Warning: Constant ABSPATH already defined in /home/public/wp-config.php on line 27
The US IS NOT Center Right — Why Now?
On-line Opinion Magazine…OK, it's a blog
Random header image... Refresh for more!

The US IS NOT Center Right

The pundits are making the same mistake that Obama makes, that the US is politically to the right of center. This was a low turn-out election because there were few left of center choices for people and they are tired of voting for the lesser of two evils, and want to vote for people and policies they believe in, and that make the country work.

Mid-terms are about the base of the parties, and the White House decided to insult the base of the Democratic Party in the run-up to the election, and then was stunned when the base decided to send the message that they wouldn’t work or vote for people who refused to work or vote for them.

Only because I prefer to keep the front page safe for work and she is writing from her core anger, below the fold I have Athenae response, which sums up what I really think about Obama’s first two years.

Athenae of First Draft: Peace Sucks a Hairy Asshole

Here’s the problem, you gutless fucks. You had majorities. And I KNOW, okay, but all America sees is that you had majorities and you wasted them. Because that’s what the GOP told them, and you said, “buh buh buh” and couldn’t point to anything you did right, not even with the unwashed hippies holding your arm up for you. You had majorities, and you had Harry Reid, refusing to be mean to Republicans by shoving stuff through. You had majorities, and you had Barack Obama acting like he was already an ex-president and could be gracious and social with these pricks. You had majorities, used them to do some stuff, and then sat back and acted like we should be grateful when we can fucking count.

We can fucking count, out here. We know what 51 means. We know what 257 means. We’re not morons. And all the procedural whatsit you argue today, about ConservaDems and Blue Dogs, doesn’t mean shit. You had it, and we worked hard to give it to you, and we see you calling things impossible which are just very hard, and we get fucking annoyed, because we don’t get to get away with that shit. Not at our jobs and not in our lives.

The Shrubbery had smaller majorities in both House when the Supreme Court decided to make him President, and he got everything he could dream up passed, even when it required having Dick “Dick” Cheney cast the deciding vote in the Senate. If the Republicans can push crap through the Senate with 50 votes, why was Obama unable to accomplish anything with 60?


1 Kryten42 { 11.04.10 at 9:42 pm }

Duffy… as well as being a complete neo-con ass-kissing fantasy-world moron, you are a total tosser! Generally these days, I just ignore anything you have to say because it truly is totally worthless. But in this one instance, in case anyone reads this thread that isn’t a regular and doesn’t know what most of us here think of you (with apologies to others for my presumption) that you are a total tosser (tosser = wanker for American’s BTW, I will assume that Brit’s know what a tosser is, and American’s know what a wanker is (eg. Pretty much all GOP’s, GOP-lovers and neo-con pundit’s are wankers)), I thought I should explain so they don’t get the wrong idea that you might actually know anything about anything or that you have anything to say worth the time to read.

OK. So back to ignoring the totally moronic wanker troll! 👿

2 Kryten42 { 11.04.10 at 9:54 pm }

Yeah Bryan… I wish I knew the answer! I know the Democrat’s had also been infiltrated by the neo-con elites, and that Obama was *the chosen one* because he was a mostly naive party-machine hack with a personality… But I didn’t expect them to be so obvious about it. I really do feel for people like Athenae, and completely understand their deserved anger and frustration. I can’t see any other way out than dismantling the two-party system you have. And neither party will even consider that as they both will loose their place on the gravy train. So, if change won’t come from *inside*, then the only option is change from the outside. *shrug*

One thing American’s do have to realise I think, is that nether side actually cares about *Ideologies* which is the excuse I hear many use. That’s simply a front and a convenient tool to con people who are ideologues. It’s always been and always will be *about the money stupid!*

3 Steve Bates { 11.04.10 at 10:02 pm }

Thanks, Kryten, for the language lesson: tosser = wanker = Duff.

It no longer matters to the American plutocracy what the American voter thinks. It has been demonstrated that a vast majority of candidates with the most campaign money at their disposal win their races. Quoting Sir Joseph in Gilbert & Sullivan’s HMS Pinafore,

   I grew so rich that I was sent
   By a pocket borough into Parliament.
   I always voted at my party’s call,
   And I never thought of thinking for myself at all.

For “Parliament” read “Congress”; for “pocket borough” read “safe Republican district” and you have it. Nobody in Congress… of either major party… gives a good damn what we think. The thing about Duff is that he likes it that way… kissing ass suits him.

4 Bryan { 11.04.10 at 10:20 pm }

Since Conservatives supposedly like history and the good old days, and quoting Britons is the prevailing fad:

Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.

I think John Stuart Mill qualifies as an historical Briton with a passing knowledge of politics.

It is time to stop voting for labels, and vote for people. Barack Obama isn’t a pawn; he is acting precisely as many people, myself and Badtux included, said he would act before he won the nomination. If you don’t listen to the speeches, but read them, and ignore the race issue entirely, he has always acted to the right of center. That’s how he voted in the Illinois senate and the US Senate. He hasn’t changed in the slightest. The people he selected for his inner circle were all to the right of center.

I have no idea why people assumed that someone who was raised by a banker and attended exclusive private schools was going to turn out any other way.

5 Bryan { 11.04.10 at 10:23 pm }

Nice one, Steve, and continues the trend of quoting historical Britons, although we were writing at the same time. It’s probably a result of the British Petroleum oil fumes along our shared coast.

6 Badtux { 11.05.10 at 12:32 am }

Bryan, my thought about why Kos, Athenae, etc. went so wild over Obama is that it was a case of reverse racism — they simply could not imagine that a black man could be anything other than a liberal. Uhm, Bill Cosby, anybody? As someone who has had a lot of contact with the black middle class in the past, I can assure you that on pretty much everything except civil rights issues, the black middle class is about as conservative as they come. If the Rethugs weren’t such out-and-out bigots, the black middle class would be one of their natural constituencies. And that’s where Michelle Obama comes from — the black middle class — and you already mentioned Barack being raised by a banker. So much for that ole’ “Michelle is a scary black ghetto negro!” and “Obama = socialist!” thingy… bankers *are* socialist, but only when it benefits bankers :twisted:.

– Badtux the Snarky Penguin

7 Bryan { 11.05.10 at 12:49 pm }

Badtux, I forgot to mention that between Columbia and Harvard law, Obama worked as an editor for a Wall Street financial newsletter.

There has never been any indication in Obama’s CV that he was ever anything other than a Rockefeller Republican at best, but, as you say, a lot of people couldn’t get passed his skin color to look at the man. All black guys can’t play basketball, nor do they all have rhythm, but you have to live among black people to understand that and deal with them as individuals.

8 Ame { 11.05.10 at 8:20 pm }

I read some interesting perspectives last night;

Media Misreading Midterms: As Usual, Press Urge a Move to the Right

With the Democrats suffering substantial losses in Tuesday’s midterms, many journalists and pundits were offering a familiar diagnosis (Extra!, 7-8/06; FAIR Media Advisory, 2/3/09): The Democrats had misread their mandate and governed too far to the left. The solution, as always, is for Democrats to move to the right and reclaim “the center.” But this conventional wisdom falls apart under scrutiny….more

and I agree this is part of the problem, Democrats should be setting their own agenda and to hell with the opinions of talking heads and bobble heads and empty heads; and why do the even bother with the Sunday morning talk shows? Self loathing? It’s always a set-up. Eleanor Cliff is the only dem leaning commentator that bites back and backs them down, she should hold training sessions.
Nancy is running for Minority Leader, Kos was collecting signatures of support last night and today, and reported an average 1250 signatures an hour this afternoon. Of course the BlueDogs , the few that remain (he,he), are opposing her. I like Nancy, she’s a little bull dog, that one. Now we need a strong Minority Whip of equal tenacity.

9 Bryan { 11.05.10 at 8:33 pm }

The corporations that own the media want center right governments, so that will always be their starting point. That’s why MSNBC jumped on Olbermann for contributing to three Democratic candidates, even though he isn’t a reporter, he’s an opinionated commentator.

The Democrats haven’t done anything that wasn’t right of center, even the so-called “Health Care reform” was a re-hash of a Republican plan from the 1990s, but the Village always wants the Democrats to move to the right.

News flash – the big losers were the right-wing of the Democratic Party.

Pelosi at least put up a fight, which is more than Reid can say. Dump Hoyer, as the Blue Dogs were losers, and promote Clyburn to number 2.

10 Badtux { 11.05.10 at 10:37 pm }

Our favorite troll says he is polite to Negros, even, presumably, to uppity ones. That is, of course, true of anyone who has been taught to be a gentlemen. Why, when I was just a tiny penguin chick under the tutelage of the kind doyennes of the Daughters of the Confederacy in the deep, deep South, I was taught to be polite to Negros too. I was not to use the vulgar “nigger” word — only white trash used that — and I was not to call Negros “boy”, but, rather, “Mr. Jim” or “Mr. Tom” or, if a Negro were a particularly good friend of the family, “Uncle Tom”. (This assuming his name actually were Tom, of course, usage of the term “Uncle Tom” under other circumstances would be vulgar and impolite and thus not to be countenanced in polite society, but you most assuredly already knew that). (And of course only good white people warranted use of last names, and furthermore only non-Jewish white people, one should be polite to Negros and Jews but, dear soul, make sure the Negro or Jew knew his proper place too, y’know?).

Of course, I was also taught by these same kind doyennes of the Daughters of the Confederacy that Negros were inherently inferior to white people, that the Negros were better off under slavery before that evil Mr. Lincoln did them the disservice of freeing them because Negros were inherently incapable of caring for themselves and thus needed white people to do it for them, and that lynching of uppity Negros was unfortunate but, really, no different from the unfortunate need to put down a rabid dog. But we were taught to do all this politely. Which, apparently, is good enough for Mr. Troll to declare that these kind doyennes of the Daughters of the Confederacy were not racists :).

– Badtux the Snarky Penguin

11 Bryan { 11.05.10 at 11:42 pm }

Ah, yes, the same civility that requires us to say “bless his/her heart” immediately before we trash them, but politely, nothing crude so that it would be obvious to outsiders. No one will ever be able to say that Southerners don’t know how “to do polite”. It is a mischaracterization that I blame on Hollywood, this belief that Southerners are crude people.

While members of the Florida legislature have been known to murder each other, they were always “correct” when speaking to each other in the chamber before the act. One has to know how to act in polite society.

12 Kryten42 { 11.06.10 at 1:53 am }

LOL Of course, the penultimate hypocrisy is…

“W ith all due respect…” IMHO, that is the penultimate insult! If someone said that to me, s/he would not have a chance to finish the sentence! 😈

Me, I’m honest. If I am trashing someone, you can be 100% certain I have no respect for them whatsoever! 😀

Oh, and the other typical common excuse:

“But, you know he did wonderful things in the 80’s (or 70’s etc) and has several degrees and is quite intelligent and charming you know.”

The problem of course is that he (or she) has stopped taking their pills and is drinking the cool-aide now! These days, it honestly matters not at all what someone *did back then*. What are they doing now?

13 Kryten42 { 11.06.10 at 5:31 am }

Hmmmm… Well Bryan, it seems that it didn’t take long for the hypocrasy to increase since the election.

Earlier today, MSNBC declared that it would be suspending progressive host Keith Olbermann because he violated NBC’s ethics rules by donating to three Democratic candidates for Congress. As many bloggers have noted, conservative MSNBC host Joe Scarborough has donated to Republican candidates for Congress while promoting the same candidate on air, but has never been disciplined. Moreover, Gawker notes that MSNBC has been exempt from the formal NBC ethics rules for years. It is still a mystery why MSNBC selectively applied NBC’s ethics rules to Olbermann. However, it important to realize that MSNBC has undergone a fundamental change in leadership in the last two months.

UPDATED: Before Bush Donor Takeover Of MSNBC, Network Selectively Applies Rules To Suspend Olbermann

Welcome to the *Brave New World*. (It’s the same as the old world, only now any pretense of any rules applying to neo-con Rethugs is over.)

14 Kryten42 { 11.06.10 at 5:54 am }

More, from Juan Cole:

MSNBC’s Phil Griffith the Worst Person in the World, as Olbermann Joins Donahue, Banfield

I guess it just goes to prove that the majority of the MSM are obviously very pro neo-con Rethug. *shrug* (But, most of us already knew that, of course). 😉

15 Bryan { 11.06.10 at 1:36 pm }

Kryten, as I mentioned in my latest post, the Olbermann situation will probably end up in court because I’m fairly certain that he works for MSNBC which is a separate company created by NBC and Microsoft, and the policy invoked is for NBC News personnel. If MSNBC doesn’t have the same policy, they have violated their employment contract, which leaves Olbermann a lot of options, all of which include big bucks from MSNBC. One of the options would be jumping to CNN and taking his audience with him.

As NBC is in negotiations with Cablevision over a possible sale, the loss of major revenue generator, like Olbermann would not help. Politics is all well and good, but you shouldn’t destroy your profit potential or the shareholders will get nasty.

16 Kryten42 { 11.06.10 at 10:29 pm }

This was just posted at TP Bryan. It’s just hillarious when all things are considered! 😆

Oklahoma Voters May Have Accidentally Voted Against Ten Commandments, Too

As a law professor noted to CNN, however, the religious zealotry of these lawmakers may now be in serious self-conflict:

Rick Tepker, the first member of the University of Oklahoma School of Law faculty to try a case before the U.S. Supreme Court…called the passage of the measure “a mess” with implications unknown until a case that challenges it arises.

“Many of us who understand the law are scratching our heads this morning, laughing so we don’t cry,” he said. “I would like to see Oklahoma politicians explain if this means that the courts can no longer consider the Ten Commandments. Isn’t that a precept of another culture and another nation? The result of this is that judges aren’t going to know when and how they can look at sources of American law that were international law in origin.”

The complicated “mess” caused by the Sharia ban is also affecting Oklahoma Muslims, who say that, though they obviously never considered seeking sharia law remedies, the constitutional amendment makes them feel alienated. “It’s really brought the Muslim-haters out,” said Allison Moore, a Muslim activist in Tulsa. Sheryl Siddiqui, a spokeswoman for the Edmond-based Islamic Council of Oklahoma, said her group tries outreach and education about Islam, though clearly with frustrating results. “Muslims in Oklahoma do a phenomenal amount of outreach,” she said. “It’s not on us anymore. There are people out there who still believe Obama is a Muslim.”

A lawsuit has also been filed against the amendment, which charges it transforms Oklahoma’s Constitution into “an enduring condemnation” of Islam by singling it out for special restrictions. “We have a handful of politicians who have pushed an amendment onto our state ballot and then conducted a well-planned and well-funded campaign of misinformation and fear,” said Muneer Awad, who filed the suit and is executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Oklahoma.

Considering how few Muslims live in Oklahome, I can’t understand the majority of Oklahoma bed-wetters stupidity! I’m sure that stupid amendment will be overturned. And the morons of Oklahoma will never understand how stupid it is and how much it cost to be so stupid! They seem to think (as many redneck states do) that nothing costs anything, and money grows on trees! 😆

Endlessly amusing! 😉 😀

17 Kryten42 { 11.06.10 at 10:35 pm }

*sigh* I stuffed up the link. Sorry!

BTW, this was interesting at TP. And I believe Ebadi is quite correct (and have stated similar thoughts about Iran in the past).

Iranian Nobel Prize-Winning Human Rights Activist: ‘You Should Not Think About’ Military Strikes On Iran

Ebadi disagreed with critics who said that President Obama should have spoken more forcefully in support of the Green movement in June 2009. “The Green movement is the Iranian peoples’ movement,” she said. While it’s important for the U.S. and other democracies to voice support for human rights, Ebadi said, real change “must come from inside Iran.”

“I believe Obama’s Middle East policy is correct,” Ebadi said. By showing a willingness to engage with Iran, Obama helped create international consensus “that it is the Iranian regime that doesn’t want to talk.”

In contrast, Ebadi criticized the Bush administration’s “axis of evil” approach in the Middle East, saying that Iran and Ahmadinejad, had become more popular in the region because of U.S. policies, particularly the invasion and occupation of Iraq. “You paid money, Iraqis died, and Iran has benefited,” said Ebadi. “Saddam was Iran’s enemy that was removed by the U.S.,” and Iran’s power and influence, both in Iran and elsewhere, has been increased as a result.

Asked what the U.S. could do to help democracy in Iran, Ebadi replied that, in addition to continuing to voice support for human rights, the U.S. should “help make peace between Israelis and Palestinians.”

“We have to be realistic, ” Ebadi said. “If there’s peace between Israelis and Palestinians, the Iranian government would lose” an important propaganda tool. Right now, any leader who stands up for the Palestinian cause is “will be a hero” in the Middle East, Ebadi said, something Ahmadinejad has used very effectively to his advantage.

She isn’t the first person to say these things. Just about everyone who knows how things actually work in the ME has said similar things. But the ignorant and stupid will ignore them of course, *shrug*

18 Bryan { 11.07.10 at 2:43 pm }

When Ohio passed its “defense of marriage” amendment, they negated common law marriage and the domestic violence laws, so I’m not surprised. They have probably eliminated English common law in Oklahoma, although they didn’t know that, or realize that it is the basis for most of their existing laws and judicial decisions.

Everyone who knows anything factual about the Middle East knows that the settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian problem is the root cause of everything else.

If the US or Israel attacks Iran, the people will rally to the government, not overthrow it. “External threats” is the only reason Castro has lasted, and will keep the Iranian regime in power forever. An attack of any kind on Iran will result in the closing of the Strait of Hormuz and a ten-fold increase in the price of oil which will only be sold for Euros.

If Graham wants a war, he can fight it … and pay for it.