Leave President Obama Alone!

Booman writes - hilarity ensues:

If you supported Obama during the primaries, you know who you are and this does not necessarily apply to you. For the rest of you, you spent the primaries either shilling for Clinton and telling us our guy was all talk and no show, or you spent them bitching that David Plouffe wouldn't respond to and obey your emailed wisdom. As soon as he won the presidency, you started bitching about his appointments. As soon as he became president, you started bitching about his messaging, his framing, his agenda, and his lack of deference to your opinion. I want to know where the point was in this process when Obama was supposed to conclude that you were his allies and that you were responsible for his victory. When was he supposed to conclude that he owed you something, or that you had any respect for him, or that you credited his good intentions, or that you understood the myriad responsibilities of the job might mean that your pet issues might have to wait six months, a year, or two years to get to the top of his agenda.

[. . .] I think the White House is willing to listen to criticism from their allies. From you? Not so much.

Heh. I think Booman thinks that Obama will be taking his calls now. Being an "ally" and all. I never had any illusion that ANY pol is my "ally" or friend. What I would like folks to imagine is a post written like this about say, Harry Reid. Why doesn't anyone write "Leave Harry Reid Alone!" posts I wonder?

Speaking for me only

< If | Rangel Gets Primary Challenger >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    That is hilarious. Here's my question (5.00 / 4) (#1)
    by andgarden on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 07:49:37 AM EST
    for Booman: when will you stop enabling the President to ignore us? Or is that just your role as a "shill?"

    It's Always Never Obama's Fault (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by Ellie on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 11:13:43 AM EST
    Even inaction. Just enjoy the photo-ops.

    arrogance of the club. (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by jeffinalabama on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 07:51:14 AM EST
    Boy, I thought that all of that 'in crowd' stuff went out in high school.

    Voting for someone doesn't make one a supporter. Oh well, new definitions for the post partisan era. And there's no more kool aid left...

    I would have said: (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by andgarden on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 07:55:25 AM EST
    "Voting for someone doesn't make one a supporter?"

    Lots of people who did everything Booman described in the excerpt nevertheless voted for Obama last November. But according to him, they don't have enough cred to be critical. According to him, only true believers are allowed to say a bad word. I'm thinking of a word that starts with "c". . .


    Apparently... (none / 0) (#22)
    by Jerrymcl89 on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:22:01 AM EST
    ... he thinks Obama can govern with the support of only those who voted for him in the Democratic primaries.

    The good news is that Obama doesn't believe that (5.00 / 8) (#27)
    by andgarden on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:36:01 AM EST
    The bad news is that it seems like he'd rather govern with the people he wishes had voted for him than the ones who actually did.

    What you said (none / 0) (#37)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 09:59:15 AM EST
    Exactly so.

    I can answer this question: (5.00 / 5) (#19)
    by inclusiveheart on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:16:43 AM EST
    Q: "When was he supposed to conclude that he owed you something..."

    A: When he became President of the United States.  Obama is a public servant.  He is supposed to act in our collective best interests.

    Some of us aren't seeing so much of that at the moment.  Some of us are seeing an intense focus on a small minority of rightwingers not because they actually have good ideas, but because there is an unreasonable (in my opinion) obsession with bipartisanship.  At the end of the day, it really doesn't work out to balance and bipartisan action.  It works out to the deck being stacked in favor of the right.  As a liberal Democrat, that is just a bit much to take from a supposedly "Democratic" President.

    But let's just get off the partisan discussion and ask ourselves how it is that anyone could call the lack of support for a public option from the White House a "bipartisan" postion when 70%+ of the American population support the concept?


    bwhahaha (5.00 / 5) (#8)
    by lilburro on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:02:39 AM EST
    Any chance you'll cross-post to Daily Kos?

    (from the comments)

    After Clinton dropped out I a) voted b) donated c) volunteered for Obama.  Will Booman's head explode?  Does he remember why I and millions of others did that?

    Oh that's right...


    What a staggering display of Obamabotness.  We expect a lot of him because he's playing on our team, and he was playing on our team before the primaries and during them, regardless of who you supported.

    Then again if I was an 11 dimensional chess devotee as Booman is, I would get pretty uptight that anything could ruin Obama's secret plans for a robust public option (rolls eyes) because secret plans are very fragile and complex, certainly much more so than overt campaigns are.

    An overt campaign (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by Fabian on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:11:32 AM EST
    would be welcome at any time!

    I think the phrase "moving the goalposts" could be this administration's motto.  I'd like someone to plot the administration's course on various issues because I rarely know where it stands on any given day.


    You know (none / 0) (#11)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:09:02 AM EST
    That was a lot more thinking than I intended for anyone with this post.

    I just found it hilarious.


    Probably (none / 0) (#16)
    by lilburro on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:13:10 AM EST
    I guess I just sometimes forget Obama miraculously won the general election with 17,869,542 votes...

    The General? (none / 0) (#21)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:18:39 AM EST
    you sure about that number?

    I'm just kidding (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by lilburro on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:22:31 AM EST
    Obama popular vote 2008 primaries:


    Obama popular vote 2008 general election:


    It's funny (5.00 / 4) (#12)
    by Steve M on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:09:48 AM EST
    When I call my Congressman to urge him to do this, or to not do that... how come they never ask whether I voted for him?  You'd think that would be their first question, in order to decide whether they're going to listen to me.

    Did you write a letter to the editor (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:12:06 AM EST
    criticizing him? Cuz if you did . . .

    Leave Albio Sires alone!! (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by Steve M on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:15:43 AM EST
    Yeah! (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:18:15 AM EST
    Or he'll get you . . . or something.

    My god, that's just embarrassing (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by kempis on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:14:52 AM EST
    He really should have just made a video of himself wailing "Leave Obama alone!"

    How dare people criticize Obama! And the critics are probably those crazy Hillary supporters who are still resentful!

    Sheesh! Whatta fanboy....

    what a pud (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:37:01 AM EST
    I never quite got the fascination with this guy.
    he always seemed like a tool to me.

    If Booman was more objective (none / 0) (#34)
    by Fabian on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 09:32:18 AM EST
    and more analytic and less emotional, then he'd have a better track record.  He writes a decent rant, but his aim is frequently off.

    No comment (none / 0) (#45)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 11:27:44 AM EST
    Wait a minute ... (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by FreakyBeaky on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 02:52:20 PM EST
    ... how can you write a comment that says "no comment"? :-)

    I wanted to say something (none / 0) (#54)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 03:05:44 PM EST
    and I put my fingers on the keyboard and they came down with diarrhea.  I wanted to make a comment but really couldn't....and really shouldn't. I know this Booman person and he is not my ally :)  Someday I'll fully get over it....or I won't.  As more time goes by and we remain at war with Booman's "precious" at the helm, and now suddenly war is sort of okay and soldiers don't need to go to jail now because Congress will do nothing to stop war....it is starting to look more and more like I won't be getting over my Booman issues.

    Also (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by lilburro on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 09:56:10 AM EST
    who will have accomplished more when it comes to HCR - FDL or Booman?  He's targeting the blogs that are actually doing the heavy lifting by creating pressure on Obama instead of rationalizing every little thing he does.

    Please cite to evidence blogs are (none / 0) (#39)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 10:51:22 AM EST
    "creating pressure on Obama."  He cares not a whit what the blogs are saying.

    blogs like FDL (none / 0) (#42)
    by lilburro on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 11:10:23 AM EST
    have mounted serious and fairly successful pushback whenever Admin officials wavered on the public option.  Remember the Sebelius PO flip flopping from the summer?

    Cause and effect? I wonder if BTD (none / 0) (#50)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 12:48:15 PM EST
    agrees certain blogs caused Sibelius to talk out of the other side of her mouth.

    If we must leave President Obama alone, (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by KeysDan on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 12:03:58 PM EST
    is it OK to criticize Rahm?   After all, no one voted for him in either the primaries or the last election, so I think it may be OK. Therefore, my evaluation is this:  Rahm is just the person Obama does not need, he is stuck in the 1990's and he should get the boot.

    Oh, absolutely! (none / 0) (#57)
    by Yman on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 04:19:11 PM EST
    In fact, it's almost mandatory.

    As a former "Clintonista", pretty much every bad decision Obama makes can be blamed on Emanuel ...... :)


    Well, maybe Rahm could (none / 0) (#59)
    by KeysDan on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 05:55:07 PM EST
    be replaced with Olympia, but it might be a come-down.  But, replaced he should be--although his old job as Congressman from Illinois's 5th Congressional District is taken.  Mike Quigley miight be a refreshing change from the previous occupants of that seat, such as Rahm, Blago, and Rostenkowski.

    Good grief; Booman's come unglued (4.55 / 9) (#28)
    by Anne on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:36:40 AM EST
    on this whole issue of who can and cannot criticize Obama, and who Obama should and should not listen to.  

    And you know why he's come unglued?  Because he's forgotten that this isn't about one man, but about our party and our country.  We criticize not because we wish to hurt anyone's feelings, but because we believe that's how the people hold the president accountable for his stewardship of a country that existed long before he did and, God willing, will exist long after he shuffles off this mortal coil.  How does Booman think we will ever have quality representation if we just accept whatever the party serves up, whatever candidates they get behind?

    Booman thinks this is all about Obama, that somehow what matters is Obama's popularity and not his performance; I have to say that I'm pretty much sick to death of the blind hero worship, and even more tired of being told I need to just sit down and shut up because I didn't see the brilliance when Obama first hit the stage.  

    Booman needs to get a grip.

    The Irony Is That (none / 0) (#31)
    by The Maven on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 09:05:56 AM EST
    I can recall a time about four years ago when Booman was far more concerned with holding elected Dems' feet to the fire to stay true to liberal/progressive ideals instead of merely positioning themselves for electoral success.  In fact, it was his absolutist obstinacy a year or so later that led me to stop reading/writing there.  Although he's changed his stripes in some regards, he still clearly believes that everyone who doesn't see the world through the same prism he does should be frogmarched out of the Party.

    I always enjoy your posts (none / 0) (#51)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 02:08:52 PM EST
    Thank you, Tracy - (none / 0) (#56)
    by Anne on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 03:29:30 PM EST
    I feel the same way about yours!

    Are you going to keep us posted while you are at Shriners' with Josh?  Am hoping that is a positive and productive time for him - and you!  Saw the great news about the approval of the PT visits - seems like things are falling into place in a good way, so hope it's a trend...


    If it is a trend I hope it sticks (none / 0) (#60)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 09:28:08 PM EST
    I just got home.  I had a kennel club meeting right after Josh's therapy and both items take place about 40 miles away.  I think this trip to Shriners will be a short one but if not I will check in here.  I will need a few distractions.  I'm just now watching the PBS Frontline program.  Knew I was going to miss the actual tube airing of it tonight and also my husband's phone call home.  But his daughter was home to catch his call, she got some alone time with dad and I suppose she needs that right now as she and spouse are discussing not ending their marriage and taking a second shot at it.  And daughters always have a different important relationship with their dads than their moms.

    Its weird (none / 0) (#52)
    by Socraticsilence on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 02:46:27 PM EST
    basically in the past year two bloggers I used to read a lot have lost it entirely- Booman has become too forgiving, and Somerby has basically become a hack.

    Does he mean to suggest that (none / 0) (#3)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 07:53:27 AM EST
    Obama is actually working on the "to do" list of those who campaigned and supported him from the beginning?

    Apparently (none / 0) (#4)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 07:55:00 AM EST
    Actually, I have no clue what he means other than leave Obama alone and if you do not, you get what you deserve.

    I was just laughing through the whole thing actually.


    I remember the youtube video (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by jeffinalabama on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 07:58:17 AM EST
    of that teen, crying, saying "Leave Britney alone!"

    for some odd reason that pops into mind at a time like this.


    An old saw (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:08:12 AM EST
    invoked by me with my title.

    Heh, I'm tickled i understood a pop (5.00 / 4) (#15)
    by jeffinalabama on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:12:14 AM EST
    culture reference!

    That was a pop culture reference? (none / 0) (#38)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 10:44:23 AM EST
    27 million views (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by Steve M on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 11:29:39 AM EST
    but apparently you are not one of them!  Quelle surprise.

    I am not sure I can articulate why this video became so popular, but such things happen on the Internet.


    Oh. So, was he acting? (none / 0) (#47)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 11:44:35 AM EST
    I also laughed through the whole thing, (none / 0) (#7)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 07:59:22 AM EST
    or, at least, enjoyed a big smile and a few chuckles....but, I thought he meant for us to laugh at it :)

    The great Booman asks: (none / 0) (#9)
    by scribe on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:04:05 AM EST
    I want to know where the point was in this process when Obama was supposed to conclude that you were his allies and that you were responsible for his victory.

    When we put down our Cheetos (TM), got out of our PJs, left the basement, went to the Obama for America offices and got our credentials, drove, carpooled or otherwise went miles and miles and miles at our own expense to the place we were directed to and registered voters, drove voters to polls, worked call banks, pitched his ideas, handed out literature, watched polls, got into the occasional shoving match with a wingnut, and, oh yeah - voted for the sumbeech.

    If he likes his current job and housing - and I have no doubt he does - he ought to think twice, and then again, about b*tchslapping us.  We've had juuuuust about enough.

    Now I know why you keep reading these guys (none / 0) (#24)
    by ruffian on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:26:09 AM EST
    That is the funniest thing I've seen in a long time.

    I'd like to know at what point in the process I was supposed to know that I had to drink the kool-aid in order for Obama to do the very things he claimed he was going to do.  Sounds like the very height of narcissism to me. Maybe George Will had a point, and you don't see me say that very much.

    Don't blame Obama for Booman (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:28:32 AM EST
    or the Nobel Committee.

    True, that's not fair (none / 0) (#26)
    by ruffian on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:33:05 AM EST
    if Booman's attitude is not coming down from the top.

    But the George Will reference was about Will's description of the case Obama made to the Olympic Committee, not the Nobel.


    I only (none / 0) (#30)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:51:10 AM EST
    have one thing to say: RTFLMAO!!

    I got some pretty hilarious (none / 0) (#32)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 09:07:51 AM EST
    responses when I sent my incredulousness around to my email friends about the Not Bush Award

    I had a friend call me (none / 0) (#35)
    by ruffian on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 09:49:07 AM EST
    obviously expecting me to share her outrage about people denigrating The Laureate.  We had a nice chat, and I shared my view that it was a political 'Not Bush Award' (wish I had used your term!), and too bad Obama got used by the committee. Calmed her down for the moment anyway.

    Issues make obvious allies... (none / 0) (#33)
    by Addison on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 09:29:49 AM EST
    ...Barack is the executive, he needs to gather coalitions around shared positions. This is easy stuff. If he isn't doing that it's his fault. People want to accomplish X, Y, and Z -- enough people to get him elected anyway and certainly the majority.

    Fer fricks sake (none / 0) (#40)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 10:55:18 AM EST
    I start out checking my comments, then I read the first post at the top of the page and worked my way down to this?  You always do this to me with this Booman person.  And now it's my fault that Obama doesn't give a rip what I think?  It's precious.  It is as precious as Booman's long post about how Obama won't "escalate" in Afghanistan.  I just read that one too.  And Booman came to this analysis through reading press releases so I guess Obama wasn't taking his calls that day either.  I could have told him he had his head right up his arse but he is not my ally :)  

    The Knights who say Neener! (none / 0) (#41)
    by Ellie on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 11:06:56 AM EST
    Terrific. (none / 0) (#44)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 11:19:19 AM EST
    Poor Booman (none / 0) (#49)
    by shoephone on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 12:31:08 PM EST
    What a pathetic, bitter little man he's become. An embarrassment. But good for a laugh, I suppose.

    This is pretty funny ... (none / 0) (#55)
    by FreakyBeaky on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 03:12:45 PM EST
    ... considering, say, the only reason the public option is still alive is because every liberal in the country right up through the CPC got pissed off and raised hell when that vile little trial balloon of getting rid of it was floated, and has kept the pressure on ever since.  

    'Sides which, Booman's got it backward.  Obama doesn't have to listen to sycophants he's got in his back pocket ...

    Let me guess. (none / 0) (#58)
    by mentaldebris on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 05:20:31 PM EST
    Booman takes part in those blogger phone calls the administration prides themselves on.

    As an Obama primary supporter who puts policy over politicians, I find this post by Booman highly offensive and incredibly inane.

    So, let me see if I have this right. If the WH can completely dismiss the criticisms of Clinton primary supporters it stands to reason that their votes in the general were worth less than the votes of Obama primary supporters, whom the WH must take seriously if, heaven forbid, they think President Perfect will ever do something worth criticizing.  

    Riiiiight. Someone should tell McCain. Perhaps he can petition the Supreme Court to conduct a recount counting Clinton primary supporters votes as a half vote and those who didn't support anyone during the primaries at a quarter vote. IOW, this is excellent news for John McCain!!! (rolls eyes, shakes head)

    It looks to me like both parties have their 20%ers. I thought the repubs had a higher number of brainless political party zombies who would come to their party's "rescue" regardless of how harmful, mediocre or pathetic the actions of their leaders.  Apparently I was wrong.