Skip to main content

They have prattled on, inventing controversy where none exists, to "create" the political dialogue; with the cooperation of the shiny object obsessed, lack of Fourth Estate awareness, modern Corporate Media, they have succeeded.
Healthcare reform turns into killing grandma, a new President of color becomes a never ending "story" about his citizenship, birthplace, how he got his education, etc.
And the media leading the parade until hacks like Donald Trump, of all people,  blow another dog whistle, or political losers like John McCain want some air time and create another "controversy". Thank you for your service sir, but somewhere around Sarah Palin-ville, that card expired.

And the media keeps on playing the game, never mind that Obama has the most politically diverse cabinet in a very long time, actually incorporating the "enemy" into his decisions. That would never get close to happening on a Republican's watch.
That isn't constantly brought up when the watch words were "bi-partisan cooperation". The previous GOP candidate, whose name I care not to ever type again, was making bi-partisanship sound like something he and Karl Rove thought up having drinks with the Koch brothers, rather than Obama's exhausted path of semi- effective action- so much that those of us with Liberal minion status are saying "screw bipartisanship" cram it through and make it stick.
One thing Reagan was right about, it's easier doing it and then apologizing, rather than trying to get consensus and approval beforehand.
Now the GOP and the media- (I include the media in almost every shape and size, they are an unofficial adjunct of the GOP ("it's a horse race, it's a horse race" was no accident)- Fox is just the most glaringly obvious) are lining up with do-nothing, know nothing Republicans as they build the momentum and "create" the story of Benghazi and why Susan Rice isn't qualified. Never mind that in reality anyone that Obama nominates isn't qualified- unless he chooses Paul Ryan, and that's a definite maybe,

There was confusion after Benghazi, but more importantly, it was confusion that primarily result was to NOT aide and assist the enemy.
All we, the American people need to know right then, was that a tragedy had occurred at an American consulate and angry anti-Americans did it. That way, we are not advertising that al-quaedi struck the American Satan or some such. I still remember the Iran hostage crisis and every thing said or done turned into fuel for the extremists and points for screwing the Great American Satan.  No one knows how many similar incidents on the anniversary of Nine-Eleven, giving al-quaedi public props, could have incited.
When things settle out, as they did, cooler heads would see that absolute transparency was not in the nation's best interest at the time.
But cooler heads amongst the GOP, -especially with their candidate going down in flames at the same moment, were not to be found.
So the echo-chamber and the McCain start generating the whirlwind that it was the bearer of the new, not the creator of the news, who should bear full responsibility for the "travesty to the American people, blah, blah"  Even after the President said he accepted responsibility for the entire thing, the slathering pitch-forkers ignored that.
That Susan Rice, because of this "travesty  to the blah, blah" was not qualified to replace Clinton, despite her extreme qualifications. In fact, it was a done deal and they would not vote for any replacement (sound familiar?) until this "travesty" is resolved. The one they made up and turned into chaos, non-jobs distraction, sound bite city with the media happily recording and echoing every statement as though it had merit.
Why the big deal, why this candidate- as the Norquist mandate starts to crumble?
I asked myself that question as I listened to the whole thing unfolding on NPR and BBC, why such a big deal?
So, I web searched it, hoping against hope that my hunch was not accurate, and I saw a picture of Susan Rice, and it confirmed my suspicions, once again.
My hunch was based on their past behavior -Sotomayor, among others, leaps to mind.

In an abbreviated way, that's why I am so sick of Republicans.

At least they aren't requesting Rice's birth certificate; yet.

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

  •  feel ya, me too, sick of idiots (6+ / 0-)

    carrying crosses and annihilating civilization for money and power

    "Lets show the rascals what Citizens United really means."

    by smiley7 on Tue Nov 27, 2012 at 07:06:41 PM PST

  •  And they put them on everywhere like they mater nt (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FiredUpInCA, jan4insight, kurt

    Occupy- Your Mind. - No better friend, no worse enemy. -8.75, -6.21<> Bring the Troops Home Yesterday

    by Thousandwatts on Tue Nov 27, 2012 at 07:11:29 PM PST

  •  There is a pattern. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    These are not random utterings. When we can turn back all of their messages, and there is follow-through on a forward-looking agenda, then we'll have some peace. Until we do, it's lock-and-load (metaphorically), seek out the enemy wherever he or she hides, and undercut ourselves as soon as humanly possible.

  •  You may like this: How Conservatives (4+ / 0-)


    1. Select one of your opponent’s positions or proposals.

    2. Imagine some possible result this proposal might have if enacted. Bonus points if – here’s the extrapolating – this result lies at several removes from the proposal’s actual, stated goal.

    3. Now imagine some cost, trade-off or downside which that result might theoretically entail.

    4. Take this distant, hypothetical cost you’ve imagined, present it as a certainty, and declare it to be your opponent’s “plan” or real, though secret, intent.

    It's not mine; I use it by permission. I think it hits all the points quite well.

    Send conservatives to for re-education.

    by filthyLiberalDOTcom on Tue Nov 27, 2012 at 07:34:18 PM PST

  •  Being a visitor to a few of my diaries, (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Thousandwatts, FiredUpInCA

    you can probably guess that we are in agreement about being sick of republicans.

    My newfound duty is to do my part, however small, writing about the bullshit that they come up with.


    Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us.
    ~ Jerry Garcia

    by DeadHead on Tue Nov 27, 2012 at 08:03:39 PM PST

  •  There's something to learn from Republicans. (4+ / 0-)

    In November 2008 they were voted out of the White House and they lost seats in the House and Senate.  The economic meltdown made it all too clear that Republican economic policy was a failure.  They didn't miss a beat.  They immediately set to scheming their way back.  Same thing this year.  There was a few days when it seemed they had some soul searching to do.  They quickly realized they have no souls to search and carried on where they left off.  

    "Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves." - Abraham Lincoln

    by leftreborn on Tue Nov 27, 2012 at 08:15:03 PM PST

  •  They are a cancer... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Thousandwatts, bluezen

    on the body politic.

  •  Me too (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    (R's) take those tired memes and shove 'em, Denise Velez Oliver, 11/7/2012.

    by a2nite on Tue Nov 27, 2012 at 08:58:46 PM PST

  •  I'm sick too, so to quote Tony Soprano.... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jan4insight, Thousandwatts

    ... They gotta go.

  •  Thousandw - "nevermind that in reality (0+ / 0-)

    anyone who Obama nominated isn't qualified" is not a true statement. Senator John Kerry would rapidly sail through confirmation in the Senate to become the next Sec of State.

    "let's talk about that"

    by VClib on Tue Nov 27, 2012 at 11:26:57 PM PST

    •  yeah well.... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wintergreen8694, Thousandwatts
      Senator John Kerry would rapidly sail through confirmation in the Senate to become the next Sec of State.
      Correct....but, the 'R's have an agenda about that as well (as has been stated here and on Rachel Maddow), confirming John Kerry would free up his Senate seat and they could run Scott Brown once again in a special election to get an 'R' in the Senate from MA.

      I think, therefore I am........................... Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose....AKA Engine Nighthawk - don't even ask!

      by Lilyvt on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 05:24:53 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  why didn't you finish your thought? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wintergreen8694, Thousandwatts

      kerry's confirmation would "sail thru" for the purpose of attaining the r's alterior motive of getting snotty brown back in the senate vis a vis him winning the special election to fill kerry's seat.

      kinda undercuts your implication that the r's are willing to cooperate in some circumstances . . . uhh-huhh.  yeah.  right.

      you might have to delay your scott brown victory dance, tho.  word is, kerry's not interested in state.

      •  bluezen - because that wasn't my thought (0+ / 0-)

        There has been a fair amount of debate here at DKOS regarding Brown's interest in another Senate run, having just lost. Some feel he wouldn't run and is looking at the governor's race in 2014. I don't know Mass politics well enough to have an opinion.

        My only point was that Kerry could be easily confirmed. Period.

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 09:13:45 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  and, why do you think kerry could be confirmed so (0+ / 0-)


          that was my point.

          •  Because first and foremost the Senate is a club (0+ / 0-)

            and John Kerry is a club member in good standing. He would be treated with courtesy and given expedited approval.

            "let's talk about that"

            by VClib on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 08:08:19 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  bull.shit. you're playing games here, & you know (0+ / 0-)


              it's interesting that last nite i heard several r senators use the exact same words you did in your original comment, about a kerry nomination for sos "sailing thru," blabbity-blah-blah-blah.

              you must be on one of their staffs (?) or of the same political persuasion, pehaps?

              •  Maybe they are reading my comments on DKOS? (0+ / 0-)

                This isn't PhD level political science. In the 40 years that I have been closely following politics the only Senator that I can recall being contested for a Cabinet post was John Tower and he had retired from the Senate a few years prior and had some personal problems with alcohol.

                "let's talk about that"

                by VClib on Thu Nov 29, 2012 at 07:31:52 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  you actually think they read?? that's giving them (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  WAY more credit than they deserve.  as for your political attentiveness resume, you over-estimate the impressive nature of its value.  one can be an observer, & yet see nothing.

                  i find it an interesting confluence of events that you consistently parrot the republican view on almost every issue . . . & regularly rec comments by other users who do the same.

                  what conclusions is a reasonable person to draw from such a pattern of behavior?

                  •  bluezen - I have written 22,000+ comments (0+ / 0-)

                    I would be surprised if you have read 1% of them.

                    "let's talk about that"

                    by VClib on Thu Nov 29, 2012 at 08:43:42 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  apples & oranges. so what if you've written (0+ / 0-)

                      2 million comments.  of the ones i've read, you consistently demonstrate where you stand on issues -- & the majority of the time it's with conservatives.  

                      you do the same when you rec comments, too -- for example, anytime someone posts one tsk-tsking d's for being "mean" to r's, or sings the praises of compromise with the r's on anything & everything, your name is usually guaranteed to be in the rec parentheses (& many times, it's the only one).

                      i don't know why you seem defensive about it.  are you ashamed?  is it supposed to be a great secret, or something?

                      •  To add my two cents to ya'lls personal verbfest, (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:

                        since I started the diary- I do find it interesting that while the gist and main point of the diary is that repugs hate and slow down or reject everything- legislation, appointments- even stuff like veteran's benefits etc Obama has done- damn near, surely they liked the republican cabinet members (before you cite those as "errors" in my assertion)
                        You pick out this not even a done deal or a true. proposal of John Kerry to point out an err in my diary premise.  In fact,Susan Rice looked to be the candidate- and the rethugs don't like her and that is the thrust of my diary.
                        To say, oh but they like Kerry so your not correct, is gagging on a gnat while digesting the camel.

                        And bluezen has a point, I have found myself reverting to your home page on other occasions wondering where the hell these opinions originated.
                        Nothing wrong with being "original" but the sense of something awry is noticeable.

                        Occupy- Your Mind. - No better friend, no worse enemy. -8.75, -6.21<> Bring the Troops Home Yesterday

                        by Thousandwatts on Thu Nov 29, 2012 at 10:45:54 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

    •  I meant "not qualified" in the eyes of the GOP. (0+ / 0-)

      There is an open contempt for anyone Obama puts forth, also the "open senate seat" issue comes into play.

      But, in Kerry's particular case, I remember how the Swift Boaters jammed him up and he went from being a viable candidate with a verifiable war record to, yes, he served but it wasn't really all that bad fighting and purple hearts where he was weren't really medals etc kind of thing and those inclined to believe it, did.  

      Kerry is approved for state, everything slightly question able, plus shit they make up is re-aired and the special election allows Brown back in- an R for the GOP in the senate.

      Congress critters respond to constituents and fox news would foment a "grass roots" reaction that turns him into a collaborator, more of Commie Obama stacking the deck with fellow travelers or something along those lines.

      Occupy- Your Mind. - No better friend, no worse enemy. -8.75, -6.21<> Bring the Troops Home Yesterday

      by Thousandwatts on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 07:17:59 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Thousandwatts - I thought your comment was (0+ / 0-)

        overreaching when there was a candidate who has been widely mentioned, and would be easily confirmed. The Senate has a long history, with only a very few exceptions, of approving one of their own for cabinet posts.

        There would be no mention of the Swift Boat issues by any Senators during a Kerry confirmation hearing. What outside parties would do is unclear. However, if he is nominated for SecDef I expect he would be confirmed, but that it will crate some waves. I am surprised that Kerry is mentioned as a potential SecDef, or that he would even want the job.

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 09:19:14 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  He would be graciously confirmed by the Senate, (0+ / 0-)

          and in the media, not the senate, all of his history will be brought up- swift boats, flip flop etc - and the GOP, will show their magnanimity and approve his confirmation- with their eyes firmly fixed on his senate seat.
          I believe if it wasn't for senate seat, and the contrasting example of Susan Rice, the GOP would hold true in their resistance with certain, perhaps more measured, resistance to Kerry.
          While the GOP has fought and disagreed with every Obama choice, Kerry's confirmation is a unique example of the needs of the GOP coinciding with an Obama selection- so smooth sailing is foreseen, though, in fact, he hasn't chosen Kerry yet.

          Occupy- Your Mind. - No better friend, no worse enemy. -8.75, -6.21<> Bring the Troops Home Yesterday

          by Thousandwatts on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 10:44:41 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Thousadwatts - I don't agree (0+ / 0-)

            While there is no doubt that the GOP would like another shot at a Senate seat in Mass I think they would graciously approve Kerry for any cabinet post for a different reason. More than any other factor the Senate is a club and John Kerry is a club member in good standing. This transcends political parties. When a club member is up for confirmation they are approved, it's one of the club rules.

            "let's talk about that"

            by VClib on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 10:57:29 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Maybe that's why Obama has positioned Rice as the (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              potential front-runner, rather than Kerry; someone not in the club.
              And he may be confirmed happily and easily, but the media will re-run his history and his tenure will be closely monitored.
              Even without the senate seat at stake, there will be a get out of jail free card on his endorsement, so when a potentially politically explosive incident occurs, the GOP can hop all over him without having to do too much backwalking. A measured endorsement to cover their ass when it becomes politically expedient to attack Kerry over performance.
              Even though he's in the club, which I acknowledge, he is still a dem and he is still working for Obama and that cuts a lot of senatorial family ties.

              Occupy- Your Mind. - No better friend, no worse enemy. -8.75, -6.21<> Bring the Troops Home Yesterday

              by Thousandwatts on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 11:45:31 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  it's a game (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    the kabuki theater is a big part of it.

    for both sides. don't let it get to you.

    learn to play the game better than them.

    -You want to change the system, run for office.

    by Deep Texan on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 06:55:51 AM PST

  •  and stop letting them create the rules. n/t (0+ / 0-)

    Occupy- Your Mind. - No better friend, no worse enemy. -8.75, -6.21<> Bring the Troops Home Yesterday

    by Thousandwatts on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 07:19:29 AM PST

  •  Bengazi was a tragedy so what do they focus on? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    What Susan Rice said in a press conference. WTF?

    Ok, maybe you could score some points arguing that we should have had better intelligence before and after this attack, or protected the embassy better, or whatever.

    But to go on and on about what was said or not said in a press conference (which was Susan Rice's only public involvement in this whole affair)? That is so bogus. It's not a scandal. It's not worth 5 minutes of anybody's time. It's not a reflection on Susan Rice's character. They are only doing it to score political points. And it is not helping increase national security, one bit.

    •  Exactly, and the echo chamber plays the game imo (0+ / 0-)

      and focuses on the shiny objects and repeating the politicians' barking point of the day.

      Occupy- Your Mind. - No better friend, no worse enemy. -8.75, -6.21<> Bring the Troops Home Yesterday

      by Thousandwatts on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 09:27:14 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  As crass as it may sound, the truth is the GOP has (0+ / 0-)

      learned that a tragedy brings with it the opportunity of political exposure and, by timing it right, they can make political hay from the misfortune of others.

      Katrina held many lessons; unfortunately not necessarily the right ones.

      Occupy- Your Mind. - No better friend, no worse enemy. -8.75, -6.21<> Bring the Troops Home Yesterday

      by Thousandwatts on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 08:36:24 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site