Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Happy Hour Roundup

* Brian Beutler does a nice job using reporting to demonstrate one of this blog's pet points: No matter how much Dems scream about GOP obstructionism, it may not hurt Republicans, because Dems may pay the bigger price for government inaction on the economy.

* Digby boils it down even further:

The party in power is expected to do what's necessary to pass its agenda. If it can't, it is held responsible for the failure, not those who stopped them from doing it. This is particularly true in the present circumstance. The president blaming the "do nothing congress" only works when the congressional majority is of the opposition party. When it's your own party, you just look like a weak leader and people think the underdog Republicans are simply "playing the game" better and so deserve to "win."

It is what it is.

* The shadowy right-wing National Republican Trust PAC whines and moans because the networks won't run their despicable, bigoted ad attacking Muslims for building a mosque near Ground Zero.

* Apropos of nothing in particular, I heartily recommend Taegan Goddard's new and rapidly growing Political Dictionary. Very useful tool, and fun to browse.

* Instaputz asks: Is CNN rebranding itself as the most trusted name in news about Sarah Palin?

* It's a good question, now that CNN's Political Ticker has taken to posting entire Palin Facebook entries verbatim with no analysis or context.

* Right wing commentators will be really disappointed, er, really happy to hear that Chris Van Hollen doesn't think the Tea Party movement should be labeled "racist."

* As predicted, Nevada Dems start publicly making the case that Harry Reid won't: Nevadans should keep Reid because John Ensign's scandals have left him powerless.

* Dear media: Please ignore Rush Limbaugh when he claims the only way to disprove your "liberal bias" is to give even more coverage to the ridiculous New Black Panther story.

No amount of coverage will ever be enough, get it?

* Relatedly, the takedown of the day: Dave Weigel versus Fox's Megyn Kelly over the Black Panther B.S.

* And Nevada journalist Jon Ralston reports that Reid has edged ahead of Sharron Angle, 44-40, in a new poll taken for the Dem-backing group Patriot Majority.

"Yes, Democratic poll," Ralston emails. "But I know of one other non-Dem poll that shows nearly identical numbers."

What else is happening?

By Greg Sargent  |  July 14, 2010; 5:38 PM ET
Categories:  2010 elections , Financial reform , Happy Hour Roundup , House Dems , Senate Dems , Senate Republicans  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: What's really driving tensions between House Dems and White House? It's jobs, stupid!
Next: The Morning Plum: Fury among House Dems

Comments

"What else is happening?"

I am retiring. Thanks, all, for excellent discussions and camaraderie. Thanks especially to Greg for his hospitality and his excellent journalism.

Posted by: wbgonne | July 14, 2010 5:49 PM | Report abuse

wbgonne, congrats, I think. Retiring from what? Your job, or commenting on political blogs?

Posted by: Greg Sargent | July 14, 2010 5:52 PM | Report abuse

wbgonne, please if you're talking about leaving, don't do it. We need your insight and besides, you're the one person I agree with the most.

Posted by: lmsinca | July 14, 2010 5:57 PM | Report abuse

wbgonne, I don't think you're allowed to retire until we say so.

Seriously, if it makes any difference, we need you. Maybe just part time?

Posted by: BGinCHI | July 14, 2010 6:03 PM | Report abuse

One of the biggest problems with the stories on "GOP obstructionism" is that they fail to mention the myriad of accomplishments made in the past 18 months by a Democratic president and congress.

I really don't understand why supposedly democratic-biased blogs would continue to push the GOP obstructionism story instead of the Democratic accomplishments story.

Have the "progressives" distaste for Obama so overwhelmed the internet that this is now the dominant meme, infecting even more mainstream democratic blogs like this? If so, that cynicism will become a self-fulfilling prophecy for a November loss.

Posted by: converse | July 14, 2010 6:10 PM | Report abuse

@Greg:

"Dear media..."

I think it's awesome that you are calling out the media over stuff like this. But I also have to ask, if you see someone at WaPo - or anyone that you have an email for - actually fall for this stuff...do you send them a little note, or a link to this post?

I'm all for calling them out, and you deserve kudos to that. But the DC Media types live in their own little world. Things like this post are dismissed as just "part of the game" - not as personal critiques to those that actually enable people like Limbaugh.

"Dave Weigel versus Fox's Megyn Kelly..."

Didn't Megyn Kelly already win that battle, by proxy, when Dave took a doorknob to the backside the moment he spoke ill of conservatives?

Man, I'm negative today...lol.

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | July 14, 2010 6:14 PM | Report abuse

I have to say, I'm not very impressed with Weigel's "takedown." First, there's the suggestion that, although he dismisses it as the actual reason, that a plausible explanation for Kelly's NBPP obsession is "turnabout for the way that liberals elevate the craziest tea party activists". Right, because TPers with a large variety of blatantly racist signs (and more) at numerous TP rallies across the country, some of which had national Republican officials as guests, is *exactly* like one small lunatic group that has no connection with "liberals" and which no Democratic official would come anywhere near.

And after citing the conservative whipping up of racist backlash from "Nixonland," he winds up with a sarcastic "Congratulations, Megyn," apparently unwilling to go far enoungh to grasp that that is *exactly* what she is trying to do, and that from the 60s until today, Republicans have convinced working-class white people to vote for them despite repeated policies that have been disastrous for their standard of living by (among other things) convincing them that they're the only ones preventing black bucks from coming for their daughters. He's read "Nixonland" but still seems to believe that it is all in the past.

Maybe I'm misreading him, but the true "takedowns" have been the exposure that the whole story is based entirely on lies. Weigel's walking up to the edge and then turning back adds little.

Posted by: jimeh | July 14, 2010 6:20 PM | Report abuse

No more blogging for me. Must save the precious bodily fluids for other endeavors. Keep the faith!

Posted by: wbgonne | July 14, 2010 6:21 PM | Report abuse

the teabaggers are now calling the naacp racist: "They make more money off of race than any slave trader ever. It’s time groups like the NAACP went to the trash heap of history where they belong with all the other vile racist groups that emerged in our history."

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/07/14/williams-naacp/#comments

and palin is jumping on them too. but don't you dare call them racist. because liberals and progressives and democrats and black people are the *real* racist.

poor white people have been oppressed for so long in this country.

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 14, 2010 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Blahg, did you see this exchange yesterday? Digby had a post up about it today and thought the comment about half black, half white was just too much. Although she doesn't think Palin even understands what that kind of comment expresses. It really just shows how clueless she is.

HANNITY: "You know, Governor, you have been one of the strongest, most outspoken members in support of the Tea Party Movement. I've met a lot of members, organizers in the Tea Party Movement. I've been at some of their rallies. I've witnessed it up close and personal.

Members of the NAACP are going to vote tomorrow on a resolution that condemns what the group calls — the NAACP — explicitly racist behavior by supporters of the Tea Party Movement.

Wanted to get your reaction to that.

PALIN: Yes. This is some typical divisive politics that is so absolutely unnecessary, especially at this time of turmoil within our country. Turmoil when you consider the state of the economy and so many other challenges that we are facing. This is just so unnecessary.

No, the Tea Party Movement is a beautiful movement, full of diverse people, diverse backgrounds. Folks of all walks of life who, for the most part, happen to oppose President Obama's policies. Not the color of his skin. They don't care that he's half white or half black. It has nothing to do with the person's skin tone —"

Posted by: lmsinca | July 14, 2010 6:46 PM | Report abuse

Give Megyn some credit:

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/07/14/megyn-kelly-is-my-coverage-of-the-black-panther-case-racist/

"Yes, he concedes, the DOJ’s decision to drop the Panthers case is a legit story... but absent a formal finding that it was part of a program of bias inside the Department, the relentless coverage feels like racial scaremongering."

Posted by: sbj3 | July 14, 2010 6:48 PM | Report abuse

Good luck wbgonne! To quote Bob Marley: Don't give up the fight, never give up the fight!

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 14, 2010 6:53 PM | Report abuse

lm,

ya, she dosn't even see the big hairy bug in her word salad. the teabaggers really don't know how much they're shooting themselves in the foot over this.

at redstate, they ban commenters and erase their comments all the time when they deviate one iota from their dogma.

but a racist comment has been allowed to stand on two thread with the only criticism being that it was double posted. here's an excerpt and a link:

"Is someone a racist because they think Western Civilization is superior to African Civilization? Is that same person “racist” because they can point out that Africans is less intelligent than whites or Asians? Is one racist because they point out that blacks commit a disproportionate amount of crime? Is a white woman “racist” when she is afraid to walk her dog in a black neighborhood? I, and the vast majority of white Americans agree with me, do not consider myself “racist” because I have such opinions. Perhaps then the label of “racist” is a good attribute and not a bad in the minds of the vast majority of the public subjected to these daily calumnies."

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/07/13/king-samir-shabazz-should-be-2010s-willie-horton/#comment-76209

they really have no clue how unpopular their racial animosity is.


Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 14, 2010 7:06 PM | Report abuse

Blahg, yep, Southern Strategy in full swing heading into an election. I hope they suffer at the polls for this, but the economic climate is perfect for them and obviously they're more than happy to exploit it for all it's worth to take back Congress.

Posted by: lmsinca | July 14, 2010 7:16 PM | Report abuse

lm,

well, it's certainly worked in the past. maybe i'm being unrealistic, but i think it just doesn't have the same traction anymore. of course it be music to the ears of the 20 percenters. but i think it's becoming more and more of a liability.

it will scare away swing voters as much as the birhter issue and will almost certainly fire up a lot of democratic voters. combined with some of the ugly talk that will come up in the immigration reform discussion, it could be very bad for the rightwing republicans. this is especially true because most of the really are tone deaf regarding how anathema most people find this hatefulness and that the only ones it appeals to are already in their camp and are not going anywhere anytime soon.

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 14, 2010 7:23 PM | Report abuse

think progress has a video of just a few examples of racism at teabagger rallies:

TEA PARTY ACTIVIST1: He’s too black to be President.

TEA PARTY ACTIVIST2: I’m a proud racist, I’m white.

TEA PARTY ACTIVIST3: Afro-Leninism! Coming to you on a silver platter, Barack Hussein Obama!

TEA PARTY ACTIVIST4: Go home wetbacks!

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/07/14/tea-party-racism/

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 14, 2010 7:36 PM | Report abuse

wbgonne: I'm sorry hear that you're leaving. You'll be missed, but the best of luck to you!

Posted by: schrodingerscat | July 14, 2010 7:42 PM | Report abuse

The poll from Ralston is a crock of bull. It's put out by former Reid staffer who is now running ads against Angle and it's two weeks old and comes out via Twitter. That poll belongs in the comic section.

Posted by: Truthteller12 | July 14, 2010 7:59 PM | Report abuse

Give Megyn some credit:
...
"Yes, he concedes, the DOJ’s decision to drop the Panthers case is a legit story... but absent a formal finding that it was part of a program of bias inside the Department, the relentless coverage feels like racial scaremongering."

Posted by: sbj3 | July 14, 2010 6:48 PM
=============================

Give Megyn credit for being a liar, you mean.

http://mediamatters.org/research/201007070020
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | July 14, 2010 9:22 PM | Report abuse

As you all know, I'm a full fledged riechwing nut deep into TeaBaggerism. In other words, I'm a racist and homophobe.

That being said, "once you accuse somebody of racism or bigotry or something, the facts become irrelevant" and I suggest that perhaps the "Obama [administration] and accomplices in the news media [are] promoting the charge" "they're feeding you this because this is what you want to [here]; this is what you live for, but this hurts the people of [United States]... What you care about is this and the Obama people know that, so they spin you up on this and you happily go along."

Luckily, The current administration would never stoop to demagogueing an issue or person for short term political gain. Becuase, once the lightworker or his minions declare someone a racist, that's it, as far as i'm concernced.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/23/eveningnews/main3746235.shtml

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 14, 2010 9:36 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut
=======================

I don't believe you're a racist homophobe, McTroll. I do believe you're a woefully misinformed about an impressively broad number of topics.

Here's the Southern Strategy:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/13/AR2005071302342.html

How about some Lee Atwater?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Atwater#Atwater_on_the_Southern_Strategy

Lee Atwater had a deathbed conversion, re: the SS. But Karl Rove is still working that magic, along with his fellow GOBPers.

I thought you would want to be informed.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | July 14, 2010 9:51 PM | Report abuse

troll,

you're so right. you have shown me the evils of my ways -- no longer will i call racists racist. it's just so darned unfair.

but, you have to help me out. i'm still not up to teabagger speed. how do i convince my former allies on the left that (a) the people i quoted from the thinkprogress post in my 7:36pm comment are *not* in fact racist and (b) that they people who call them racists are the *real* racists?

please, enlighten me cos i really don't know how to argue that with a straight face...

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 14, 2010 9:51 PM | Report abuse

"Brian Beutler does a nice job using reporting to demonstrate one of this blog's pet points: No matter how much Dems scream about GOP obstructionism, it may not hurt Republicans, because Dems may pay the bigger price for government inaction on the economy."
----------------------------------------------

But how crushed will he be if it turns out not to work that way, exactly? Americans aren't completely stupid *all* the time. There have been occasional exceptions.

Posted by: CalD | July 14, 2010 10:06 PM | Report abuse

ifthethunderdontgetya,

Thank you for conflating demagogueing racism with a suppossed political tactic that's 40 years old. Also, I admire your ability to fight the good fight along with your peerless leader, Barry McStrawman Slayer. If NOT conflating and demagogueing is wrong, I dont wanna be right!

blahgblogwordpresscom,

You're so right, I did explicity say that no TeaBaggers are racists. It's right there in simple plain reichwing english. I salute you for seeing my obvious statements! And I hereby award you a Silver Star for gallantry in Strawman Slaying! Welcome to the Obama Division of the Great Army of the Potomac Strawman Slayers. A comment about racial demagoguery is the same as saying that NO TeaBaggers are racist.

I salute the two of you for your intellectual prowess.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 14, 2010 10:07 PM | Report abuse

troll,

drop the offended schtick. the clear implications of your comments were that noting the rampant racism on display by the teabaggers is, as you write, racial demagoguery. it is a common tactic of many on the right to attempt to silence any mention of the racism of so many rightwing republicans.

also, you refer to the southern strategy as a 'suppossed political tactic that's 40 years old.' so, i take it that your points are that (a) it might not have happened and (b) it's not relevant today anyway.

is that correct?

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 14, 2010 10:15 PM | Report abuse

blahgblogwordpresscom,

I'm explicity saying that the constant attack on the TeaBaggers (or Republicans for that matter) as being thoroughly infested with inveterate racists was and is demagogueing designed to deligitimize and (hopefully for those doing the demagogueing) silence said TeaBaggers (and Republicans). That was the extent of my implications. Sorry, but not everyone opposing President Barry McStrawmanSlayer is a racist. Some are I'm sure, some even in the TeaBagger movement are racist. I don't think it deligitmizes them as I do not think that racists in the Democratic Party deligitimize it. Argue the merits, argue inconsistencies or the lefty favorite of supposed hypocricy but please, consider for yourself the possibility that some on the left are using the "racism card" to silence dissent.

As far as "The Southern Strategy" goes I won't deny that Atwater identified it as starting with Nixon in '68, though he lost most of the south to either Wallace or that raging Confederate Humphries. In 1972 Nixon won all but I think 3 states against McGovern. You may want to talk about McGoverns decision making prowess ala Muskie, but I don't know if the "Southern Strategy was responsible. If we examine Reagan's victory in 1980, he won something like 45 states, rendering the "Southern Strategy" somewhat moot, and in 1984 Reagan won all but two states. Again, not a real plug for the overarching influence of the Southern Strategy. Maybe Bush 41's victory in 1988 might illuminate things for us as Bush 41 only won 39 or 40 states. So, maybe one victory. Maybe. Atwater was a lot of things, including a braggert.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 14, 2010 10:37 PM | Report abuse

ifthethunderdontgetya,

Thank you for conflating demagogueing racism with a suppossed political tactic that's 40 years old.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 14, 2010 10:07 PM |
=====================================

"demagogueing racism" - What?

"a suppossed political tactic" - I linked to to actual practioners of the "supposed tactic" confessing same.

"that's 40 years old." - Yes, Nixon's The One.

But I linked to Lee Atwater: "Atwater's most noteworthy campaign was the 1988 presidential election..."

And to Ken Mehlman, the Republican National Committee chairman, this morning will tell the NAACP national convention in Milwaukee that it was "wrong." (This morning being Thursday, July 14, 2005.)

I'm trying to help, but you need to want to be cured of your blindness.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | July 14, 2010 10:38 PM | Report abuse

I don't know, this guy's running for state office in NH, he doesn't seem to have caught on to subtlety yet. No one here is saying all Republicans or all Tea Partiers are racist, but you can't just deny all the facts and let conservatives call Obama a racist without fighting back a little.

Ryan Murdough, in his own written words:

"For far too long white Americans have been told that diversity is something beneficial to their existence. Statistics prove that the opposite is true. New Hampshire residents must seek to preserve their racial identity if we want future generations to have to possibility to live in such a great state. Affirmative action, illegal and legal non-white immigration, anti-white public school systems, and an anti-white media have done much damage to the United States of America and especially New Hampshire. It is time for white people in New Hampshire and across the country to take a stand. We are only 8 percent of the world's population and we need our own homeland, just like any other non-white group of people deserve their own homeland.

What will happen to New Hampshire once it is only 60, 50 or 40 percent white? Statistics show that areas with high non-white populations have higher rates of violent crime. New Hampshire has one of the lowest rates of violent crime in the country, but that will change as the white population percentage declines and the non-white population percentage increases."

http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/gop-candidate-nh-statehouse-rides-racist-wa

Posted by: lmsinca | July 14, 2010 10:42 PM | Report abuse

ifthethunderdontgetya,

Thank you for your measured and well reasoned response. Bush won the 1988 election 426 to 111. Even if he lost most of the south, say 150 electoral votes, he still essentially wins. like I said, Southern Strategy? Maybe. Atwater was a braggert, as many high ranking political operatives are. I bet Axelrod has a healthy ego. And myths run deep in society, doesn't make them right.

But, since I'm a TeaBagger, and the TeaBagger's have some racist affiliated with them, why argue with me? Isn't everything I might write or posit illegitimite?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 14, 2010 10:48 PM | Report abuse

Imsinca,

I do not think Kesha Rogers represents mainstream, leftwing, or conservadem / bluedog Democratic ideals. I think she's a nut. There are nuts everywhere, heck, I'm a nut. Smear away if you must but trying to equate a racist running as a Republican with the Republicans is the same as me saying this kook is representative of the Democrats.

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/06/21/texas-congressional-nominee-wants-to-impeach-obama-opposes-un/

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 14, 2010 10:55 PM | Report abuse

As far as "The Southern Strategy" goes I won't deny that Atwater identified it as starting with Nixon in '68, though he lost most of the south to either Wallace or that raging Confederate Humphries.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 14, 2010 10:37 PM |
=======================================

Lyndon Johnson - "We have lost the South for a generation." (re: Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Alabama Republican Senator Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III (ranking GOBPer member on the Senate Judiciary Committee) - "Mr. Sessions admonished me to 'be careful what you say to white folks,'" Figures testified.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/05/sessions-colleague-i-thought-id-be-fired-if-i-objected-to-being-called-boy.php

Perhaps you have had a Rip Van Winkle style nap since the 60's, Mr. McTroll.

Check the 2008 Electoral results map.

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/map.html

Sure there's a few sparsely populated Western Plains states in there, but Lyndon Johnson was right, except for the number of generations.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | July 14, 2010 11:01 PM | Report abuse

Okay McWing, we'll agree there are all sorts of nuts out there. But I am not going to be silent while conservatives are arguing that Obama is a racist on Fox or over the internet, when I don't believe it's true. I don't use the word lightly or paint everyone with the same brush, but it's out there and it does a lot of damage to our political discourse as just another way to de-legitimize the president. That seems to be their goal and it's one thing that pisses me off more than just about anything. All the talk of birth certificates, socialism, neo-marxixm, black panthers, reverse racism, rev. wright, bill ayers, acorn, muslim, kenya blah blah blah all serve a single purpose.

Posted by: lmsinca | July 14, 2010 11:10 PM | Report abuse

Thers expresses my anger and frustration better than I can.

"(And incidentally, the real reason conservatives are suspected of “racism’” is not to do with a desire to protect Big Government Ideals, but because of stuff like Fox News inciting nonsensical hysteria over the idea that Frightening Black Men Working for the Department of Justice just might show up at your polling place. I mean, for crying out loud.)

This insanity is how you get a country with a Democratic president and establishment so terrified of being called commies that they won’t aggressively move to address crushing unemployment, do what’s necessary to face up to climate change, or stop torturing people — and whose reward is to get called commies anyway and get killed in midterm elections. It’s a shite situation altogether."

Posted by: lmsinca | July 14, 2010 11:15 PM | Report abuse

ifthethunderdontgetya,

Well you nailed it. I stand defeated. And to think, the entire population of the United States has remained static for all time.

http://uncpress.unc.edu/browse/page/385

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 14, 2010 11:17 PM | Report abuse

troll,

"Sorry, but not everyone opposing President Barry McStrawmanSlayer is a racist."

talk about strawman tactics. please show me where i said this.

so, it was just a coincidence that reagan began his campaign in philadelphia mississippi?

honestly, if you won't cop to the blatant republican appeal to racists in this country for the last four and a half decades, continuing with a passion, as lm notes, against obama, then i don't know what to say.

can you please give some examples of the racism you claim exists in the democratic party?

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 14, 2010 11:22 PM | Report abuse

Imsinca,

I think your afraid to call The President ineffective and instead put far to much blame on Rebulicans. For whatever reason, the President, who has one of the largest Congressional majorities in several generations, and who, for eight months even had a filibuster proof Democratic caucus (something that I think only FDR had enjoyed in the last century). With those kind of numbers, he could not get more of what you desired accomplished. Did Reagan, Clinton (who had an opposition Congress for most of his two terms)or Bush 43 have such large majorities? The problem lays largely on the President and the leaders of the House and Senate. Repbulicans have been largely irrelevant.

Sure, their unity has been remarkable but no more remarkable than I suspect the Democrats would have been in similar circumstances. You can argue that they (elected Republican officials) are all cynical, know that Democratic ideas are better and voted against them to keep their elected positions. I choose to believe that some of that opposition was principled, even if bouyed by the knowledge that not countering the overwhelming power that the Democrats had was in fact an existential threat to their very existance.

Hate the opposition, label their motives as racist, cynical and illegitimate. But do not forget who squandered perhaps the greatest political majority in several generations.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 14, 2010 11:32 PM | Report abuse

so now i guess we should address you as concern troll. you paper over the unprecedented rightwing republican obstructionism and never before seen frequency of filibuster threats.

the rules of the senate are incredibly anti democratic and demint, as we speak, is holding up a removal of the power of individual senators to hold bills.

but sure, blame obama.

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 14, 2010 11:37 PM | Report abuse

blahgblogwordpresscom,

"honestly, if you won't cop to the blatant republican appeal to racists in this country for the last four and a half decades, continuing with a passion, as lm notes, against obama, then i don't know what to say."

I wont cop to such unmitigated nonsense.

"can you please give some examples of the racism you claim exists in the democratic party?" I think there are racist who call themselves Democrats. I mean I can't prove it but there's probably at least one. Didn't the President lose some primaries to Clinton in 2008 in some rural counties in Ohio, Kentucky, Pennsylvania and West Verginia by like 70/30 or 75/25? I gotta think some of that lopsided Democratic voting has got to be from racism. Is it prevelant? I don't think so.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 14, 2010 11:39 PM | Report abuse

Hate the opposition, label their motives as racist, cynical and illegitimate. But do not forget who squandered perhaps the greatest political majority in several generations.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 14, 2010 11:32 PM |
===========================

I, meself, will not forget it. But tell me, McTroll, why would Barry being the DLC Centrist he has always been make me want to vote Republican?

AKA: Barack Obama did not kick the oil companies to the curb, and purge MMS. Therefore, I'll vote for the party of Deregulation and sekrit Energy Task Forces?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/15/AR2005111501842.html

Sure you can complain that the President is a wimpy terrorist appeaser, and at the same time a ruthless Marxist-Nazi crusher of Freedom².

But you can't do both and still pretend to be a sane or honest person.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | July 14, 2010 11:51 PM | Report abuse

Well McWing, apparently you weren't here last year during the HCR debate, I was one of the biggest critics here of the back room deals when we lost some of the best ideas for reform. I actually have been pretty cynical about Obama's centrist tendencies and mostly blame blue dogs and corporate Senators for the weak legislation, and Rahm.

I'm way more of a socialist than Obama ever was or will be and I'm still not one. It doesn't mean however that I would be remotely interested in handing over the power to Republicans, at least not the ones we have now. I don't shy away from policy or economic debates with people on either side, but this tactic of illegitimacy is devious and divisive and I'll keep highlighting it until they stop, forever? It infiltrates the electorate and turns normally smart, reasonable people into something I no longer recognize.

And now I'll shut up about it because I'm sure I'm boring everyone. Manana

Posted by: lmsinca | July 14, 2010 11:52 PM | Report abuse

concern troll,

you're being disingenuous. you've already declined to acknowledge the southern strategy or answer my question about why reagan began his campaign in philedelphia mississippi. that does not help your credibility.

you are, with a straight face, denying that the republicans have been appealing to race for more than 45 years. in attempting to build your case, you site some election returns.

i would have thought it was clear that my challenge to cite racists democrats was in reference to politicians or apparatniks. sorry. are there people who vote democratic or even call themselves democrats who are racists. sure. but i think you know that was not what i was referring to.

should i then take it that you cannot cite racist democratic politicians or functionaires?


Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 14, 2010 11:53 PM | Report abuse

blahgblogwordpresscom,

"but sure, blame obama." Don't mind if I do. I think he has done enough damage and am afraid some of it will be permanent and irreversible.

I obviously did'nt vote for the current administration. I appreciate politics, and I look at it as the accumulation and exercise of power. It's impossible not to admire the power that has been accumulated and exercised. Based on what I read here, Kos, FDL, Think Progress and Open Left, it seems that not enough has been done. Ok, I disagree but my party had had little or no power. And if the current Administration cannot steamroll even one Republican Senator for the minority of time that there has not been a filibuster proof majority in Congress, well then, they're not politicking too well are they?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 14, 2010 11:54 PM | Report abuse

ifthethunderdontgetya,

"I, meself, will not forget it. But tell me, McTroll, why would Barry being the DLC Centrist he has always been make me want to vote Republican?

AKA: Barack Obama did not kick the oil companies to the curb, and purge MMS. Therefore, I'll vote for the party of Deregulation and sekrit Energy Task Forces?"

I have no doubt that you will not vote Republican and I never expected you would. I find Barry's excuses for poor regulatory oversight hilarious and disingenous. I will say though that it's not like the BP and the companies drilling the Macondo well were in perfect regulatory compliance. (One of the aspects of Barry's campaign and of Democratic leadership claims in general, that they can manage government effectively versus the Republican presumed incompetence and/or corruption, I find particularly hilarious, chalk it up to our different world views.)Barry's had what, 16 months and all the resources of the Federal Government and Democratic Pary along with a $1 Trillion slush fund and a large, filibuster proof majority legislature and he can't effectively manage his own departments? Ok then, do you think he was in collusion with them? If so, who do you vote for now?

I think Barry likes power and is interested in keeping it and will say, or have his surrogates say virtually anything to keep it. I think he's an innefective administrator and a bully. I do not find the those two things mutually exclusive.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 15, 2010 12:09 AM | Report abuse

concern troll,

repeating what thunder wrote just a few posts ago and what many others have noted many times before:

so again with the dichotomous rightwing republican talking points that obama is simultaneously inept *and* a deviously effective threat to the nation.

do you also think he's simultaneously a marxist and a nazi?

maybe a secret muslim and a radical black christian too?

i'll note you still haven't responded to my questions about reagan beginning his campaign in philadelphia mississippi or my challenge to cite any racist democratic politicians or party officials.

also, would you please explain what 'permanent and irreversible' 'damage' obama has done to the country?

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 15, 2010 12:10 AM | Report abuse

concern troll,

"Barry's had what, 16 months and all the resources of the Federal Government and Democratic Pary along with a $1 Trillion slush fund..."

please explain your reference to the '$1 trillion slush fund.'

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 15, 2010 12:13 AM | Report abuse

Imsinca,

"but this tactic of illegitimacy is devious and divisive and I'll keep highlighting it until they stop, forever? It infiltrates the electorate and turns normally smart, reasonable people into something I no longer recognize."

I think this has been going on since the founding of this Country and I have a lot faith in the resilience of the Electorate. There was a lot of this going on with Bush 43, Selected not Elected, etc., I'm not saying it started with him, my God, go back and read some of the things written about Lincoln during his terms, from members of his own party! People were marching in the streets chanting at LBJ, "How many kids did you kill today?"

It's not new. I think a lot of this depends on which side of the political spectrum you're on.

And I'm not bored and do not care if others are, but I'm a wingnut;-) Goodnight!

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 15, 2010 12:16 AM | Report abuse

concern troll,

are you really going to decline to answer my questions?

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 15, 2010 12:30 AM | Report abuse

I have no doubt that you will not vote Republican and I never expected you would. I find Barry's excuses for poor regulatory oversight hilarious and disingenous. I will say though that it's not like the BP and the companies drilling the Macondo well were in perfect regulatory compliance.
...
Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 15, 2010 12:09 AM
=======================

I'm still waiting for an explanation of why all of that would make you want to vote for the "Drill, Baby, Drill!" party.

Don't worry, it's an open google test and you can take your time.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | July 15, 2010 12:40 AM | Report abuse

blahgblogwordpresscom,

"should i then take it that you cannot cite racist democratic politicians or functionaires?" Yup, I cannot think of any. I must have misinterpreted your meaning and I apologize for that. I was trying to say that while their may be some racist's in the TeaBagger movement, I think it's more an indication of there being racists in any large political group. I'm guessing that you think some elected Repbulican officials are racist. We might disagree on some of the more famous ones and I probably do not know all elected Republicans so in all fairness there might be. I'm not suggesting that elected Democratic leadership is occupied by racists. Again, if that's how it sounded I'm sorry, was not my intent.

I do not think that Barry is a Marxist nor a Nazi. I think that political discourse gets increasingly hyperbolic in times of economic straights and/or war. Bush got called plenty of nasty things as well, Nazi, war criminal, etc. Also, I do not think he's a secret or even open muslim. If I had to guess, an athiest who used Rev. Wright's church and influence to help him get elected in Chicago. I actually believe he could sit in his church for years and not hear what the Reverend was saying as he was probably thinking of different things!

"'ll note you still haven't responded to my questions about reagan beginning his campaign in philadelphia mississippi or my challenge to cite any racist democratic politicians or party officials." I do not think that Reagan was a racist and I remember reading an article a while back, I think an interview with Don Regan that eventhough most of his campaign advised against kicking off in Mississippi, Reagan had made a promise to someone there or in Mississippi that he would and felt like he could not back out. I'm too lazy to find the proof of it right now so feel free to think I made this up out of whole cloth knowing full well, cause I was there, that Reagan, after grinding down his devil horns, donned the white hood and rode around town on horseback torching crosses on various African American lawns.

I think that, among other things, Obamacare will eventually destroy our medical system. I also think that Barry, using the BP leak as an excuse, has essentially made any new drilling offshore, and soon I think, on land virtually impossible, driving out those industries for the foreseeable future, contributing to high, permanent unemployment. I also believe that Barry will effectivly use the EPA's regulatory authority to control carbon, causing energy prices to, as he put it, "necessarily skyrocket" and againg, further delay any sort of economic recovery. There's more, but I think that's a good start on the subject.

I think the $1 Trillion slush fund was the ARRA as well as monies distributed to various wall street banks, AIG, GM and Chrysler. I think that the accounting of how that money was/is/will be spent is so purposely convoluted as to constitute a moral hazard, a slush fund.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 15, 2010 12:41 AM | Report abuse

ifthethunderdontgetya,

Sorry i'm so tardy in answering your questions. I will vote for the "Drill baby drill" crowd, and I'm assuming you mean Republican, because I think that they will serve as a check for two years on Barry's agenda. Hopefully in two more years a Republican will be elected President, along with a Repbulican Congress, and repeal things like, for example, Obamacare. I'm in favor of energy production and exploration. Cheap energy is essential for a vibrant and growing economy, in my opinion, and I think it's important to persue it.

I did not need to google any of the above, I just cut and pasted the talking points i'm given every day, along with my medication.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 15, 2010 12:48 AM | Report abuse

blahgblogwordpresscom,

"concern troll,

are you really going to decline to answer my questions?"

My sincerest apolgies if I have missed any and I beg of you to highlight the ones still in need of my insights.

I'm sorry I'm so slow but apparantly Mr. Rove is feeding talking points to a number of us and it takes a while for it to be my turn again. I think it's thinning out though so it should go faster.

The other problem I have is that I'm afraid of Barry's middle name and occasionally the fear becomes so pervasive I have to stop and gaze at my Dark Lord Cheney's picture to calm down.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 15, 2010 12:54 AM | Report abuse

concern troll,

"I'm guessing that you think some elected Repbulican officials are racist. We might disagree on some of the more famous ones and I probably do not know all elected Republicans so in all fairness there might be."

yes. and also party operatives. primarily the ones who conceived and put into action the southern strategy, but also secondarily, those who tacitly endorsed by their silence.

"If I had to guess, an athiest who used Rev. Wright's church and influence to help him get elected in Chicago."

i only with an atheist could get elected president in this country. what makes you think obama's an athiest?

"I'm too lazy to find the proof of it right now so feel free to think I made this up out of whole cloth knowing full well, cause I was there, that Reagan, after grinding down his devil horns, donned the white hood and rode around town on horseback torching crosses on various African American lawns."

i actually don't think you made it up. i just think you gave to mych credence to whoever sold you this line.

i think obama was way to generous to the health insurance industry but still saved them. predictions were that, without reform, americans would be paying huge proportions of their income for insurance. it wasn't perfect and needs work, but i firmly beleive hcr was nonetheless a good start.

and i disagree about the supposed slush fund. do you remember the rightwing repubican charge from a year ago that obama was supposedly ordering the car companies to close down dealerships that allegedly donated to republicans.

whatever happened to that story?

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 15, 2010 1:00 AM | Report abuse

concern troll @Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 15, 2010 12:54 AM

what purpose do responses like these serve?

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 15, 2010 1:15 AM | Report abuse

blahgblogwordpresscom,

"yes. and also party operatives. primarily the ones who conceived and put into action the southern strategy, but also secondarily, those who tacitly endorsed by their silence."
Ok, I've said that the Southern Strategy is a myth, even in the Republican party, and I've tried to show that for every election since 1968, the south was irrelevant. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, three different Democrats, including an African American, have been elected since 1968, thereby proving that the Southern Strategy is BS and/or irrelevant. We'll have to agree to disagree.

I just think Barry's an athiest. I blame Frank Davis. But seriously, it's more just a vibe I have. No proof, as is my, and us teabagger's way. In any event it's irrelevant to me, though I agree it's probably impossible for an avowed athiest to be elected Potus.

And as a teabagger, i believe what my overlords tell me. I suspect that even if I googled the proof for you vis a vis Reagan and Mississippi, you'd still think it was BS.

I was as disgusted as you with Barry and Pharma and Insurance's collusion with this disasterous piece of legislation though for probably different reasons. I agree with you that from a certain standpoint, it's a good start. That is ultimatly what I'm afraid of. Entrenchment will make it impossible to repeal. I pray not.

I heard those stories about dealerships as well and even on some interesting pattern analysis on some racist righty blogs. I think the health care debate overshadowed it and it's not like I think the media is really thinks it's true and worthy of investigating. As far as us rightie's, there is a whole lot of other things to look at and freakout about. I'm a Ford man anyway and therefore do not have much sympathy for GM or Chrysler dealers.


Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 15, 2010 1:33 AM | Report abuse

blahgblogwordpresscom,

"what purpose do responses like these serve?"

Just playing to perceived type along sensing some hostility with queries like: "are you really going to decline to answer my questions?" The intertubes is a funny thing and it's possible, in the heat of debate to confuse and innocent or sincere question with one that is dripping with snottiness and contempt. If that was not your intent than I'm sorry, really.


Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 15, 2010 1:40 AM | Report abuse

concern troll,

"In fact, if I'm not mistaken, three different Democrats, including an African American, have been elected since 1968, thereby proving that the Southern Strategy is BS and/or irrelevant."

wrong. do you deny that the south switched from overwhemling dixiecrat democrat to solid republican after the civil rights movement?

fank davis? really? why not just bring up ayers and alinsky?

again, the concern trollery is ineffective. you sound like the putative pumas from the election who claimed they were lifelong democrats who just, for some reason, couldn't stomach obama and then proceeded to spout, verbatim, rightwing republican talking points.

"I heard those stories about dealerships as well and even on some interesting pattern analysis on some racist righty blogs"

would you please expound on this idea?


Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 15, 2010 1:41 AM | Report abuse

concern troll @Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 15, 2010 1:40 AM

being limited to alphanumeric script can make interpreting comments difficult. i extend the same apologies to you. what about my comments made you think they were 'dripping with snottiness and contempt'?

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 15, 2010 1:48 AM | Report abuse

blahgblogwordpresscom,

Okay, I was way off on the Don Regan thing, but was right about the details. This is where I read it.

http://article.nationalreview.com/334519/reagan-no-racist/deroy-murdock

There, that should settle the issue, it is, after all, The National Review, a periodical above reproach in the neck of the woods right?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 15, 2010 1:51 AM | Report abuse

concern troll,

wow. i really expected better from you. care to highlight a relevant quote?

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 15, 2010 2:03 AM | Report abuse

blahgblogwordpresscom,

"wrong. do you deny that the south switched from overwhemling dixiecrat democrat to solid republican after the civil rights movement?" No I do not deny that by '72, the south was voting, at least Presidentially Republican (and considering the quality of Democratic candidates, I don't blame them)but still were voting largely Democrat, at least locally. Now, in my opinion, there has been some pretty significan migration of people to the South and Southwest in the last several decades and it has been, up until like 2000, that suburbans and the retiree's were pretty solid Republican voters so a shift to Repbulican from Dixiecrat is, I think, murkier and more related to an influx of Republicans leaving the North. Your milelage may very. This Southern Strategy belief is deeply engrained in the American Psyche. I'm not a believer, you are.

Frank Davis was a joke. Like I said, just a vibe. It doesn't matter to me.

A couple of blogs on the right, HotAir, Aoshq and NRO were batting stories around from the Hoover institue and/or the Heritage foundation. The Libertarian wing or the right was really exercised about the whole thing so was just doing some initial investigations, or statistical analysis, including some interesting links with surviving dealerships and Obama doners. Then health care started to overshadow it. I'll look tomorrow and see if I can find them. I don't think anything was conclusively proven and it may have died because of that. I recall being interested but not knocked out convinced.

And as far as tone goes, like I said, the questions just seemed rather hostile. I like spirited debate but more often than not, particularly in a forum that tends to lean left, not everybody appreciates the debate and tends to be rather dismissive and contempetous of disagreers. I see it on rightie sites with lefty trolls. Plus I'm a shallow reader and miss stuff that might negate a perceived hostility.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 15, 2010 2:06 AM | Report abuse

also, seriously, please expound on this quote: ""I heard those stories about dealerships as well and even on some interesting pattern analysis on some racist righty blogs"

and, sorry to have to keep asking you to provide answers, what part of my comments were 'dripping with snottiness and contempt'?

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 15, 2010 2:08 AM | Report abuse

I'll try and get you the dealership stuff tomorrow, if you're interested but am signing off now, as I gotta work tomorrow. Geez, now I can only do the schtick for ifthethunderdontgetya!

Goodnight.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 15, 2010 2:09 AM | Report abuse

I'm sorry,

it was really the "are you really going to decline to answer my questions?" that rubbed me wrong for some reason. I'm thinking now that it was just a question and I overreacted. Sorry about that and I appreciate your questioning this because I like the back and forth and don't want to leave a pall over it because I took something wrong. There isn't anything else but that. Chalk it up to me being tired and accept my apollgies and I will exempt you from schtick for a couple days to show my sincerity;-)!

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 15, 2010 2:15 AM | Report abuse

concern troll,

"Your milelage may very. This Southern Strategy belief is deeply engrained in the American Psyche. I'm not a believer, you are."

you're entitled to your own opinions but not our own facts. simply acknowledging that the republicans appealed to racial animosity, in the country as a whole but primarily in the south, would go a long way to establishing more credibility.

"I'll look tomorrow and see if I can find them."

i look forward to continuing this discussion with you. my contention is that the story died because it was utter bullshit. please try to prove me wrong.

do you contend that think the manner you primarily adopt here is particularly conducive to civil debate?

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 15, 2010 2:19 AM | Report abuse

concern troll @July 15, 2010 2:15 AM,

why not just lay off the schtick completely? you're clearly capable of it. can't we just discuss matters without the silliness?

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 15, 2010 2:23 AM | Report abuse

Blah,

This is a better environment for debate because, among other things you can't hide comments you don't like, as well as that it's not overwhelmed to often by partisans questioning everybodys sincerity. The result is some interesting exchanges between people with really different world views. That's interstingmto me. I learn alot about how people think and that's speaking as well.. Imknow
Greg would probably like more commentors, but I don't want so many that you cannot have a conversation.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | July 15, 2010 2:34 AM | Report abuse

concern troll,

there are certainly advantages to this kind of alphanumeric, asynchronous, chronologically displayed forum.

a, if not *the* major benefit: everyone gets their turn and no one can talk or shout over anyone else.

clearly, i also enjoy discussing these matters with people who have various perspectives. i agree that the archival nature of online discussion is a good thing, as george allen discovered.

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 15, 2010 2:45 AM | Report abuse

TrollMcWingNut said:

"I'm sorry"

Two and a half words that count. Speaks well of you.

Posted by: bernielatham | July 15, 2010 7:19 AM | Report abuse

Headline in today's Ha'aretz...

"Police suspect alleged Jewish terrorist killed four Palestinians"

Here's a bit of the story...

"A right-wing Israeli extremist arrested this week over a string of stabbing attacks is suspected of murdering four Palestinians and attempting to murder another seven, according to details of the investigation released on Thursday."

And if you check the link, you'll see a youngish fellow who doesn't look either concerned nor even slightly repentant.

But the thing that caught my attention here was the title's "Jewish terrorist". Has anyone ever seen that pairing of noun and adjective in a US paper?
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/police-suspect-alleged-jewish-terrorist-killed-four-palestinians-1.302122

Posted by: bernielatham | July 15, 2010 7:40 AM | Report abuse

This Reuters piece, carried up front in Ha'aretz today will, we're sure, be welcome at NRO...

"Israel attack wouldn't stop Iran nuclear program, says U.K. study
Oxford Research Group predicts Israeli attack would spark long war that might even encourage Iran further."

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/israel-attack-wouldn-t-stop-iran-nuclear-program-says-u-k-study-1.302005

Will Sarah weigh in? Her foreign policy bona fides are exemplary, of course.

Posted by: bernielatham | July 15, 2010 7:54 AM | Report abuse

And speaking of the NRO - ya gotta love this alternate-universe title to Lowry's piece this morning...

"The Radicalism of the Anti-Arizona Suit"

Next week, we'll expect to see...

"Hell's Angels forced to sell clubhouse because of high crime rate in neighborhood"

Posted by: bernielatham | July 15, 2010 8:02 AM | Report abuse

Not sure if I've bumped into the National Republican Trust PAC before (mentioned by Greg above) but the Exec Dir is Scott Wheeler who was previously employed by Moon, Paul Weyrich and Chris Ruddy.

@Greg... if you haven't seen it yet, LGF posts a fundraising letter from Wheeler re this network decision to not run the ad. It's a dilly...

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/219093_Scott_Wheeler_falls_off_the_co

Posted by: bernielatham | July 15, 2010 8:20 AM | Report abuse

Rand Paul gets honest about his dishonesty

"My dad freely will say that, that he would eliminate at least half of the departments, but he is just more forthright.”

http://www.salon.com/news/rand_paul_kentucky_senate_republican/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2010/07/14/rand_paul_interview


Posted by: bernielatham | July 15, 2010 8:32 AM | Report abuse

All, morning roundup posted:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/07/the_morning_plum_52.html

...and Bernie, thanks for that Nat'l Repub Trust thing. I may revisit today.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | July 15, 2010 8:33 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company