home
Double Standards - Part One Million | 134 comments (134 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

I've seen enough (5.00 / 7) (#1)
by dskinner3 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:12:18 AM EST
"all hat no cattle" for my lifetime.

While Obama may turn out to be a fine president, I've seen nothing but speeches to back that up. How long did he campaign with next to nothing of substance on issues?

The substance-free charge is itself empty (5.00 / 0) (#5)
by bumblebums on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:16:00 AM EST
but it's convenient for your narrative.

[ Parent ]
You're right, he does have substance. (5.00 / 10) (#15)
by ahazydelirium on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:24:24 AM EST
It's just a shame that it's Hillary's substance he has. His recently issued economic proposal seems to be an incomplete copy of Hillary's. Unsurprising considering she is usually ahead of the curve in terms of policy proposals, and he is always trying to play catch-up (read: jack her ideas quickly).

[ Parent ]
The charge of a campaign (5.00 / 3) (#17)
by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:26:45 AM EST
that is not one of sharp partisanship, Fighting Dems and liberal issues based is false you say? So Obama's own words on this are false you say?

I tell you what is really false, the charges by some of you at daily kos that this web site is racist and mendacious. That was offensive and wrong.

Perhaps you want to address that some day.

do a little unity schtick. You know Obama is going to be the nominee and he is going to need the Clinton supporters to win. The entire Obama Unity Offensive needs to be directed at fellow Dems.

The Hillary Hate should stop if you care about the Dem Party and Obama's chances in November.

[ Parent ]

Inertia (5.00 / 6) (#23)
by Edgar08 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:34:42 AM EST
They won't be able to stop.

[ Parent ]
Please remind us why this is (5.00 / 1) (#36)
by oculus on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:50:16 AM EST
inevitable:

You know Obama is going to be the nominee


[ Parent ]
not so, Clinton will be the nominee recall (none / 0) (#120)
by Salt on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 01:16:12 PM EST
she also was.....

[ Parent ]
My question was addressed to BTD (none / 0) (#130)
by oculus on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 01:45:42 PM EST
and I'm hoping he will answer it for me.

[ Parent ]
You could not be more wrong (none / 0) (#132)
by dianem on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:10:13 PM EST
The election is not even close to over. The primary might be leaning strongly in Obama's favor, but the election is going to last until November.  Clinton has gained 9 superdelegates since that day. Obama has gained 47. The numbers are large enough that I don't see why you need to exaggerate them. I'd get over that tendency. The right wing will grab onto false claims and make it seem as if Obama's supporters are delusional.

[ Parent ]
the inevitable (none / 0) (#156)
by teachermom on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:38:10 PM EST
I think BTD is using the "Obama is the nominee" meme as a suggestion for the Obamaites to take into account that they will need the pro-Hillary Dems to win, if (and I hope he isn't) he is actually --ouch, this is hard to write! - the nominee. Conversely if Hillary is the nominee it will not help her chances of winning if the O people have been slamming her non-stop.

[ Parent ]
Hillary hate (5.00 / 0) (#42)
by dem08 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:54:50 AM EST
true, it should stop.

But a person would have to be a scholar to find those instances where this blog hasn't been pro-Hillary and anti-Obama.

Ann Althouse criticized a female blogger for dressing sexy when she had her photo taken with Bill Clinton, explaining :

"Third, the real target of this post is Bill Clinton. I think Clinton betrayed feminism (and I hate the way many feminists have given him a pass)(Althouse. September 16, 2006)."

Talk Left will even use an anti-Clinton person who is temporarily FOR Hillary to flog Obama. And any Democrat has to know that Althouse consistently expresses scorn for Democrats, progressives, young women, and praise for the war & Republicans. She and Instapundit are a joke in their "neutrality" and so-called Democratic Party membership.

I do not blame anyone for being negative.

I have a thesis, hardly original, that the nature of the Internet is to stir up easy hatreds.

However, a reader of this blog and nothing else,  would wonder why Obama ever was elected a district committeeman, much less is allowed to run for president.

Clearly, many on the so-called "left" --I say so-called because few progressives call for Single Payer Universal Coverage, Guarenteed Living Wage, etc. Obama doesn't either, but the old labels really don't apply anymore--leave one wondering why Hillary won anything and the farthest out there supporters, like Taylor Marsh and whoever her anti-Hillary counterparts are, why Obama isn't in jail).

And believe me, Mr. Llorens, I respect you, and so respectfully, I wonder why your distaste of Obama runs so deep. You say often that you "Favor" Obama as the most electable, and I know (like me) you wanted John Edwards, but reading this blog and being a life-long member of the Democratic Party, I think you describe Obama as deserving nobody's support for any office.

I know Jeralyn is a true blue Hillary supporter, and, respectfully, so is Talk Left.

[ Parent ]

Excuse me (5.00 / 3) (#71)
by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 12:14:09 PM EST
I get so tired of these types of comments. Let's go through it:

"But a person would have to be a scholar to find those instances where this blog hasn't been pro-Hillary and anti-Obama."

There has NEVER been even a single post that attacked Barack Obama's character or commitment to progressive positions at this blog. EVER. Disagreeing with a pol is not hating them. That is the difference most Obama supporters seem unable to grasp.

Talk Left will even use an anti-Clinton person who is temporarily FOR Hillary to flog Obama. And any Democrat has to know that Althouse consistently expresses scorn for Democrats, progressives, young women, and praise for the war & Republicans. She and Instapundit are a joke in their "neutrality" and so-called Democratic Party membership.

Jeralyn Merrit has had a relationship of longstanding with both Althouse and Reynolds. She will engage them and agree with them sometimes and disagree with them in others. Anyone who has read me on both of those writers knows where I stand about them. But this is Jeralyn's blog and I do not trash her friends for no good reason. Did you address the SUBSTANCE of what Jeralyn wrote or merely attack the source of the argument?

I do not blame anyone for being negative.

When it comes to character attacks, I do.

I have a thesis, hardly original, that the nature of the Internet is to stir up easy hatreds. However, a reader of this blog and nothing else,  would wonder why Obama ever was elected a district committeeman, much less is allowed to run for president.

An ignorant reader of this blog would have that problem, or a cultist who can hear no criticism of the object of their worship without lashing out.

Clearly, many on the so-called "left" --I say so-called because few progressives call for Single Payer Universal Coverage, Guarenteed Living Wage, etc. Obama doesn't either, but the old labels really don't apply anymore--leave one wondering why Hillary won anything and the farthest out there supporters, like Taylor Marsh and whoever her anti-Hillary counterparts are, why Obama isn't in jail).

True dat.

And believe me, Mr. Llorens, I respect you, and so respectfully, I wonder why your distaste of Obama runs so deep. You say often that you "Favor" Obama as the most electable, and I know (like me) you wanted John Edwards, but reading this blog and being a life-long member of the Democratic Party, I think you describe Obama as deserving nobody's support for any office.

Then you have not read my posts on Obama, that span a near 3 year period, starting with my posts critical of him on the Supreme Court fights on Roberts and Alito. I am not going to explain myself to you. Your inability to even cite what my arguments are tells me all. You have not ENGAGED my writing at all.

You write well, but you say nothing imo.

I know Jeralyn is a true blue Hillary supporter, and, respectfully, so is Talk Left.

So what?

[ Parent ]

It's really not (5.00 / 1) (#118)
by Faust on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 01:11:58 PM EST
There is defenitely some heavy handedness that goes on at this site BUT I've seen more generally civil discussion on this site than I've seen on most other blogs.

Look, things are really, really, really polarized in the left blogosphere right now. This site is also polarized, but it's far less polarized than most.

Lets say I asked you for some truly neutral and objective website where the discussion was disciplined and civil. Can you give me a good example?

And that's not a rhetorical question I really mean it, cause most sites at this point just gross me out. This one does too sometimes, but it seems better than average which is why I've started comming here regularly.

[ Parent ]

OpenLeft seems pretty civil and reasonable (none / 0) (#148)
by dotcommodity on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 05:52:31 PM EST
to me, I think here and OpenLeft are the likeliest.

I prefer the um...furnishings at dailykos (the hotlists, the inconspicuous post design) etc, but it has been taken over by such a frenzy of testosteronefueled rage that no one there can think straight anymore/the commenters at MyDD, similar problem/other side...


[ Parent ]

Protesteth Much? (none / 0) (#109)
by mattt on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 12:51:01 PM EST
There has NEVER been even a single post that attacked Barack Obama's character or commitment to progressive positions at this blog. EVER.

Some people might interpret accusations that a candidate makes "mendacious excuses" and has played "dirty tricks" in order to "disenfranchise" millions of voters, and who "attacks" a rival in a "harmful and divisive" manner out of "fear" as suggestions of character flaws.

At least, in progressive circles.  ;)

[ Parent ]

Only people (5.00 / 1) (#111)
by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 12:55:23 PM EST
who have illusions about what politicians are.

Are you one of those?

[ Parent ]

If the shoe fits... nt (none / 0) (#138)
by FlaDemFem on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:47:17 PM EST


[ Parent ]
You are suspended (none / 0) (#119)
by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 01:14:32 PM EST
Do not commment further. And no, not because of this comment.

[ Parent ]
Should Be The Norm (5.00 / 4) (#91)
by squeaky on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 12:33:06 PM EST
And believe me, Mr. Llorens, I respect you, and so respectfully, I wonder why your distaste of Obama runs so deep.
Seems to me that BTD is taking the position that every supporter should take. It only looks like distaste for the candidate and not his campaign mistakes and policies because everyone is showing nothing but uncritical cult adoration for their candidate, who can do no wrong.

Were things more normal we all would be making demands on both candidates to stop the BS and really win our support.

Not too much of that has been happening in either camp. It seems more like a redsox/yankees game than anything else.

[ Parent ]

Excellent analogy. (5.00 / 1) (#94)
by jeffinalabama on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 12:35:30 PM EST
We should be demanding critically. thank goodness for the non-or weakly-aligned commentators who do examine issues, strategy and tactics without wearing rose-colored glasses.

[ Parent ]
and (none / 0) (#39)
by myed2x on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:52:21 AM EST
vice versa.

[ Parent ]
How long did he (none / 0) (#9)
by dskinner3 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:19:11 AM EST
spend on the campaign trail without being truly substantive on the issues? Enlighten me.

[ Parent ]
I read somewhere (5.00 / 10) (#14)
by ghost2 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:23:31 AM EST
(and unfortunately can't think where) that the Axelrod campaign went aggressively after manufacturing a movement.  They aggressively got after their people to attend rallies.  

Trust me, all this inspiration is the Emperor's New Clothes.  It has NO substance whatsoever.  Obama has a really good speaking voice, and he is good looking.  That's it.  That's the whole movement.  He is marketed like the latest i-phone.  

Also interesting is that I believe Axelrod once had a astroturf company.  He would be stupid not to use that tactic in the internet, and not infiltrate sites.  Much easier, much more hype created, and tracks covered.  

For example, there was perhaps a 10 to 1 ratio of Obama to Clinton supporters on dkos.  But 95% of them jumped into diaries to distrupt it, and continuously repeated their empty talking points (such as Roolz).  They never were interested in engaging in a discussion.  

All seemed to me highly suspicious.  


[ Parent ]

Obama is marketed like the iPhone? (5.00 / 1) (#60)
by Prabhata on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 12:07:15 PM EST
I take offense because I like the iPhone and see it as a great advancement.  Obama is an empty suit and his people are using race to create a greater divide.  I'm sick and tired of Obama and no marketing will turn me around.

[ Parent ]
I do prefer... (5.00 / 2) (#77)
by DudeE on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 12:18:18 PM EST
...the term 'empty vessel' to empty suit.  Empty suit implies a certain vacuousness.  He is an empty vessel by design.

No joke, he claimed "I serve as a blank screen...on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views."

Sorry but that kind of stuff scares me.  A bit like the person who always answers a question with a question.

[ Parent ]

Amen to this (5.00 / 1) (#101)
by davnee on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 12:43:36 PM EST
This is why I can never vote for Obama.  He terrifies me.  Not because I think he's a Manchurian candidate entered into the race by the Muslims, black separatists, Wall Street money men, Clinton-hating New England Dems like Kerry or Leahy, lefty netroot nuts, or the Republicans themselves, but exactly because he is so unrelentingly empty in his message that you can't disprove any of those outlandish theories.  He deliberately stands for nothing (sure he has a website, lol, but he is only substantive when forced into it).  I want a little courage and a little conviction in my candidates.  Even if it is the courage and the conviction to say something I disagree with.  At least I'd respect that.  Don't flash a mirror at me and hope I get dazzled by the glare or seduced by the image of myself smiling back at me.  I don't want a pony.  I want a president!

[ Parent ]
The irony (5.00 / 1) (#137)
by nemo52 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 02:46:35 PM EST
of it all is that the same group that wanted a "fighting dem" gets one, and then because she won't stop fighting, revile her.  Ugh.

[ Parent ]
Very good observation--fighting Dems are (none / 0) (#141)
by jawbone on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 03:47:31 PM EST
worrisome to some. How can they be controlled?

BTW, I came to back Hillary from being a strong Edwards' supporter. The more I learn about her, the more impressed I am--the more I think she could really accomplish things as president.

And I had been one who kept saying, well, if Edwards doesn't win I see Hillary as a great and good force in the US Senate. Meaning I'd pretty much accepted there was real "there" to Obama. Then I began to notice there was little to no "there there."

And now I'm worried Hillary won't be the nominee.  

[ Parent ]

Someone compared him to a Mac (5.00 / 1) (#89)
by nycstray on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 12:27:01 PM EST
and her a PC. I had to laugh because it was right around the time when the MacBook Air came out . . .

That said, I perfer my Macs not be compared to Obama. I know they can hold up to the massive amount of work I put them through, him, not so much.

[ Parent ]

Double Standards - Part One Million | 134 comments (134 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft