cleopatra

    Real adults know that,  if you don't call people on it when they're fucking up,  they'll continue to fuck up.

    If people keep rolling over for anything and everything for the sake of winning elections,  the Democrats will wind up just like the Republicans have.

    If there's no loud,  continuing public outcry about issues like FISA,  we'll keep getting exactly what we've gotten:  a public sleepwalking its way through the slow destruction of our liberties and the rule of law.

  •  This unity trolling is increasingly tiresome (4+ / 0-)

    I'm an American, and I care about issues.

    I support politicians in direct proportion to the degree to which they support my preferred issue stances.

    Sometimes they disappoint me. I let them know, and my level of support adjusts accordingly.

    This is both right and proper. It is, after all, why I'm not voting for John McCain.

    What part of that is hard to understand?

  •  Kudos - very similar to my diary earlier (0+ / 0-)

    President Obama - start getting used to the idea.

    by DJ ProFusion on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:06:02 PM PDT

  •  I must be the only Democrat.. (0+ / 0-)

    ...who doesn't "Fall in love" during the primaries.

    Maybe that's why I agree with you, and don't agree with all the hyperventilators.  These guys aren't saints.  And nobody told you they were.

    Stop projecting your dreams of perfection onto mere mortals.  If you want a savior, join a religious movement.  Me, I just want someone better than the Republicans.

    All your vote are belong to us.

    by Harkov311 on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 07:10:09 PM PDT

  •  Better to infiltrate the system to effect change. (0+ / 0-)

    You can't win if you don't play. Ideological purity and philosophical consistency are laudable aspirations, but THIS IS POLITICS. We need to support our candidate comprehensively so HE CAN WIN and we can win. GET REAL, PURITY PEOPLE! Compromise, or LOSE! Standing inflexibly on principle is for the neocons and fundamentalists and unsatisfied losers. Barack is not just running to satisfy us progressives, but to try to truly change this Bush-World morass. Speak out all you want, but try to remember that real progressive change doesn't come from simply shouting from outside the tent or leaving the club when the band plays a song you don't like. We need to get our candiate elected, thereby infiltrating the broken system that is our government, and make change from the inside. Ultimatums are what we are trying to move past int this new era. It will require our patience and sometimes, our grumbling silence.

  •  dem politicians don't respect progressives (0+ / 0-)

    Not because we're ideological purists, but because they don't believe we'll vote for a third party.  They know we have nowhere else to go.  Me, I'm in a safe state, and I'm leaning towards Nader.

    It's not that I expect Obama to agree with me on every issue.  But his justification for capitulating on telecom immmunity was disgusting, Bush-style fearmongering, and insulted my intelligence.  "Restoring the constitution."  Right.  I feel like a fool for ever letting myself believe he was a real progressive.

    Also, 60,000 "residual" troops left in Iraq and no commitment to not increase the number of private security contractors does not equal "ending the war."  Surely better than McCain's Iraq policy, but still not progressive.

    Politicians have to compromise (not that FISA qualifies as a compromise, since we gave the Republicans more than they had dared dream of).  But grassroots social justice movements do NOT need to compromise.  Progressive policies have only been enacted in this country when social movements have become too loud to ignore.

  •  Obama speaking from the side of his mouth (0+ / 0-)

    'When you choose between the lesser of two evils, you still get evil'.

    Ralph Nader

    I am not voting for evil.  This guy makes Gore, Kerry, and Hillary look like the best things that ever happened to the Democratic party.  Back when Obama was declaring that he would get the most republican votes, he really bothered me.

    Then after Hillary was done, I decided I would get behind "the progressive" candidate and give him my vote.  This was the briefest honeymoon in history.  

    Goodbye, two party myth.  It's over.  It is very clear who Obama works for.

    Another Joe Lieberman. Nice.  Just what we need.  Wonder how long it will take him to turn on his anti-war stance.

  •  when you grow up (0+ / 0-)

    you become jaded and compromise yourself.  thats what mommy was saying when she was drinking her stinky soda. mommy said never trust a man and dont go to mexico too.the pic is of me.  

  •  I hate eff'en cheerleaders... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    ...They are the epitome of immaturity and simple mindedness. GW was a damned cheerleader and still thinks he is.

    Grow up? Please...

    The young man who has not wept is a savage, and the old man who will not laugh is a fool. George Santayana

    by Bobjack23 on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 09:02:44 PM PDT

  •  Go to the Field for a rationale presentation (0+ / 0-)

    Just read Al Giordano's post. And wrote to him:

    I'm new to the blogosphere. I read you, Huffington, Sullivan, and the Kos loyally. I'm 57 and a product of Kent State et al. Door to door for Carter, but disillusioned ever since -- until Obama. I teach third grade in what passes for the ghetto in Sacramento. We've got issues up to our noses. I've been treading water with these kids and their families for thirty years. This is our absolute last hope for America and for our children. I've been sending and will keep sending as much money as I can to this campaign. When I read what some of the posters are saying now about him - including Kos himself - I can't describe the despair I feel. Your post of his remarks and your reaction is music to my ears. This is rationale - not knee-jerk, similar to what I would expect from a narrow-minded Republican who is angry because their bought-and-paid-for candidate is not towing their ideological line. Once again, Al --- thanks for the insight. RieRie

    PsiFighter - You had through me most of your post until you got to the money part. good grief....

    Please read Al's post:

  •  Amen (0+ / 0-)

    America remains a Center-Right country unless and until we change it.  We cannot change it unless we win the Oval Office.  We will not win the Oval Office running from the Far Left.  

    Get off Senator Obama's ass and get to work supporting him.  His strategy is correct.  Period.

    When he wins and when Democrats win more seats in Congress, THEN we can change the world.  

    But we won't change a damn thing UNLESS WE WIN!!

    Grow up!!

  •  So you're going to resend your donation? (0+ / 0-)
tk421, mark, skybluewater, ethan, Sharoney, JUSIPER, CA Pol Junkie, N in Seattle, ether, Hamburglar, Louise, Mike, Grassroots Mom, Dana Houle, Superskepticalman, MichaelPH, Angie in WA State, zzyzx, wclathe, democrattotheend, SpyralPegacyon, Terri, sophie, zane, PLS, Sean Robertson, fcvaguy, Cowalker, Peace JD, Phoenix Woman, nolalily, taylormattd, Nathan in MN, slinkerwink, DawnG, Deja Vu, Dounia, Trendar, Better Days, Adam B, Oregon Bear, Christin, Steven R, daninoah, importer, dbratl, Turtle Bay, Delaware Dem, Superribbie, 2pt5cats, JeffLieber, droy20, mndan, TrueBlueMajority, zed, nicolemm, whataboutbob, mem from somerville, scrape, jkennerl, BooMan23, Robespierrette, savvyspy, Yoshimi, ctami, B Rubble, Debby, ETinKC, bornadem, kpardue, liz, hyperstation, Jay C, theron, Midwest Meg, jg82567, nedog, eeff, kineticdissent, DemDachshund, figdish, Bexley Lane, frisco, Don MacDonald, Luam, lilorphant, Carnacki, bethcf4p, object16, Joe B, Walt starr, bumblebums, zeroooo, Poika, beav, strengthANDwisdom, sclminc, TrueBlueDem, Plan9, RubDMC, virginian, DJ Adequate, Gustogirl, think2004, Babsnc, EricS, sponson, powerplay40, indybend, Mariposa, jackass, Dazy, Wee Mama, wonkydonkey, SamSinister, anotherCt Dem, groggy, nyceve, understandinglife, SecondComing, sja, DAVE DIAL, mishiem, Gundar Schwartz, brown girl in the ring, HippyWitch, Liz P, stevetat, IndigoBlues2, mxwing, mindoca, Glic, ZanderOC, KS McCann, Transmission, PocketNines, Dana in MN, someRaven, Aethern, peraspera, sgilman, skertso, Jeanni, juslikagrzly, dp3, CodeTalker, jbeach, k2winters, exconservative, sidinny, turneresq, itskevin, oceanview, Terre, state29, rioduran, bustacap, Yomberto, vogue500, dmsilev, terence, Cixelsyd, rian90, dksbook, OutOfManyOne, wader, sunflight, iowabosox, InquisitiveRaven, mayan, kharma, Getreal1246, psnyder, Alizaryn, snout, BleacherBum153, TexDem, oldjohnbrown, missreporter, Urizen, pat bunny, Chicago Lulu, MKS, wordene, Noodles, laderrick, madame defarge, lezlie, Seattlite, joemcginnissjr, Guinho, bloomster, Bulldawg, bklynarch, NYFM, homo neurotic, DiAnne, manwithlantern, joan reports, EngineerEd, attydave, defluxion10, mcfly, betson08, sinistral, applegal, Ericwmr, RenaRF, Timbuk3, Anna Luc, Democratic Hawk, TheJohnny, smartguy11, outragedinSF, CabinGirl, Oaktown Girl, Matt Esler, FlyingToaster, monkee, JohnGor0, ybruti, lee1954, randallt, DemDog, KayCeSF, tomjones, sfluke, valadon, homogenius, eve, BigBite, Sybil Liberty, xndem, howardpark, pat208, bibble, thereisnospoon, maggie sarah, jim bow