Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Happy Hour Roundup

* The MSNBC gang explains why Obama is campaigning for Dem Rep. Tom Perriello this evening: The district's history shows a presidential visit could actually put him over the top. It's going to be tough, but that would be a very big win indeed.

* It ain't over 'till it's over? The DCCC argues in a new memo that GOP declarations that Dems will lose the House is a "tactic to depress Democratic voters," and makes the case that early voting shows the enthusiasm gap just hasn't materialized.

* The Cook Political Report's final prediction for the House: "A Democratic net loss of 50 to 60 seats, with higher losses possible."

* Bill Clinton clarifies: He didn't tell Kendrick Meek outright to get out of the race; he merely discussed the possibility with him.

* A new twist on the secret cash debate from Jesse Zwick: Corporate cash that has been disclosed is flowing overwhelmingly to the GOP.

* The DNC has been arging that early voting and volunteering disproves the enthusiasm gap. The latest: They are claiming Organizing for America volunteers have made 72 million door knocks and phone calls.

* Politifact's verdict on Obama's claim that most job losses occured before his policies took hold: "True."

* Failed conservative attack line of the day: Sam Stein unearths proof that the RNC, too, filed freedom of information requests on Dem presidential candidates. Whoopsie!

* Special bonus failed conservative attack line of the day: A new Fox News poll finds that more think Obama is pro-business (42 percent) than anti-business (38 percent).

* But: The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is regarded favorably, 48-22.

* Everyone is trying their hand at counterfactuals today, and Igor Volsky wonders whether health reform would be such a liability for Dems if Obama had more agressively pushed for core liberal priorities.

* Steve Benen valiantly clings to the hope that verifiable facts will one day matter in our politics.

* Dirty tricks watch: A flyer is circulating in Nevada (it isn't the work of the Sharron Angle campaign) telling seniors that they may die sooner if they vote for Harry Reid.

* Ed Kilgore calculates that half the Blue Dog Dems may drown in the GOP wave, leaving the survivors with diminished influence.

* Lede of the day, from CNN:

Palin picks fight with State Department

A tweet by Sarah Palin attacking the U.S. State Department for a tweet to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on his birthday distorted the State Department's original intent, a spokesman for the department said Friday.

Palin launches yet another comically ridiculous, thoroughly un-newsworthy national security Tweet in Obama's direction, and suddenly she's in a head to head media standoff with the State Department. Magic!

* And by pure coincidence, a new Washington Post/ABC News poll also found today that two thirds think Palin is unqualified for the presidency.

What else is happening?

By Greg Sargent  | October 29, 2010; 6:21 PM ET
Categories:  2010 elections, 2012, Campaign finance, Happy Hour Roundup, Health reform, House Dems, House GOPers, Political media, economy  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Sharron Angle: "I'll answer those questions when I'm the Senator"
Next: Obama hits McConnell "one term president" claim

Comments

The tactics of the Obama people of bullying those who do not agree with Obama - and calling them racist has been going on all over the nation?

Now it is against the rules to mention that the American People are sick of these tactics?


The American People do not like how Obama and the democrats have disrespected them. This is another instance. It is a legitimate campaign issue - worthy of discussion.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 29, 2010 6:27 PM | Report abuse

Irony:

http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20101028/OPINION03/310280018/1020/Marc+Murphy+|+Irony

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 29, 2010 6:29 PM | Report abuse

Is THAT all you've got, Greg?! You just shot your wad, for this election season at least ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 6:33 PM | Report abuse

PALIN-RUBIO 2012 (at least they were BORN in the USA ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 6:37 PM | Report abuse

It is true - the Obama tactics which bully people with False Charges of Racism - are aimed only at white people.


So to level a False Charge of Racism - is RACIST AGAINST WHITE PEOPLE.

The whole attempt is to try to silence people - or to get people to refrain from exercising their Freedom of Speech.

That is what the Obama people have been doing - all over the nation.

This is just one more reason not to vote for the democrats. Obama has done nothing about these Obama tactics - and his silence has indicated his support for these false Obama charges of racism.

The democrats do not like to talk about this.

It is like they know they have been caught red-handed.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 29, 2010 6:37 PM | Report abuse

"And by pure coincidence, a new Washington Post/ABC News poll also found today that two thirds think Palin is unqualified for the presidency."

So two thirds of the nation aren't complete lunatics. There's something encouraging in that, I suppose.

Posted by: bernielatham | October 29, 2010 6:40 PM | Report abuse

Bernie (form an earlier thread):

"Well, Scotty."

Nice touch, Bern! Very subtle. I bet half the people here don't even know what you were up to with that. (As an aside...ever notice how 2 syllable names - Bernie - are routinely shortened to one in order to show familiarity, while single
syllable names are routinely lengthened to 2 for the same purpose? What's
up with that?).

"What do you think...How many...How many...What are...And how are..."

That's an awful lot of questions from someone who so routinely claims to be
"uninterested" in my thoughts about things. You should be careful,
otherwise people might start to think your "disinterest" has
a lot more to do with your ability to sensibly counter what I say than with
any actual boredom with doing so.

Posted by: ScottC3 | October 29, 2010 6:41 PM | Report abuse

Jake

Do not download the program from Kevin Willis onto your computer - even if you are curious.

There might be some virus in there which would enable him to read all the files on your computer - or get some personal information about you.


Be Careful.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 29, 2010 6:44 PM | Report abuse

In order to compare apples to apples, however, we need to find out how many of the 69,456,897 Americans who actually voted for OBAMA still think that he is qualified for the presidency. When are we going to see THAT Washington Post/ABC News poll?

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 6:44 PM | Report abuse

From Josh...

"Late Update: D'oh! I get that reporter's learned his lesson. Angle's campaign just banned his TV station from the campaign's election night event over the foreign policy question."

Posted by: bernielatham | October 29, 2010 6:45 PM | Report abuse

SaveTheRainforest:

I definitely won't be downloading the program from Kevin Willis onto my computer -- there might be some virus in there which would enable him to read all the files on your computer - or get some other personal information too.

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 6:47 PM | Report abuse

bernielatham:

Late Update: maybe that TV station should have thought about the consequences first. You were fine with Obama refusing to go on Fox News, right?

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 6:50 PM | Report abuse

Scott said: "your "disinterest" has
a lot more to do with your ability to sensibly counter what I say than with
any actual boredom with doing so."

I don't care a whole lot what people think but I am curious. Do you actually think this is what is going on?

Posted by: bernielatham | October 29, 2010 6:50 PM | Report abuse

STRF is banned.

I know this is basically gonna be a long game of whack a mole, but we'll do our best to prevent him from reentering under different names.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 29, 2010 6:50 PM | Report abuse

Today's quote, from Yglesias...

"Jonah Goldberg, well-known critic of liberal fascism, wonders: “Why wasn’t Assange garroted in his hotel room years ago?”"

Matt links this...
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/ct-oped-1029-goldberg-20101029,0,3320548,print.story

Posted by: bernielatham | October 29, 2010 6:53 PM | Report abuse

whack a troll :)

Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 29, 2010 6:56 PM | Report abuse

McWing (same earlier thread):

"Bernie does any belief outside of the mainstream drag us back to fascism?"

Come, come McWing. Let's not be so hyperbolic as to bring Hitler into it. Clearly Bernie was expressing nothing more than the much more moderate position
that the election of a religious believer portends the likely loss of every
technological and scientific advancement since the age of the
Enlightenment. And be honest...who among us rational folk doesn't worry
about that from time to time?

Posted by: ScottC3 | October 29, 2010 6:57 PM | Report abuse

Whack a troll! Thanks, Mike. That's exactly it. :)

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 29, 2010 6:57 PM | Report abuse

Exactly what were the charges against STRF ? We all would like to know so we can comply with the new rules.

Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 29, 2010 7:02 PM | Report abuse

You were fine with Obama refusing to go on Fox News, right?

Posted by: JakeD2
++++++++++

Unlike Sharron Angle, Barack Obama is not a coward.

Interview with Chris Wallace of Fox (during the primary campaign, not "after I'm the President") on April 27, 2008:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vYLXZEVsz0

Interview with Bill O'Reilly of Fox, Sept. 4, 2008 (during the general election campaign, not "after I'm the President") and the very first question is about National Security:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_753sLQQ8q8

Interview with Bret Baier of Fox, in the White House, March 17, 2010, about health care:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,589589,00.html

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 29, 2010 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Hope you all make it to the rally tomorrow.

I'll be there with my Repeal the 28th Amendment and The only thing we have to fear... is Glen Beck's Hair signs.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 29, 2010 7:03 PM | Report abuse

Bearclaw Obama was keeping away from answering questions posed by Fox News - and the Obama campaign did keep the candidate away from questions for the most part. It was tightly controlled.

Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 29, 2010 7:05 PM | Report abuse

Bernie:

"Do you actually think this is what is going on?"

Oh no. Of course not. ;)

Posted by: ScottC3 | October 29, 2010 7:05 PM | Report abuse

badCom[4]='MountainPeaks';

Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 29, 2010 7:07 PM | Report abuse

Greg,

I admire your persistence, but as you can see, it took him 12 minutes to come back under a different name.

I can scroll past him, and others are now employing Kevin's techno-wiz approach. Why waste your time trying to ban him? It is like the old saying about wrestling with a pig. You both get dirty, but the pig enjoys it.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 29, 2010 7:07 PM | Report abuse

69,456,897 Americans who actually voted for OBAMA still think that he is qualified for the presidency.

---------------


Well, applying Bernie's standard of "complete lunatics"

I wonder if voting for a completely inexperienced and unqualified person to be President qualifies them as "complete lunatics"

It certainly is extremely irreponsible with the nation - and its finances.

Obama has proven that he can not handle the job and he should have never been put in the position in the first place.

Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 29, 2010 7:11 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw1:

Careful threadbombing the same thing over and over (I already addressed your links to Fox News on the other thread ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 7:13 PM | Report abuse

badCom[4]='MountainPeaks';

Posted by: mikefromArlington

That is the funny thing -- he is so easily identifiable. He can't really go "incognito" because part of the pleasure for him is showing everyone that he is "clever" enough to get back on the blog.

Have a great time at the rally. I'm sure we can rely on Fox News for an accurate crowd count, right?

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 29, 2010 7:15 PM | Report abuse

Greg wrote: "Palin launches yet another comically ridiculous, thoroughly un-newsworthy national security Tweet in Obama's direction, and suddenly she's in a head to head media standoff with the State Department. Magic!"

Thank goodness you won't participate in that!

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 29, 2010 7:15 PM | Report abuse

badCom[4]='MountainPeaks';

Posted by: mikefromArlington

That is the funny thing -- he is so easily identifiable. He can't really go "incognito" because part of the pleasure for him is showing everyone that he is "clever" enough to get back on the blog.

Have a great time at the rally. I'm sure we can rely on Fox News for an accurate crowd count, right?

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 29, 2010 7:16 PM | Report abuse

One would think the Democratic party would have a bit more self-respect than to engage in such as the current Florida circus. Regardless of what you've read hear at the PL, Dems are scared to death of Rubio. That's why they're so desperate to derail his path to the Senate. He's what Joe Biden might call "clean and articulate", a possible future Republican star.

So the Dems are trying every trick in the book to elect a Republican who couldn't win his own party's nomination and has no core principles at all---other than personal greed and ambition. So the Obama and Clinton people want the man who legitimately won the Democratic primary to drop out of the race so a contemptible moron in a snit can get back at the party who snubbed him by caucusing with Dems. LOL.

None of the principals in the affair have been able to match their lies since the story broke. They've reminded us all once again what little integrity Bill Clinton possesses and have no doubt managed to depress the Democratic turnout even further. The party that is supposedly the all inclusive look of our political future would do anything to get rid of a black candidate and a Latino candidate so the old white guy can win. Oh, but he may be gay, so what the heck.

Posted by: Brigade | October 29, 2010 7:16 PM | Report abuse

Remember everyone - you are now not allowed to make the same same point twice twice.

If you do, you will be banned.

Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 29, 2010 7:17 PM | Report abuse

Now, here's an opinion with which I am 110% in agreement. Chait quotes Millbank and adds his thoughts...

"President Obama's appearance on the Daily Show has inevitably produced concern about his lack of dignity:

---------
"You don't want to use that phrase, dude," Stewart recommended with a laugh.
Dude. The indignity of a comedy show host calling the commander in chief "dude" pretty well captured the moment for Obama.
---------

On the contrary, I think the office of the president has too much dignity. The president is a citizen who serves the public. It is in the interest of the president to make himself into something exalted, a national father figure and symbol of the government. But the public has no interest in this function, which, indeed, can take on monarchical trappings with an insidious anti-democratic undertone. (It's a little disturbing when people who see the president salute -- a military signal that suggests subordination.)

Obviously, I don't want to see presidents cutting their own rap videos or jumping into the ring with professional wrestlers. But at the moment, and for the foreseeable future, out problem is not too little presidential dignity but too much."
http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/78766/the-trouble-presidential-dignity

This is, for many non-Americans, one of the truly weird aspects of your Presidency. The level of, or perhaps the character of, deference granted the President is more akin to that of a King (or slightly threatening dictator) than to a temporary First Citizen. If you've seen any press/leader interactions from Canada or Britain, you'll appreciate the differences.

Posted by: bernielatham | October 29, 2010 7:19 PM | Report abuse

Brigade:

PALIN-RUBIO 2012 (at least they were BORN in the USA ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 7:24 PM | Report abuse

The use of the word "dude" was condescending to Obama -

"Don't do that, Dude"

Obama made a mistake going on the Daily Show - he didn't excite anyone, Obama probably deflated his base. In addition, Obama re-nationalized the election, which was exactly the worst thing to do.


Anyway - evaluating Obama's tactics is probably out-of-bounds.


Now that Greg Sargent has joined the Sopranos - WHACK A TROLL !!!


.

Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 29, 2010 7:25 PM | Report abuse

...others are now employing Kevin's techno-wiz approach. Why waste your time trying to ban him? It is like the old saying about wrestling with a pig. You both get dirty, but the pig enjoys it.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 29, 2010 7:07 PM
-------

Wonderful new software that allows people to pretend they're in an echo chamber. Instead of simply scrolling past the posts they don't want to read, like bearclaw1 or me or any other sensible person, they can now pretend that the people they don't want to read simply don't exist. The fly in the ointment is that they then can no longer respond to those people. So if I block bearclaw1 and then post an argument of some kind, he can freely demolish it and make a fool of me to most everyone else on the blog, and I won't even be aware of what's happened. Of course I'm not going to block him or anyone else---or call for anyone to be banned. What do people expect when they argue politics on a blog? Some people must live to be big fish in a little pond. What would they do on a site with 3000 hits per thread? The Fix beckons---you won't be harassed or insulted and you'll only have six other people with which to exchange ideas.

Posted by: Brigade | October 29, 2010 7:29 PM | Report abuse

Jerry Boykin, just the kind of fellow you want heading up important military operations...
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2010/10/obamas-secret-healthcare-army.html

Posted by: bernielatham | October 29, 2010 7:29 PM | Report abuse

All, some interesting news: The commenting system we're moving towards will allow us to pick out commenters on both sides who we think are trying to have a real conversation, and then you will be able to do something that allows you to just see those comments -- and you won't even see those of thread bombers and trolls.

More when I learn it...

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 29, 2010 7:30 PM | Report abuse

PALIN-BOYKIN 2012!!!

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 7:32 PM | Report abuse

Nevada is now a Fox Nation. Another reason not to go to Vegas and spend your money.

Posted by: dozas | October 29, 2010
-------

Obama has already advised the country of this. It must have been a big help to Reid for Barry to tell people not to spend money in Vegas.

Posted by: Brigade | October 29, 2010 7:32 PM | Report abuse

bernie
Yeah, we don't want a Dear Leader, no cult of poisnality. But for being a regular guy, no chance for being mistaken for regal, we don't have to worry about Obama (I heard his father is from Africa). The Shrub, Clinton, Reagan was a washed up B list actor, I think we have nothing to worry about here. Sarkozy, Berlusconi, those guys are tabloid fodder.

The countries that have to worry about are the one party states. We know who they are.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 29, 2010 7:33 PM | Report abuse

others are now employing Kevin's techno-wiz approach.

-----------------


Be careful downloading rogue computer programs onto your desktop - it could contain a virus to enable someone to read all the files on your computer, or to gain personal information, credit card numbers - or access to your bank account passwords.

Just a warning.


A friendly warning.


Really, it is friendly - a friendly warning.

Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 29, 2010 7:33 PM | Report abuse

@Greg - re STRF whackamole... my sympathies.

Posted by: bernielatham | October 29, 2010 7:34 PM | Report abuse

suekzoo1 wrote,
"The owner of a franchise in Canton, Ohio enclosed a handbill in employees' paychecks that threatened lower wages and benefits if Republicans don't win on Tuesday."
-----------

I'll second that. If the country doesn't change course and get rid of these Dems, lower wages and benefits will almost certainly result.

Posted by: Brigade | October 29, 2010 7:35 PM | Report abuse

Greg Sargent:

The new commenting system sure is taking longer than the "week" you promised us TWO WEEKS ago now ; )

Brigade:

What is even BETTER with Kevin's "Troll Hunter" is that those people will inadvertantly post about something Greg has brought up, even after we have proven Greg wrong. To the lurkers, it will just look like they are idiots!

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 7:36 PM | Report abuse

Greg

I would actually like to see that - because for the past three years the liberals have been doing nothing but harass other posters on the Washington Post blogs - with virtually no response from the "moderators"

It is absolutely unbelievable what the Washington Post has allowed the liberals to do -

The harassment and bullying has been out of control. Perhaps if that has not been the case, more people would be engaging in "real conversations."

However, no one can say that even the "regulars" on this blog have put there hostility aside -

and concentrated on "real conversations."

Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 29, 2010 7:39 PM | Report abuse

"The Fix beckons---you won't be harassed or insulted and you'll only have six other people with which to exchange ideas."

No you are wrong. The Fix was and would have been fine before the troll spam and then...The Change.

Look, people talk to you, yes you Brigade. Right wing political thinkers who can string a few different sentences together each day are not the problem Do you really not get it?

The Fix is abandoned for a bunch of reasons, I'll posit a lot having to do with the Twitter format. Why did you quit? In solidarity?

CC wants to be attractive to the Twitter repeater, "smart" phone wobbling down the street guy. We still sit in front of screens. We didn't leave the Fix, the Fix left us. Ok? Are we good?


Posted by: shrink2 | October 29, 2010 7:46 PM | Report abuse

Greg

I find it highly suspicious that all these new enforcement programs and rules come in before the midterm elections.

The liberals were allowed to harass and bully people from the winter of 2008 onwards -

But as soon as the narrative turned against them, all of a sudden things start getting shut down. Suspicious?

The enforcement seems to be aimed at shutting down only one point of view.

There have been clear rules violations on this blog for months - and nothing was ever done about it. Ethan's capital letters were never made an issue. The liberals were allowed to harass, mock and bully without restraint for a long, long time.

All of a sudden, new offenses are invented and bannings take place.

Well clearly there are issues here - which you have failed to address as a man - you have had more than an adequate opportunity.


YES I AM QUESTIONING YOUR MANHOOD TO CONFRONT THESE ISSUES WHICH HAVE CLEARLY BEEN PUT IN FRONT OF YOU.

Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 29, 2010 7:48 PM | Report abuse

From the prior thread, some of what passes for intelligent political discourse from liberals. Read it carefully, as liberals are now congratulating themselves for being able to block posters and get Rainforest banned:
---------------------------------------

The typical whining points of the Tea Klan Bigot

Posted by: rcc_2000 | October 29, 2010 5:43 PM
--------------------------------------

Love it how idiots cover-up their lack of knowledge by blaming the "lamestream media" for asking questions they are too stupid to answer. The Tea Klan is the uprising of the brain dead, perfect for Halloween (Angle does not even need a mask).

Posted by: rcc_2000 | October 29, 2010 5:46 PM
------------------------------------

If any of these Tea Party nutcakes get in, it definitely means we need voting and government information classes because they are all sinfully ignorant!

Posted by: Maerzie | October 29, 2010 5:53 PM
---------------------------------------

So are you willfully ignorant or just plain ignorant?

Posted by: denise4925

------------------------------------
This woman is completely insane.
And the freaks keep coming out of the woodwork.
Teatards!!

Posted by: skinswitabullet | October 29, 2010 5:16 PM
------------------------------------

But I've not heard a peep about any of this stuff---which goes on all the time. Mind you, I don't care, because I can take it as well as dish it out. Too bad so many people can only dish it out.

Posted by: Brigade | October 29, 2010 7:53 PM | Report abuse

Trollbaggers at it again. They have no lives. It's hilarious, and kind of pathetic.

Meanwhile, in terms of the political action, the more I see of Angle and Miller, in particular, the more I'm astonished that anyone could vote for them....enthusiastically. They might not like Harry out in Nevada, and may want to vote to stop him, but to vote for her, with pride...seriously, what is wrong with people?

Wish I could be down there for the rally. That was Plan A, had to switch to Plan B.


Posted by: KathleenHusseininMaine | October 29, 2010 7:53 PM | Report abuse

Another reason not to go to Vegas and spend your money.

Posted by: dozas |
++++++++++

A trash heap of a city, built around taking the money of people who believe math doesn't apply to them. I don't need any other reasons to avoid Vegas.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 29, 2010 7:55 PM | Report abuse

@shrink,

If you are up for it, I responded to you on the prior thread. I'll watch for you there.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 29, 2010 7:57 PM | Report abuse

Brigade

Exactly - the problem is the liberals love to dish it out - but they refuse to accept a sustained challenge to their way of thinking.

The personal attacks on this blog which Greg Sargent has allowed the liberals to make have been unbelievable.

Greg has been contacted about this issue - and he has refused to do anything about it.

It is a case of selective enforcement.

In fact, Greg is actually making up his own rules - refusing to enforce clear rules violations by the liberals - but making up vague rules to enforce only against the Conservatives.

And only in front of the elections.


It is harassment and bullying.

Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 29, 2010 7:59 PM | Report abuse

So the Dems are trying every trick in the book to elect a Republican who couldn't win his own party's nomination and has no core principles at all---other than personal greed and ambition.

Posted by: Brigade
++++++++++++

Reverse the parties and you have the Republicans (including Karl Rove) backing Joe Lieberman in 2006.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 29, 2010 8:03 PM | Report abuse

mike or someone, where do I enter the new badCom[4] ?

Posted by: lmsinca | October 29, 2010 8:06 PM | Report abuse

KathleenHusseinMaine:

Urge all of your friends, family and acquaintances who vote in Alaska to WRITE IN: Lisa M. Lackey (note the correct spelling ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 8:06 PM | Report abuse

Look, people talk to you, yes you Brigade. Right wing political thinkers who can string a few different sentences together each day are not the problem Do you really not get it?

The Fix is abandoned for a bunch of reasons, I'll posit a lot having to do with the Twitter format. Why did you quit? In solidarity?

CC wants to be attractive to the Twitter repeater, "smart" phone wobbling down the street guy. We still sit in front of screens. We didn't leave the Fix, the Fix left us. Ok? Are we good?

Posted by: shrink2 | October 29, 2010 7:46 PM
-------

I left because so many others left (or were banned), because I didn't like the format, and because people complained that posts were mysteriously disappearing. You and I have always been "good", but I get a little rough around the edges at times, and I can promise you that there are any number of people here (rukidding7 and bernielatham come to mind) who are thin-skinned and don't much care to joust with me. As I've said, some people---like Obama---can dish it out but just go all to pieces when they get return fire. I predict that any of the format changes suggested will have a detrimental effect on participation. I'm not that heavily invested, so I'll get by no matter what the future holds. I don't know why some of the people here don't just go on Facebook and "friend" the people they want to talk to. They obviously aren't functioning well in this sort of an evironment, and the sudden influx of us Fix refugees has evidently created havoc with the normally serene protocol here at PL.

Posted by: Brigade | October 29, 2010 8:10 PM | Report abuse

MountainPeaks:

206 people in Alaska signed up as a "write in" candidate for U.S. Senate! LOL!!!

http://www.elections.alaska.gov/ci_pg_cl_2010_genr.php#uss

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 8:10 PM | Report abuse

Reverse the parties and you have the Republicans (including Karl Rove) backing Joe Lieberman in 2006.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 29, 2010 8:03 PM
-----

Was there even a Republican on the ballot? Also, Lieberman made no secret that he would continue to caucus with his party if he won. I don't think that's what Crist has in mind.

Posted by: Brigade | October 29, 2010 8:15 PM | Report abuse

Jake

Quick - on Monday - get a Judge to change your name to "Write In Candidate" - go to Alaska and claim you were just elected to the US Senate.


.

Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 29, 2010 8:17 PM | Report abuse

"are they really foolish enough to elect a half baked sociopath like Angle to represent them in congress the next six years?"

Yes, they may very well be. Remember -

"Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people." - P.T. Barnum

Even with TV and the internet, nothing else really has changed since the mid 19th Century.

Posted by: filmnoia | October 29, 2010
-------

Unintended irony. The election of a bloviating community-organizer to the Presidency is proof enough of Barnum's statement. If Obama is qualified to be President, Angle is MORE than qualified to be Senator. At least, it appears those who know her best prefer her to Dingy Harry.

Posted by: Brigade | October 29, 2010 8:23 PM | Report abuse

Wonderful new software that allows people to pretend they're in an echo chamber.
...
The Fix beckons---you won't be harassed or insulted and you'll only have six other people with which to exchange ideas.

Posted by: Brigade | October 29, 2010 7:29 PM
=======================

I'm going to miss your Internet Tough Guy act, and your fond memories of the Kent State massacre.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | October 29, 2010 8:26 PM | Report abuse

Brigade, Jake

Greg Sargent has made absolutely no attempt to define "thread-bombing," which he has been requested to do numerous times.

One reason is that Greg knows that many liberals on this blog will instantly fall under his definition.

So, "thread-bombing" has been defined as so vague - it can mean anything anyone wants - to ban a Conservative.


If Greg wants a new rule, it should be defined clearly and everyone should have an adequate chance to comply with the new rule.

Greg has been running like a coward away from these issues. He made a rule against capital letters, and never addressed the point that when Ethan capitalized all the time, why it wasn't an issue when a liberal did it.

Clearly there are issues here.

I think the $500 Billion issue was the last straw, with Greg refusing to state that the Washington Post itself reported that Obama was seeking to transfer $500 Billion out of Medicare - Greg was insisting that this was a lie even when the actual Washington Post article was emailed to him.


Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 29, 2010 8:28 PM | Report abuse

Was there even a Republican on the ballot? Also, Lieberman made no secret that he would continue to caucus with his party if he won. I don't think that's what Crist has in mind.

Posted by: Brigade
++++++++++++

Yes, Alan Schlesinger was the Republican candidate, and the Bush White House officially chose to be neutral.

And of course Lieberman said he would caucus with the Democrats. He knew he wouldn't get elected otherwise, and he knew the Democratic leadership would be weak enough to take him back into the fold (so that he could campaign for McCain in 2008 -- nice move, Harry Reid).

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 29, 2010 8:34 PM | Report abuse

"Wonderful new software that allows people to pretend they're in an echo chamber."

What makes you think that's how it's being used? I would hazard a guess that for most of us - including some posters on the right - only a single commenter is being blocked.

It has nothing to do with wanting to be in an echo chamber or trying to avoid opposing viewpoints: as much as I might disagree with them, I have learned something from participants such as qb, Scott, Kevin, and Tao. The only thing this has to do with is wanting to be able to discuss issues rationally without having to wade through post after post of CAPS and whitespace.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | October 29, 2010 8:39 PM | Report abuse

Brigade, Jake

A real man confronts issues when they are presented to him.

On these new rules - and the complete lack of enforcement against the liberals - Greg has completely failed to be a real man.


YES I AM QUESTIONING GREG SARGENT'S MANHOOD


I attempted to get answers to these questions several times - instead of coming up with a resolution, Greg ran away.

Greg started to ban people - for whatever reasons. Clearly he was setting it up that way. The identical conduct on the part of liberals has never been met with banning.


But this has more to do with the midterm elections this week than anything.

Greg is banning people based solely on partisan motivations - and this last one - an honest point about the tactics which the Obama people use to bully people by calling them racist - suddenly that is an bannable offense.

Greg can not be more of a coward by doing that.

.

Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 29, 2010 8:40 PM | Report abuse

By the way, it should be obvious that JakeD2 is just as much of a spammer as STRF...he just tries to be (very slightly) less brazen about it (no doubt thanks to JakeD's experience of being banned at TPM, for spamming).
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | October 29, 2010 8:44 PM | Report abuse

schrodingerscat at 8:39 PM


Your reasoning makes absolutely no sense. Is there anyway you could clarify?

I really do not care if people are ignoring me - they love telling people they are ignoring them in any event.

So if they are blocking people, who really cares?

If you do not answer, we can be sure that you agree - and that you love Sarah Palin.

Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 29, 2010 8:45 PM | Report abuse

Brigade:

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/10/29/crist-would-caucus-with-democrats-advisor-says/

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 8:48 PM | Report abuse

@lms,

Are you still trying to change the Troll Hunter code?

Troll Hunter, downloaded 36 times and counting.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 29, 2010 8:53 PM | Report abuse

Some people are still seething over my reference last week to the Kent State shooting. Here is some additional information from kent state website:
-----------------------------------

"Friday evening in downtown Kent began peacefully with the usual socializing in the bars, but events quickly escalated into a violent confrontation between protestors and local police. The exact causes of the disturbance are still the subject of debate, but bonfires were built in the streets of downtown Kent, cars were stopped, police cars were hit with bottles, and some store windows were broken. The entire Kent police force was called to duty as well as officers from the county and surrounding communities. Kent Mayor Leroy Satrom declared a state of emergency, called Governor James Rhodes' office to seek assistance, and ordered all of the bars closed. The decision to close the bars early increased the size of the angry crowd. Police eventually succeeded in using tear gas to disperse the crowd from downtown, forcing them to move several blocks back to the campus.

"The next day, Saturday, May 2, Mayor Satrom met with other city officials and a representative of the Ohio National Guard who had been dispatched to Kent. Mayor Satrom then made the decision to ask Governor Rhodes to send the Ohio National Guard to Kent. The mayor feared further disturbances in Kent based upon the events of the previous evening, but more disturbing to the mayor were threats that had been made to downtown businesses and city officials as well as rumors that radical revolutionaries were in Kent to destroy the city and the university. Satrom was fearful that local forces would be inadequate to meet the potential disturbances, and thus about 5 p.m. he called the Governor's office to make an official request for assistance from the Ohio National Guard."

"Shortly before noon, General Canterbury made the decision to order the demonstrators to disperse. A Kent State police officer standing by the Guard made an announcement using a bullhorn. When this had no effect, the officer was placed in a jeep along with several Guardsmen and driven across the Commons to tell the protestors that the rally was banned and that they must disperse. This was met with angry shouting and rocks, and the jeep retreated. Canterbury then ordered his men to load and lock their weapons, tear gas canisters were fired into the crowd around the Victory Bell, and the Guard began to march across the Commons to disperse the rally."

Many accounts of the events "contain four factual errors: (1) some degree of provocation did exist; (2) the students were not fleeing when the Guard initially opened fire; (3) only one of the four students who died, William Schroeder, was shot in the back; and (4) one female student, Sandy Schreuer, had been walking to class, but the other female, Allison Krause, had been part of the demonstration."

The moral: violent demonstrations can result in tragedy.

Posted by: Brigade | October 29, 2010 8:55 PM | Report abuse

Of course, Mr. Morgan says the question of whether Mr. Crist would side with Democrats had "nothing" to do with any purported deal under which Mr. Meek would quit the race. Crist spokesman Danny Kanner has also denied that Mr. Crist had agreed to caucus with Senate Democrats as part of any deal with Mr. Clinton or Mr. Meek.

However, a person close to Mr. Clinton and familiar with the discussions tells Washington Wire that, yes, Mr. Crist had agreed to caucus with Senate Democrats if Mr. Meek bowed out of the race.

Mr. Crist, a former Republican who turned independent in April, has said repeatedly he would “caucus with the people,” a dodge that allows him to simultaneously court Republicans, Democrats and independents in the three-way race.

(No doubt, some poor little McDonald franchise owner trying to point out the truth to his valued employees, though, is the #1 threat to democracy in the world today ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 8:55 PM | Report abuse

12Bar, yes I was trying to add the new name but when I get to manage user scripts and hit the edit button under troll hunter, I'm stuck. It's no big deal I was just trying to be self-sufficient.

Posted by: lmsinca | October 29, 2010 8:59 PM | Report abuse

Imsinca

Did you get it?

If you download a rogue program, someone might be able to download all the files on your computer -

Or get a hold of your credit card numbers you use on your computer - or the password to your bank account.

Remember I warned you

Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 29, 2010 9:03 PM | Report abuse

I use MANY CAPS
I use triple spaced lines
Why won’t you listen?

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | October 29, 2010 9:06 PM | Report abuse

@lms,

Are you looking at the code when you are stuck?

If so, scroll down until you start seeing "badcom", then insert

badCom[#]='________';

Remember to put the next number in place of #, and the handle inbetween the single quotation marks. Don't forget the semicolon.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | October 29, 2010 9:07 PM | Report abuse

From TPM

"TPM Reader JL recounts his unusual flight into DC for the sanity rally:

My girlfriend and I cashed in our miles so we could fly in for the rally. As we boarded our flight from Minneapolis into Reagan, it was largely an older crowd, and we figured we must be the only ones on the flight headed for the rally.
Then, as we were getting settled on the plane, we started hearing whispers from seats behind us, "Are you going to the rally? Are you?"
We found out our neighbor was, a gentleman who was upset he hadn't been to Woodstock, and wanted to make up for lost time.

As people began to realize the plane was filled with nothing but rally goers, no joke, we all cheered, spontaneously. The flight had much more energy than usual - loads of people chatting about Jon Stewart, politics, etc. It seemed most people on the flight were baby boomers. After all, who else is going to have the time and money to fly themselves in from Minnesota?

When we landed, a woman shouted, "Sanity has just landed in DC!" and we all burst out in cheers and applause."

Posted by: bernielatham | October 29, 2010 9:08 PM | Report abuse

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/30/us/politics/30ohio.html

WASHINGTON — When workers in a McDonald’s restaurant in Canton, Ohio, opened their paychecks this month, they found a pamphlet urging them to vote for the Republican candidates for governor, Senate and Congress, or possibly face financial repercussions.
=========================

That's our Ohio wingnuts. Why risk elections to fair play and the rule of law, they say.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | October 29, 2010 9:18 PM | Report abuse

KEEP FEAR ALIVE!!!

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 29, 2010 9:22 PM | Report abuse

ifthethunderdontgetya


So what do the unions do - they recommend candidates to their workers,

That is only good for the unions right?


The unions probably tell their people that they will get worse deals too if they side doesnt win

Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 29, 2010 9:22 PM | Report abuse

KEEP IGNORING ALIVE !!!

Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 29, 2010 9:26 PM | Report abuse

From Andrew Sullivan...

"On Hugh Hewitt's radio show, a segment with Victor Davis Hanson unearthed something revealing. Here's what the host said:

'You spent a lot of time in the Oval Office with President Bush during the war years of President Bush. ... as did some radio talk show hosts, of whom I was a number, [We] would go in and the President would talk to us ...'

Maybe this doesn't surprise you. But ponder its implications. George W. Bush could've called any man or woman in the United States to his office to get advice. Anyone in the military, any policy expert, the most knowledgeable American in any industry or field of knowledge. With whom did he apparently spend a lot of time conversing? Hanson, Hewitt, and some other talk radio hosts."
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/10/talk-radio-as-kitchen-cabinet.html

Or, as Bush himself put it, "You Have To Keep Repeating Things To Catapult The Propaganda"

Posted by: bernielatham | October 29, 2010 9:44 PM | Report abuse

Bernie, thanks for that post from the TPM reader. The plane ride sounds like a memory-making event all by itself, and I'll bet a lot of the passengers will include it in their accounts of the rally.

Posted by: carolanne528 | October 29, 2010 9:44 PM | Report abuse

"12Bar, yes I was trying to add the new name but when I get to manage user scripts and hit the edit button under troll hunter, I'm stuck."

I don't know if you're still out there, Ims, but don't forget you have to pick a text editor. I just used the notepad that comes standard.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | October 29, 2010 9:48 PM | Report abuse

12Bar, I don't see a code, that's my problem. Don't worry about it, I'm busy working on a Halloween costume tonight anyway for a 6 year old, so I'm distracted and not really checking in here.

Have a good weekend all !!!!!!!!

Posted by: lmsinca | October 29, 2010 9:51 PM | Report abuse

@carolanne - Sounds like great fun, doesn't it. I am travelling tomorrow so won't get to see the event in real time. Damned pity I can't be there.

Posted by: bernielatham | October 29, 2010 9:53 PM | Report abuse

bernie wrote: "Maybe this doesn't surprise you. But ponder its implications. George W. Bush could've called any man or woman in the United States to his office to get advice. Anyone in the military, any policy expert, the most knowledgeable American in any industry or field of knowledge. With whom did he apparently spend a lot of time conversing? Hanson, Hewitt, and some other talk radio hosts."
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/10/talk-radio-as-kitchen-cabinet.html"

Do you think he spent more time with talk show hosts and VDH than, say, the SECDEF? Or NSA? Or CIA head?

What, in your opinion is "a lot of time?"

I have no idea, just curious. And for the record I'd say "a lot of time" to spend with the President would be a total of 1 hour per week for, say, 6 months.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 29, 2010 9:58 PM | Report abuse

bernie wrote: "Maybe this doesn't surprise you. But ponder its implications. George W. Bush could've called any man or woman in the United States to his office to get advice. Anyone in the military, any policy expert, the most knowledgeable American in any industry or field of knowledge. With whom did he apparently spend a lot of time conversing? Hanson, Hewitt, and some other talk radio hosts."
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/10/talk-radio-as-kitchen-cabinet.html"

Do you think he spent more time with talk show hosts and VDH than, say, the SECDEF? Or NSA? Or CIA head?

What, in your opinion is "a lot of time?"

I have no idea, just curious. And for the record I'd say "a lot of time" to spend with the President would be a total of 1 hour per week for, say, 6 months.

And this goes out to Kevin_Willis: You know who this helps, don't you?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 29, 2010 9:58 PM | Report abuse

"We found out our neighbor was, a gentleman who was upset he hadn't been to Woodstock, and wanted to make up for lost time."

The brown acid must have made it out to St. Paul.

Posted by: tao9 | October 29, 2010 10:02 PM | Report abuse

Whoa! Deja Vu. Something changed in The Matrix. Ignore the first one, it's completely wrong.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 29, 2010 10:02 PM | Report abuse

Brigade, got it.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 29, 2010 10:05 PM | Report abuse

Probably should of only taken half a tab.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 29, 2010 10:06 PM | Report abuse

What else is happening?

A little political humor being circulated on the internet:

http://newzeal.blogspot.com/2010/10/little-humor-at-democrats-expense.html

Posted by: actuator | October 29, 2010 10:42 PM | Report abuse

Re the favorability ratings of the Chamber of Commerce:

I suspect that a lot of people confuse the Chamber of Commerce with the Better Business Bureau.

If the poll-takers explained that the Chamber of Commerce is not there to help consumers but to help businesses fight unions...that was their original raison d'etre and remains so to this day...the favorability rating would be considerably lower.

Someone needs to do an information campaign about who the Chamber of Commerce really is and what they really do.

Posted by: Dema | October 29, 2010 11:07 PM | Report abuse

Got my sign all ready for the rally 2morrow.

Should be a fun day.

Someone should have suggested everyone wear nametags of their internet names or something. wonder if its too late to spread that message....

Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 29, 2010 11:42 PM | Report abuse

Greg, pretty amazing that as the link you have says all of you agree that no other approach to health care would have made any difference to Obama's popularity.

I guess then either the Dems aren't going to lose any seats on Tuesday, OR none of you guys are going to have the slightest idea why you lost seats!

(I know, I know, it was foreign/undisclosed donor money, don't remind me)

Posted by: 54465446 | October 30, 2010 12:07 AM | Report abuse

"I guess then either the Dems aren't going to lose any seats on Tuesday, OR none of you guys are going to have the slightest idea why you lost seats!"

Like I said in an earlier post. The republican activists (teaparty) fired up in Feb of 09 in response to Obama's mortgage assistance plan and the previously passed stimulus.

It didn't matter what this admin did, Koch along with Fox would have found something else to keep the activists fired up and keep up the astroturfing propaganda.

Passing healthcare, the little financial reform we got passed and some other initiatives might be responsible for a percentage point or two in the generic ballot and maybe the gop would win a few less house seats but unless this economy turns around, nothing else matters.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 30, 2010 12:28 AM | Report abuse

If this place looks like a Fix blogger Refugee Camp, it's Chris Cillizza's fault.

Not mine

I'm not responsible for all these people coming over here - most of them followed 12BarBlues here in an attempt to stalk me.

It is complete harassment.


And 12BarBlues told everyone to start email complaints into Greg Sargent - so if Greg doesn't like all the complaints, blame 12Barblues - who is upset on account of Chris Cillizza. Let's just be clear on the narrative here.


.

Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 30, 2010 12:30 AM | Report abuse

Dema, they are not all just about fighting unions. The Chamber represents our ideas—and interests—in Washington D.C. and has been for nearly a century. Did you ever watch "Pleasantville"?

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is the world's largest business federation representing the interests of more than 3 million businesses of all sizes, sectors, and regions, as well as state and local chambers and industry associations. More than 96% of U.S. Chamber members are small businesses with 100 employees or fewer.

As the voice of business, the Chamber's core purpose is to fight for free enterprise before Congress, the White House, regulatory agencies, the courts, the court of public opinion, and governments around the world.

Do you want to know their Mission Statement?

Posted by: clawrence12 | October 30, 2010 12:32 AM | Report abuse

mike:

I half agree with you. It was always the economy first and foremost. Why do you think those guys at the White House couldn't figure that out?

Posted by: 54465446 | October 30, 2010 12:52 AM | Report abuse

Let me pose a hypothetical—a democratic candidate is closely defeated in a district where undisclosed outside money comes in and puts up false (or arguably false) ads. Would this candidate be able to sue the outside groups for slander/libel/tortuous interference? Damages is easy—loss of salary, etc. Candidate is a public figure but a showing of malice or reckless disregard might be possible. In any case, the candidate could force the outside groups into discovery where names of their donors would become part of the record. Should this be the democratic response to Citizens United?

Posted by: ncaofnw | October 30, 2010 1:11 AM | Report abuse

"Why do you think those guys at the White House couldn't figure that out?"

I don't think there is anything this gov could have done with the American economy. Our livelihood depended on HELOC's from the expanding housing bubble.

With how wages stagnated for the last decade and that cash gone from HELOC's, where is the spending to stimulate the economy going to come from?

Who knows, maybe if we did what Germany did we'd be in a good position like they are right now, and that's pay business not to fire people.

None of that crap matters now anyways. Politically, there is nothing of help that could pass Congress at this point to help jumpstart our economy. The Fed is about out of options. Congress will be a stalemate for the next two years. Hopefully enough has been done so employment looks better in 2012. Heck, Reagan got what, 48 states or something with 7.4% unemployment the month before the election.

There's still hope for some sanity.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 30, 2010 1:23 AM | Report abuse

Shouldn't you be sleeping for your big rally tomorrow?

KEEP FEAR ALIVE!!!

Posted by: clawrence12 | October 30, 2010 1:40 AM | Report abuse

@lmsinca: Will have update tomorrow sometime. Sorry, should have checked earlier.

@troll: "And this goes out to Kevin_Willis: You know who this helps, don't you?"

I'm lost. The Lawn Gnomes? Greg is going to be moving soon, script will cease to work, and I probably won't be able to read or post (if it's anything like The Fix comments under the hood). Much of the time.

Mainly just wanted to offer something to keep the folks who might be tuning out from doing so.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 30, 2010 1:52 AM | Report abuse

@lmsinca: Never mind, I just updated it. Go . .

http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/89140

And hit install. Most recent sock puppet is addressed.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 30, 2010 2:03 AM | Report abuse

@Brigade: "Wonderful new software that allows people to pretend they're in an echo chamber. "

Well, by that same token they could just stay out of the comments entirely. It's just an organizational tool. Unless it gets out of control, I'm not blocking anybody, personally. More concerned with letting contributors who are finding it difficult to deal with the threads when they are full of threadbombing (and, let's face it, that's what STRF does). You don't have to use it.

Also, was hoping to find a solution that would keep folks for clamoring for Greg to move to a new system which would involve something from the WaPo labs like The Fix comments which would hit .js libraries in other domains so would get blocked by an IPS I'm behind for most of the day . . . etc, etc. Don't think that worked, but it was worth a shot.

Plus, lmsinca likes it, and she gave my lots of good gout input, and if you've ever had gout, you know that's worth a thing or two.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 30, 2010 2:12 AM | Report abuse

@mikefromArlington: "Hopefully enough has been done so employment looks better in 2012. Heck, Reagan got what, 48 states or something with 7.4% unemployment the month before the election. There's still hope for some sanity."

You call it sanity, I call it historicity. A: Mondale ran a poor campaign. Against a very charismatic and likable guy. B: No primary challenge, no 3rd party, 1st term for party back in power--Reagan was almost unbeatable. As such, even if there is a leviathan wave--the Demplosion many right wing pundits are fantasizing about--Obama still wins with Whitehouse (or, very high degree of likelihood) in 2012. Without significant coat tails, but he takes it. Unless there is a moderate 3rd party challenger or a primary challenge, presumably from his left. Then he stands a good chance of losing in the general election.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 30, 2010 2:23 AM | Report abuse

Bernie said:

"On the contrary, I think the office of the president has too much dignity."

This definitely isn't a problem in the Obama era. In all seriousness, dignity concerns not how others address the President but the President's behavior.

Obama has squandered any dignity he might once of had. The closest he comes is in his apparent belief that condescension and haughtiness are the marks of leadership.

Posted by: quarterback1 | October 30, 2010 6:03 AM | Report abuse

Brigade:

"They obviously aren't functioning well in this sort of an evironment, and the sudden influx of us Fix refugees has evidently created havoc with the normally serene protocol here at PL."

I wouldn't call the post-Fix environment here serene at all. Far, far from it. For sheer abusive and nasty behavior, I could name some regular commenters and former commenters who were easily worse than any current behavior I see now.

Posted by: quarterback1 | October 30, 2010 6:14 AM | Report abuse

For sheer abusive and nasty behavior, I could name some regular commenters and former commenters who were easily worse than any current behavior I see now.

Posted by: quarterback1 | October 30, 2010 6:14 AM
======================

Would you like a set of pearls to clutch? You and your fellow right-wingers don't have a leg to stand on in the name-calling department.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | October 30, 2010 6:52 AM | Report abuse

@Kevin - you've done very well to provide that tool to folks here. Thank you.

On another site where I'd been active some years back, there was a similar simple "ignore this poster" option. Not surprising, lots of folks didn't use it because what they really wanted to do was throw spitballs at each other. It seemed to be their understanding of political discussion/debate (one presumes hundreds of hours of WWF and Rush and zero hours with Lincoln/Doublas).

Again, thanks. A fine thing to do.

Posted by: bernielatham | October 30, 2010 7:22 AM | Report abuse

I've been utterly dismayed at the hand-wringing in the media re the rally today. It seems to be some weird combination of "this is OUR place and you comics are trashing it" insider presumption of ownership and an inability to break free of established narratives. Some will be old enough to recall how the "Yippies" were similarly outside of normal framing and had few friendly voices anywhere except with the recently emerged underground press - and within a generation of young people who were thrilled at the anarchic rejection of an institutionalized and unreflective (and very often, oppressive) framing of the terms of citizen/government relationships and of earlier societal norms.

By far the most astute comment I've seen comes in the letter I'll post immediately following this.

Posted by: bernielatham | October 30, 2010 7:58 AM | Report abuse

It's the "theater of the absurd" sentence that gets it exactly. Bravo, say I.


"Jon Stewart critic just doesn't get it

Wednesday, October 27, 2010; 8:14 PM
In the Oct. 24 Outlook section, editor Carlos Lozada implores Jon Stewart to "Cancel the rally. For our sanity." Then he says: "I know, I know, it's a satire, a sendup of rallies, a rally against rallies, a mockery. . . . I get it."

Obviously not.

Although he says he's a fan, maybe Mr. Lozada's bedtime is before the interview segment on "The Daily Show," so he has missed the many intelligent, respectful and still-funny interviews Mr. Stewart has done with folks such as Eric Cantor, King Abdullah II of Jordan, Tony Blair and Rod Blagojevich (They're available on the Internet, if he wishes to catch up.) It is possible to enlighten and entertain.

Mr. Lozada acts like the rally is a big departure for Mr. Stewart, although Mr. Stewart said last week that "What we're doing is using the rally format to do the same thing we do with our shows," just as "Earth" is "the show in book form."

Ironically, Mr. Lozada compares Stephen Colbert and Mr. Stewart to Statler and Waldorf - those cranky Muppets who heckle the rest of the cast from the balcony. In a great theater-of-the-absurd moment, Mr. Stewart and Mr. Colbert are inviting the rest of us to sit in that balcony and fling the biggest spitball yet. Mr. Lozada, save the prejudgment, stop being part of the hyperventilating media, and join us at the rally.

Victoria R. Ross, Vienna"

Posted by: bernielatham | October 30, 2010 8:01 AM | Report abuse

Thanks Kevin

I'm enjoying it immensely. Every time Jake talks to him it's like he's talking to himself, so funny. Anyway, I've been advocating for no changes to the format here, just so you know.

Mike, you'll have to give us a report tonight or tomorrow. I'll be gone most of the day so will miss the coverage, I hope it's both entertaining and interesting.

qb, you should try Kevin's troll hunter, I've only hidden one person's comments but it really brought the noise level down and made it easier to read the comments.

Also, for as long as I've been here you've literally had absolutely nothing positive to say about Obama. I really believe it's a visceral reaction, much like mine to SP. It wouldn't matter what she said or did, I wouldn't like it. But if she were ever to become President I'd probably keep some of my opinions to myself just out of common courtesy. Just sayin'.

Posted by: lmsinca | October 30, 2010 8:59 AM | Report abuse

As many of you already know, Andrew Breitbart (the right's version of Code Pink if it was run by the Charlize Theron character in Monster) has been signed on to do election night 'analysis' by ABC.

This was predicted by LaHaye in one of his books.

Posted by: bernielatham | October 30, 2010 9:05 AM | Report abuse

Obama has squandered any dignity he might once of had. The closest he comes is in his apparent belief that condescension and haughtiness are the marks of leadership.

Posted by: quarterback1
------------

Yeah, "Bring it on" and "I am the Decider" were vastly more dignified and leader-like. Gimme a break.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | October 30, 2010 9:05 AM | Report abuse

@suekzoo1: "Yeah, 'Bring it on' and 'I am the Decider' were vastly more dignified and leader-like. Gimme a break."

Well, all leaders have their moments, though I'll take "Bring it on" over "the American people aren't thinking straight because they're scared" any day of the week. ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 30, 2010 9:26 AM | Report abuse

Serene Environment?

I doubt it - I haven't seen it.

The PL "regulars" have been extremely nasty - and they have engaged in harassment and bullying.

They make all sorts of claims about how civlized their comments are - but that has simply not been the case.

Then they continue to lie when they say they are not motivated by their partisanship.

Ethan and the other liberals engage in the exact same things they have whined about - and they have never said anything about that - so partisan motivations are the only explanation. It is not easy to have any discussion with a group of people who are intent on being honest in the middle of the conversation.

Well.

The real problem is they are getting ignored. People are ignoring their whining and their desires to have only liberal voices speak out. It is that clear.

It is quite ironic that "ignoring" has become their desire.

That only means that others ignore them.

The result has been more whining. 12BarBlues has encouraged the complaint.

Once a moderator gives any poster the idea that complaints can yield results, the complaints just keep on coming - it is self-fulfilling.

The only proper moderation is even-handedness - and this has not been the case here.

And playing all these games with changes in moderation enforcement before an election is extremely suspect.


.

Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 30, 2010 9:29 AM | Report abuse

Highlight of your day
Writing words that most ignore
You live to annoy

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | October 30, 2010 9:39 AM | Report abuse

The smears against Christine O'Donnell keep on coming

I saw an interview with Bill Maher - what a horrible obnoxious person.

First of all, he was basically blackmailing Christine O'Donnell by demanding another appearance on his show "or he will release more material." That should be investigated to see if it is blackmail of a Federal candidate.


But Bill Maher had such a horrible attitude toward a candidate - He wanted her on his show to create a foil of her views with others' views - and now he shows nothing but contempt and hatred toward those views.


Well those views were just fine when he thought that they would give him ratings on his show.


Bill Maher became a part of character assassination. I don't believe that is proper.

It ended up helping her - by diverting attention and bringing her sympathy.

____________________


The Gawker article on Christine O'Donnell

What? She "made out" with a guy? Big, big deal. This is the most ridiculous thing.

These people are intending to embarass her - not add to any debate. So what she went out on a Halloween evening - like everyone does.

I'm sure the account was embellished - but the intent of the author is important - it was all meant to be cruel and to embarass her.


__________________________


All these things might end up having Christine O'Donnell win.

Chris Coons is a horrible candidate - who would want to vote for him? In this year, anyone who has "marxism" in their background is simply not a person the democrats want to have around.

Christine O'Donnell is going to get a substantial sympathy vote.

Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 30, 2010 9:40 AM | Report abuse

Honestly Folks

The Conservatives have been keeping the peace on this blog with their restraint. It is that clear and simple.

The liberals have been the ones harassing with their nasty comments - and their clear intention to drive people away.

Any attempt to get the liberals to act with any maturity is met with more silly statements from them


_____________________________________


Paul Lane

You now have your ability to block - so you can not be "annoyed" anymore -


So please stop making nasty comments -


Besides, if you don't like Freedom of Speech and reading the comments of others, perhaps a blog is not the place for you.


.

Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 30, 2010 9:44 AM | Report abuse

Kevin,

Prefer what you will. The bravado attitude typified by "bring it on" is what got us two wars paid for on the the national credit card that significantly drove the national debt to the current unsustainable level...that NOW people fear.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | October 30, 2010 9:45 AM | Report abuse

Paul Lane

12BarBlues has been recruiting people to come to this blog and stir up trouble.

The "regulars" are probably more upset with this influx - than with one poster who they don't want to converse with.


The truth is 12BarBlues started encouraging people to complain - so the complaints not spontaneous - instead it was her carrying over her fighting from the Fix.

It is childish behavior.

Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 30, 2010 9:49 AM | Report abuse

George McGovern pleads with voters to think twice before throwing the Democrat bums out. I say bums are bums. They smell like old donkeys and they are defecating all over the place. Who wants that??

Looks like the joke is on at the Stuart-Colbert rally. Lots of liberals want to be the butt of this, big joke. It figures.

Harry Reid says he doesn't carry water for Obama. Maybe not. Harry is too busy carrying buckets of salsa out to La Raza meetings.

Nancy Pelosi might retire after the house falls on her in November.

Posted by: battleground51 | October 30, 2010 9:55 AM | Report abuse

It is amazing how Obama and the democrats came in 2008 and promised the nation bipartisanship.

Obama rejected that idea as soon as he got in office - the posters on this blog are doing the same thing.

After all the talk from the democrats about bipartisanship, they have not been bipartisan at all. I'm sure the "regulars" on this blog talked up "bipartisanship" and swore to everyone that is what they wanted.

However, the nation never got that from the democrats.


The bloggers here prefer to ignore people - but that is not what they committed to in 2008 - "elect Obama and we will be bipartisan" turns out to be the biggest lie.


This is why Obama and the democrats have to go.

All they care about is their hidden agenda and they can not be trusted.

Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 30, 2010 9:57 AM | Report abuse

All, check this out, Obama directly took on Mitch McConnell's claim that he wants Obama to be a one term president:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/10/obama_hits_mcconnell_one_term.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 30, 2010 10:04 AM | Report abuse

The Chicago Tribune is reporting that there is some confusion in Chicago about the actual intended targets of the packages on UPS.

One jewish group which was apparently the target moved a few years ago - and the other package was intended for an area in which there were two jewish places of worship but both had left by 2002.


So, the addresses were no good. So, either the addresses were "covers" with terrorists intending to pick-up the packages somehow OR they were sending out packages based on a old list of addreses.


With it being so easy to check addresses on the internet, why would these guys make a mistake like that?

And Al Queda is known for sending out people to look at their targets ahead of time. So why in the world would they not do that this time?

It would have been clear that there was no one at the addresses.


Something is not being told to us here - there are too many questions.


This is why - yesterday the overall Jewish organizations in Chicago were contacted - there was no one at the addresses on the packages.

.

Posted by: MountainPeaks | October 30, 2010 10:05 AM | Report abuse

"On another site where I'd been active some years back, there was a similar simple "ignore this poster" option. Not surprising, lots of folks didn't use it because what they really wanted to do was throw spitballs at each other. It seemed to be their understanding of political discussion/debate (one presumes hundreds of hours of WWF and Rush and zero hours with Lincoln/Doublas)."

I am one of the Fix refugees and one of the problem people had with the trolls on that site was that the non-trolls really wanted to talk politics. Now we all had the sides that we root for, and of course that made it in to our discussions, but people there were just more interested in actual analysis, especially from people who could provide insights into the politics of areas from an on-the-ground view. I'm a pretty ardent supporter of Democrats' policies, but I can divorce that from the fact that Vitter is almost certain to win his race on Tuesday. Yeah, there's some partisan bickering, but that wasn't really the focus of the blog. People were there for discussion, not debate. Which is why the trolling was irritable. I'm oversimplifying the Fix culture a hell of a lot, but what I described was a major part of it. I personally threw quite a number of partisan bombs, but I also did my part to provide thoughtful analysis when I could.

I'd say that people like JD2 and STRF are more appropriate on a blog like this one, at least in terms of the content even if one of them goes overboard with the quantity. This blog is more geared towards debate rather than discussion. People come here for the wrestling. I think Brigade might be the best illustration on here as to the difference between the two blogs. On here, Brigade takes his lumps, but he fits in with the culture of the blog well. On the Fix, he was just irritating. No one wants the same talking points repeated daily with no advancement in the discussion.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 30, 2010 10:06 AM | Report abuse

@sue: "The bravado attitude typified by "bring it on" is what got us two wars paid for on the the national credit card"

Well, arguably, (and rightly or wrongly) 9/11 led to that. If the twin towers were still standing, it's unlikely we would have gone to war in either place. That's being said, even so, bravado does not necessarily lead to pre-emptive wars, though perhaps it did in this case.

A little bravado wouldn't hurt Obama, or the Democrats. In the right way, directed at the right things. Doesn't mean he has to start a war. But a little more "we're going to put a man on the moon" and a little less "well, the American people don't think straight when times are tough" would be helpful. Just sayin'. There's a reason Dubya almost won the 2000 election and actually did win the 2004 election. ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 30, 2010 10:07 AM | Report abuse

Pundsters, pollsters, and politerati are now hinting that Obama and his 'crats are about to take a thumping of such catastrophic proportion that the Democrat party could be reduced to a weak, also-ran party for a generation or more.

I say, not so fast. Due to the notoriously short memories of the so-called moderates that determine U.S. elections, Democrats could make a comeback in as little as 12-16 years. A pattern that has held for about 60 years now.

These moderates need an occasional reminder of just how stinking rotten liberal Democrats are. Obama is the most recent reminder and it amounted to an electo-shock treatment for those forgetful fence sitters.

The punishment for voting the feckless liberals back in must get more severe each and every time or it will lose it's intended effect.

Topping Obama is going to be very difficult.

Posted by: battleground51 | October 30, 2010 10:16 AM | Report abuse

Kevin: "A little bravado wouldn't hurt Obama, or the Democrats. In the right way, directed at the right things."

I don't disagree...yet "uppity" is still in the lexicon.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | October 30, 2010 10:17 AM | Report abuse

Barack Obama is the first, true liberal that the Democrats have managed to get elected with the possible exception of Woodrow Wilson.

Look at the results. Maybe it was not such a good idea. Maybe the Democrats should nominate men that are representative of the ideology of the majority of America. Maybe they could get more done that way. Maybe then Republicans and Democrats could work together for the greater glory of the good ol' USA.

Nahhhhhhhh!

Posted by: battleground51 | October 30, 2010 11:12 AM | Report abuse

A sampling of the headlines out of RCP tells the story of 2010:

"Why the Stimulus Hasn't Helped"

"Will Politicians Stay in Denial"

"Obama Appears to Have No Idea What to Do"

"Nitty-gritty Numbers Suggest a Downward Spiral"

"Requiem For the Pelosi Democrats"

"After the Election, Obama to Flee U.S."


"Obama in Exile" for the next two years then retirement.

Posted by: battleground51 | October 30, 2010 11:29 AM | Report abuse

Greg wrote:

"All, check this out, Obama directly took on Mitch McConnell's claim that he wants Obama to be a one term president"

This is crazy. Why WOULD Mitch McConnell WANT Obama to win a second term?

Did Harry Reid want Bush to win a second term?

Did you?

Sometimes the things you write and postulate make no sense on any level!

Posted by: 54465446 | October 30, 2010 3:08 PM | Report abuse

It "makes sense" if you are in the Obama cult, just like drinking poison so you can teleport to a comet "makes sense.". I'm glad that there are SOME reasonable liberals posting here at least.

Posted by: clawrence12 | October 30, 2010 8:40 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company