Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 6:26 PM ET, 12/16/2010

Happy Hour Roundup

By Greg Sargent

* Counterintuitive take of the day: Mark Murray says the real story about Obama's numbers, given all the setbacks he's suffered, are how stable they've been.

* But maybe there is something of a revolt on the left: Gallup finds Obama's approval has slipped nine points among liberals since last month.

* The House Dem vote on the Obama tax cut deal has now been pushed back until tonight, but it's still expected to pass.

* It's hard to overstate how important Joe Lieberman has been to DADT repeal, but Democratic consultants tell Chris Cillizza that his performance may not be enough to save him among Dem voters in 2012.

* Joe Sudbay is also worried that postponing the DADT vote until after Christmas is very risky.

* But: Dem Senators who have spoken to Harry Reid about repeal are convinced it remains a very high priority for him.

* And Jonathan Bernstein explains why Dems should be optimistic about Reid's vow to prolong the session:

Democrats should breath a sign of relief that Harry Reid isn't going to give up in the early afternoon; he's saying, as he should be, that he and the Democrats are going to sprint to the wire.

* Barbara Morrill: "If repeal doesn't happen this year, it's dead." Can't be repeated enough.

* As Atrios points out, one good thing about DADT repeal is that it's managed to unite the online left.

* Filibuster reform update: Steve Benen has the latest, from Senator Jeff Merkley, who explains his proposal to force Senators to actually filibuster.

* While you weren't looking: Six in 10 Americans now oppose the war in Afghanistan, an all-time high in Post/ABC polling.

* Funny catch by Taegan Goddard from the new NBC/WSJ poll: Sarah Palin's negatives are now higher than Nancy Pelosi's. And the 'Cuda isn't even an elected official making tough decisions day in and day out!

* In case you lost track of this debate, Andrew Sullivan has a nice roundup of all the latest blogospheric back and forth over the constitutionality of the individual mandate.

* Historical comparison of the day, from Anthony Weiner: "Trying to predict what's going to happen in the Senate is like trying to predict what's going to happen in the 1970s Politburo."

* Despite the best efforts of Congressional officials in both parties to kill them, it looks like civilian trials for Gitmo detainees may be alive for at least another year.

* Amusing: A World Public Opinion poll may have found proof that Fox News leave viewers badly misinformed.

* And Christian leaders slam senators Jon Kyl and Jim DeMint for politicizing Christmas.

What else is happening?

By Greg Sargent  | December 16, 2010; 6:26 PM ET
Categories:  Happy Hour Roundup, House Dems, Senate Dems, Senate Republicans, gay rights, taxes  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Good news and bad news on DADT
Next: The Morning Plum

Comments

Greg,

Ron Wyden is having surgery for prostate cancer on Monday, and will likely miss the votes on START and DADT repeal.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 16, 2010 6:39 PM | Report abuse

Greg,

Wyden is having prostate surgery at John Hopkins on Monday December 20th. I am sure that Reid knew about this since it was scheduled since late November.

Perhaps that is why Reid said there was no guarantee that he would have votes before Christmas. Knowing that Wyden was going to have surgery on December 20th with aides saying that Wyden will miss votes Friday, Monday, and Tuesday, perhaps Reid will have final votes on START, the DREAM act, and DADT when Wyden can make the votes which realistically will be a week after his surgery thus after Christmas.

Posted by: maritza1 | December 16, 2010 6:40 PM | Report abuse

Hey Sue and Maritza, yeah, I saw that...it does seem like he can make it back. Maybe you're right that this is what's helping drive Reid's timing here.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | December 16, 2010 6:45 PM | Report abuse

Palin for President.

Remember Democrats, Rush pushed hard for to have Republicans participate in the 2008 Democratic Presidential primaries, so be sure to return the favor, by working hard to nominate Gov. Palin in 2012.

It would be very rude of you to not repay Rush for all the help he provided for us, in 2008.

So be sure to pitch in a get out the votes for Sarah, during the 2012 Republican Presidential Primaries.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 16, 2010 7:17 PM | Report abuse

The Senators do not want to come back after Christmas.


Perhaps after New Years - that is why Harry Reid keeps on saying January something.


I still don't think Joe Manchin is on board - and there are other democrats who do not want to make this vote.


What does the Constitution say as to when this liberal circus will end ?

Posted by: RainForestRising | December 16, 2010 7:19 PM | Report abuse

The 20th Amendment to the Constitution will put an END to this LIBERAL CIRCUS on January 3rd - at NOON.


That is MONDAY JANUARY 3RD -


WHEN THE NATION WILL BE SPARED THIS CIRCUS


The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.

Posted by: RainForestRising | December 16, 2010 7:24 PM | Report abuse

"Six in 10 Americans now oppose the war in Afghanistan"

The other four didn't know there was a war somewhere, but they like that idea, no matter what.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 16, 2010 7:24 PM | Report abuse

Funny how in 2008, Obama and the democrats never mentioned they were against the war in Afghanistan.


In fact, they said it was the good war.

And they promised to fight that war until the US won - and the threat of terrorism was eliminated


Chalk that up for another DECEPTION BY OBAMA


Give us a break, seriously folks. Beating the drum against this war is ridiculous.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | December 16, 2010 7:27 PM | Report abuse

"Obama's approval has slipped nine points among liberals since last month."

No problem, those center right people he has been pandering to ever since he got elected are falling in love with him.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 16, 2010 7:31 PM | Report abuse

I hope some of you will spread the word to elected officials, to enact the legislation that I am proposing:

The Chicago Tribune has been doing some great work investigating the status of child abductions.

Here is a link to one of their reports.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/watchdog/childabduct/

It turns out that very few of the pedophiles, who attempt to abduct children, ever get caught, and those who do get caught, get released after very short sentences.

They interviewed one guy, who was driving around trying to pick up young girls on their way home from school. He lived right in the neighborhood, so police finally spotted his car, cruising around a local school. It turned out that the guy had a prior record, for having enticed a five year old girl into a tool shed, where he worked.

The reason why I mention all this is because it occurred to me:

Why not pass a law or laws that take away driving privileges for life, from convicted pedophiles. Since many of them are driving around, looking for targets of opportunity, why not take away their mobility?

If you think this is a suggestion worth pursuing, please contact all your local, and national representatives, and start pushing for such laws to be enacted.

It is ridiculous to allow repeat offenders to have drivers licenses, or cars.

I watched a clip on WGN TV last night, and the interview of the pedophile would make your flesh crawl. It was clear to me this guy will never stop, so we should at least take away his wheels, and driving privileges.

Use the link to the Tribune report, and you will be able to watch the video clips, for yourselves.

Why not push to have laws passed that will make it much harder for convicted pedophiles to drive around scouting for children.

Make the calls please.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 16, 2010 7:34 PM | Report abuse

I never thought I'd agree with Xe, but I do.

"The security firm formerly known as Blackwater told a federal judge Thursday that the U.S. government — and not the company — should be held accountable for a 2007 shooting by its contractors that killed 17 Iraqis.

Lawyers for the company, now known as Xe Services, argued in court that Blackwater contractors were essentially acting as employees of the U.S. government because....yadda yadda"

What, does someone think they were not employees of the Bush Chen...sorry, our gubmint?

Do you stupid fu king Republicans think you can just murder people and pretend no one did it?

Wouldn't that be funny if we told the families that American judges decided no one is responsible in America? It wouldn't surprise them, they were used to that. But then, apart from the Haliburton deal, why did Republicans do Iraq?

Afghanistan is no different, except the Democrats own it now .

Posted by: shrink2 | December 16, 2010 7:50 PM | Report abuse

The WPO study showing FOX viewers uniquely misinformed has an earlier precursor from 2003...

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/international_security_bt/102.php?nid=&id=&pnt=102&lb=brusc

Posted by: bernielatham | December 16, 2010 7:50 PM | Report abuse

Right Wingers have convinced a large percentage of the population that Global Cooling is what is making all the Glaciers melt away.

How the hell can a nation survive, when forty percent of those that vote in elections are so terminally bewildered, that they believe that the colder they set their freezers, the faster their contents will thaw?

Posted by: Liam-still | December 16, 2010 8:02 PM | Report abuse

Harry Reid has pulled the omnibus bill off the floor.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 16, 2010 8:10 PM | Report abuse

Wouldn't that be funny if we told the families that American judges decided no one is responsible in America? It wouldn't surprise them, they were used to that. But then, apart from the Haliburton deal, why did Republicans do Iraq?

Posted by: shrink2 | December 16, 2010 7:50 PM
-------

That's exactly what they should be told. If you're afraid somebody might get shot, don't go to war. Obviously we haven't yet shot enough people or both wars would now be over. The judges should butt out. We're still waiting for all that oil for which the left tells us we went to war.

Posted by: Brigade | December 16, 2010 8:16 PM | Report abuse

"Reid said he would work with McConnell to produce a short-term funding bill to keep the government running into early next year."

Praise God. I was so worried about that. Bipartisan cooperation is a sure sign Obama's plan is working.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 16, 2010 8:37 PM | Report abuse

"We're still waiting for all that oil"

Speak for yourself, the rest of the Republicans ordered another helping of chicken fried steak with curly fries a long time ago.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 16, 2010 8:41 PM | Report abuse

"Reid said he would work with McConnell to produce a short-term funding bill to keep the government running into early next year."

Praise God. I was so worried about that. Bipartisan cooperation is a sure sign Obama's plan is working.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 16, 2010 8:37 PM
....................

That means that Boehner will get to shape the bill the way he and McConnell want it. Here come the entitlement cuts. Here come the entitlement cuts. After all, someone has to offset the 900 billion that we just agreed to borrow, in order to pamper the pampered.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 16, 2010 8:59 PM | Report abuse

From TPM

"Senate floor just now, Majority Leader Harry Reid announced the Senate will vote as soon as Saturday on a bill repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell. That puts it ahead of the START treaty, as proponents of repeal had requested.

"We've got to move this all along," Reid said from the floor.

Reid is also filing cloture on the DREAM Act. That means both bills should come up for a procedural vote on Saturday. The vote on the DREAM Act will come first, followed by the vote on DADT.

The cloture vote to break the filibuster on the DREAM Act is expected to fail. Next will come a cloture vote on DADT. "If DREAM gets 60 to end debate then we would have final passage Sunday," a Reid aide told TPM. "If DREAM fails, but DADT gets 60 then it's the same case -- final vote Sunday."

Posted by: Liam-still | December 16, 2010 9:07 PM | Report abuse


From Think Progress:

"Durbin: The $1.1 Trillion Omnibus Spending Bill Is ‘Exactly The Number’ McConnell Asked For "

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/12/16/omnibus-hypocrisy/

"Overhearing McConnell’s tantrum, Senate Majority Whip Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) came to the floor. Acknowledging that the omnibus does indeed cost over a trillion dollars, Durbin offered one small helpful reminder to assuage McConnell’s “horror” over the figure: that $1.1 trillion number was “exactly the amount” he asked for himself:

DURBIN: I’m a member of the Appropriations Committee. And I remember what happened…this is the reality…It’s true it’s over a trillion dollars. In fact, it’s $1.1 trillion in this bill. But what hasn’t been said by Senator McConnell and Senator Kyl, that’s exactly the amount that they asked for! Senator McConnell came to the Senate Appropriations Committee and said Republicans will not support this bill unless you bring the spending down to $1.108 trillion. That is exactly what we bring down to the floor to be considered.

So to stand back in horror and look at $1.1. trillion and say where did this figure come from, it came from Senator Mitch McConnell in a motion he made before the Senate Appropriations Committee. It reflects the amount that he said was the maximum we should spend in this current calendar year on our appropriation bills. He prevailed. It’s the same number as the so-called Sessions-McCaskill figure that’s been debated back and forth on this floor, voted repeatedly by Republicans to be the appropriate total number. So we have the bipartisan agreement on the total number, and now the Republican leader comes to the floor, stands in horror at the idea of $1.1 trillion, the very same number he asked for in this bill. You can’t have it both ways. "

Posted by: Liam-still | December 16, 2010 9:15 PM | Report abuse

"So be sure to pitch in a get out the votes for Sarah, during the 2012 Republican Presidential Primaries."

==

Good idea.

We need a name for the organization .. hey, I got it, how about "Operation Chaos?"

Posted by: caothien9 | December 16, 2010 9:16 PM | Report abuse

No No No.

We call it Patriots For Palin, and The American Way.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 16, 2010 9:17 PM | Report abuse

Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR) just gave a great floor speech against tax cuts.

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 16, 2010 9:56 PM | Report abuse

LoL. Reid pulled the spending bill

Nancy forgot to fund Obama's health care plan

That is hilarious.


..

Posted by: OrangeDogs | December 16, 2010 9:59 PM | Report abuse

Didn't Senators Reid, Feinstein, Biden, Daschle, Lieberman, Leahy, Kerry, and even Ted Kennedy originally vote for DADT (signed into law by Bill Clinton) in 1993?

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 16, 2010 10:06 PM | Report abuse

LoL. Reid pulled the spending bill

Nancy forgot to fund Obama's health care plan

That is hilarious.


..

Posted by: OrangeDogs | December 16, 2010 10:09 PM | Report abuse

If the House did nothing as to taxes, there would be a record $1.4 TRILLION increase on a faltering economy starting 1/1/11. Much better in my opinion to keep the tax rates where they are, not increase.

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 16, 2010 10:19 PM | Report abuse

LoL. Reid pulled the spending bill

Nancy forgot to fund Obama's health care plan

That is hilarious.


..

Posted by: OrangeDogs | December 16, 2010 10:20 PM | Report abuse

(sigh) and next we'll be hearing about Republicans responsible for Emancipation, nine generations ago, before "Republican" was a polite word for "batsh*t crazy bigot."

Check it, claw, back when DADT was new it was an improvement. Prior to that the military was actively investigating soldiers' sexual identities and expelling those discovered or even believed to be gay. Does Leonard Matlovich ring any bells? I knew him in Norfolk in the early 70s.

Now, two decades later, the country has largely put the antigay bigotry that continues to fire up the Republican filth behind them; thanks in large part to non-biker-S&M-gear gays who came out to family and coworkers and put a human face on homosexuality to replace the caricatures promoted by radical confrontational gays, being antigay is unsustainable outside the crazy bigots who comprise the GOP base. DADT is now an unacceptable compromise; where once it was an advance, it's now obsolete.

Got it? Good.

Posted by: caothien9 | December 16, 2010 10:21 PM | Report abuse

LoL. Reid pulled the spending bill

Nancy forgot to fund Obama's health care plan

That is hilarious.


..

Posted by: OrangeDogs | December 16, 2010 10:22 PM | Report abuse

No.

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 16, 2010 10:32 PM | Report abuse

If the House did nothing as to taxes, there would be a record $1.4 TRILLION increase on a faltering economy starting 1/1/11. Much better in my opinion ..

==

Glad you called it an opinion because factually it's garbage.

You guys argue from the belief that taxes are subracted from the economy; what the government taxes from people they gather into a pile and set ablaze. That's wrong. It's military spending that does that, which, in a stunning turn of events, you guys favor.

Taxed money goes right back into the economy, except for the military part, and except for the part that goes to pay off the debt to foreign banks, debt that we would not have incurred had we not lowered taxes in the first place.

I saw restore the steep progressivity of the Eisenhower (Republican) years. That's my "opinion." And, factually, the economy didn't collapse back then.

Posted by: caothien9 | December 16, 2010 10:37 PM | Report abuse

Check it, claw, back when DADT was new it was an improvement. Prior to that the military was actively investigating soldiers' sexual identities and expelling those discovered or even believed to be gay. Does Leonard Matlovich ring any bells? I knew him in Norfolk in the early 70s.
------------------------------------------------
In addition to all the politician listed by claw, most Americans have changed their mind on DDAT. Bringing up the 1993 vote just shows how Republucans have been left behind by the public on this issue. I wonder if the likes of skip, brigade and qb will feel the same about DDAT in another 20 years. Maybe they will come around when 90 percent of Americans agree on ending DADT.

Posted by: ashotinthedark | December 16, 2010 10:41 PM | Report abuse

If Reid brings the repeal to a vote it'll probably pass, and Obama will sign it into law.

Expect paroxysms of Republican outrage, and probably some mucker going off on a security guard somewhere or getting caught with a trunk full of automatic weapons on his way to create mayhem for some brain-charred reason.

Posted by: caothien9 | December 16, 2010 10:47 PM | Report abuse

I don't think the true bigots will ever come around. The people who've come around are those who weren't really bigots in the first place, they were more like people who just went with the prevailing attitudes around them.

It's hard to be a committed bigot when the object of one's hatred has a human face. It'd be easer to hate homosexuals if the only homosexuals one knew were those lewd cretins in the leather outfits and feather boas, but when it's the hard-working guy in the next cubicle or the neighbor who drove your wife to the hospital when she got pneumonia and your car died, it's a little harder.

True cretins like the three you name are another story.

Posted by: caothien9 | December 16, 2010 10:54 PM | Report abuse

Funny how Obama who ran on Compromise now wants to repeal Compromise

Obama and the liberals are a bunch of FRAUDS

.

Posted by: OrangeDogs | December 16, 2010 11:08 PM | Report abuse

Speaking of which, in another thread now gone off the edge of the world qb was trying to claim, with that signature snide dishonesty of his, that (1) the batsh*t crazy bigots of the goober base comprise the political center and (2) they always have. That a fictitious demographic of immoral envious he refers to the "the left" have been moving ever more "left" as time passes.

Ridiculous, I know, but some people need their myths.

Face it, Gomers, you guys aren't timeless or eternal, your politics is nothing but a fad, like sixth grade girls getting wet over some boy band. That the American right has been getting more extreme each generation is a documented fact.

And what you ninnies refer to with bared teeth as "the left" has been moving rightward too. Even the most "left" Democrats in the Congress are supportive of Israel and believe that free market junk.

Socially, though, you guys are as far from the center as you can be. You still embrace bigotry that the rest of the country left behind when Leave It To Beaver was a new show.

Posted by: caothien9 | December 16, 2010 11:10 PM | Report abuse

Jon Stewart is scorching hot tonight on the 9/11 First Responders Health Bill! If you missed it, catch it on the replay.

He had 4 First Responders who all have cancer as guests discussing their health problems and how they are being screwed over to get the funds they need to get healthcare. Worker's comp is fighting their claims because they can't "prove" their illnesses are job related, while their job-related policies won't pay either because it's a work-related injury. Jeebus!


Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 16, 2010 11:24 PM | Report abuse

"Bringing up the 1993 vote just shows how Republucans have been left behind by the public on this issue. I wonder if the likes of skip, brigade and qb will feel the same about DDAT in another 20 years."

Hopefully they will feel like McCain did for having opposed commemorating MLK's birthday as a federal holiday. He did a lot of apologizing and groveling about it in 2008. Sadly, though, he learned nothing because he's repeating his "mistake" with the repeal of DADT.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 16, 2010 11:51 PM | Report abuse

Seriously. Did Nancy really not pass a budget ???

And seriously did Nancy forget to fund the Health care plan???

I kept telling you Obama and the liberals were incompetent but this is beyond hilarious.

..

Posted by: OrangeDogs | December 16, 2010 11:54 PM | Report abuse

@cao: "Socially, though, you guys are as far from the center as you can be. You still embrace bigotry that the rest of the country left behind when Leave It To Beaver was a new show."

Well, then, the political reality should reflect it. For at least more than one election cycle. However, it doesn't seem to right now. When and if it does, then your side--the new left-of-center middle--will win all the elections and set all the policy. And utopia will thusly be nigh.

Your compulsion to use garnish your commentary with substanceless epithets ("batsh*t crazy bigots of the goober base","Gomers", etc) suggests to me that either you aren't serious in your largely faith-based critique, or that, at some level, you have doubts about the undeniable truths you traffic in.

Or perhaps you think it makes you look cool, like smoking, or something?

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | December 16, 2010 11:58 PM | Report abuse

I never said that taxes are subtracted from the economy or that it's gathered into a pile and set ablaze. Good to know, however, that DADT was advanced in 1993 and an improvement worthy of widespread support by Democrats far and wide but, in 2010, it's batsh*t crazy bigotry. So much for opinions.

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 17, 2010 12:08 AM | Report abuse

Kevin

In all this time you never realized who your real enemy is. It is cai. A/k/ Chris fox. A/k/a. Noacoler. A/k/a gold and tanzanite

And the people Obama pays to spam these boards


Those are your real enemies.

Yes

Not the people fighting them.

Posted by: OrangeDogs | December 17, 2010 12:12 AM | Report abuse

suekzoo1, the key difference in your apples-to-oranges comparison is that blacks don't get to choose their skin color.

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 17, 2010 12:13 AM | Report abuse

Kevin

In all this time you never realized who your real enemy is. It is cai. A/k/ Chris fox. A/k/a. Noacoler. A/k/a gold and tanzanite

And the people Obama pays to spam these boards


Those are your real enemies.

Yes

Not the people fighting them.

Posted by: OrangeDogs | December 17, 2010 12:15 AM | Report abuse

No, Kevin, the conservative fad has a lot of fan clubs. It remains just that, a fashion.

This fan club has a lot of corporate sponsors, kind of like a summer blockbuster flick with collectible plastic cups from fast food joints. It's still a fad. A very ugly, very destructive fad.

And my colorful language in reference to uh "conservatives" reflects my disinterest in concealing my contempt, which is bottomless.

How do you guys feel while referring to the president as "Obummer" or whatever? Like Joe Camel?

Posted by: caothien9 | December 17, 2010 12:17 AM | Report abuse

Kevin

In all this time you never realized who your real enemy is. It is cai. A/k/ Chris fox. A/k/a. Noacoler. A/k/a gold and tanzanite

And the people Obama pays to spam these boards


Those are your real enemies.

Yes

Not the people fighting them.

Posted by: OrangeDogs | December 17, 2010 12:17 AM | Report abuse

Kevin

In all this time you never realized who your real enemy is. It is cai. A/k/ Chris fox. A/k/a. Noacoler. A/k/a gold and tanzanite

And the people Obama pays to spam these boards


Those are your real enemies.

Yes

Not the people fighting them.

Posted by: OrangeDogs | December 17, 2010 12:21 AM | Report abuse

Kevin

In all this time you never realized who your real enemy is. It is cai. A/k/ Chris fox. A/k/a. Noacoler. A/k/a gold and tanzanite

And the people Obama pays to spam these boards


Those are your real enemies.

Yes

Not the people fighting them.

Posted by: OrangeDogs | December 17, 2010 12:22 AM | Report abuse

The Lame duck was supposed to end today

It would be best for everyone to just go home now


This is so ugly. The liberals are only proving their insanity

Posted by: OrangeDogs | December 17, 2010 12:28 AM | Report abuse

The Lame duck was supposed to end today

It would be best for everyone to just go home now


This is so ugly. The liberals are only proving their insanity

Posted by: OrangeDogs | December 17, 2010 12:29 AM | Report abuse

suekzoo1, the key difference in your apples-to-oranges comparison is that blacks don't get to choose their skin color.

==

And if you think gays can choose to be straight then you don't have as much brain as a grasshopper

Posted by: caothien9 | December 17, 2010 12:32 AM | Report abuse

Tick tick tick. Tick. Tick tick
Tick


Tick. Tick.

Tick. Tick. Tick.


Tick. Tick. Tick


Posted by: OrangeDogs | December 17, 2010 12:37 AM | Report abuse

"Hopefully they will feel like McCain did for having opposed commemorating MLK's birthday as a federal holiday. He did a lot of apologizing and groveling about it in 2008. Sadly, though, he learned nothing because he's repeating his "mistake" with the repeal of DADT."

==

I've always wondered where McCain got that reputation as a respectable thinker. He was always a war-lover and always one of the more extreme conservatives in the Senate. Now that he's closer to the center and the crop to come includes some real fruitcakes (and, shamefully, a *libertarian*, that's what America has sunk to), McCain seems out to redefine himself as having no scruples at all, grovelling for the ugliest distinction he can find.

He has a penthouse reservation in hell for letting that Palin creature off its leash, his loopiness cost him the presidency, or at least removed it from reach even if it never was in his grasp, and now with his inexplicable position on DADT and his bitterness at losing to Obama, he's reduced whatever former reputation he enjoyed, deserved or not, to a footnote.

Posted by: caothien9 | December 17, 2010 1:01 AM | Report abuse

Cao

You already betrayed your country by leaving

.......... If only Obama would follow you to Vietnam. That would be priceless.

Posted by: OrangeDogs | December 17, 2010 1:18 AM | Report abuse

Tick. Tick. Tick. Tick. Tick. Tick. Tick


..

Posted by: OrangeDogs | December 17, 2010 1:37 AM | Report abuse

caothien9, gays can choose to not have sex with their same sex. Blacks cannot choose their skin color. Neither was a Civil War fought for gays.

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 17, 2010 1:45 AM | Report abuse

Cao

You do realize you will be hanging upside down in a pit soon


You are insane for leaving the USA.

Ha ha. Ha


You are a spy.

Posted by: OrangeDogs | December 17, 2010 1:50 AM | Report abuse

It's not the act of having sex that makes on gay or straight. This is one point that you conservatives seem unable to grasp. It's really quite striking, and the basis of those frausulent conversion therapies.

Sexual orientation is defined by attraction, not behavior. A married man who can only achieve an erection with his wife by visuallizing himself performing fellatio, you would call him straight. And a penitentiary prisoner who sodomizes a smaller weaker man, I dare you to be his cellmate and call him gay.

Your beliefs are so ridiculous, as though believing that carving a piece of marble into the shape of a man creates a man, not a statue.

Gays are people who are attracted to the same gender, whether or not they "choose" to consummate that attraction.

Simply ... amazing that you uh people are unable to grasp this. Simply effing amazing.

Posted by: caothien9 | December 17, 2010 1:59 AM | Report abuse

I didn't say anything about religion. Even if your "sexual orientation" is defined by attraction, not behavior, it is not a protected class under the United Stated Constitution.

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 17, 2010 2:32 AM | Report abuse

Neither is race. What does the Constitution have to do with it?

Oh, that's right, you saw the need to throw up an irrelevant distraction.

Equal treatment under law is the basis of it. If you have a problem with that extending to people you're squeamish about, perhaps you'd be happier in Iran. Dinnerjacket says they have no gays there.

Or maybe you could hitch a ride in Doc Brown's DeLorean back to a time when your squeamishness was more widely shared.

Posted by: caothien9 | December 17, 2010 2:41 AM | Report abuse

Wrong again. Race is a "protected class." That was my point about the apples-to-oranges comparison. See, e.g. Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Civil Rights Act of 1866. As for the Constitution, try Amendments XII - XIV.

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 17, 2010 4:02 AM | Report abuse

The CRA of 1964 is part of the Constituion? Who knew!

It's still a tangent. You guys use the Constitution the way fundies use the Bible, with all the bookmarks in Timothy and Leviticus. It's nothing but a mirror for your own prejudices.

Back at the time of the drafting slavery was legal and anyone who said that blacks and whites were equals was regarded as a nut, or in your modern parlance, as "extreme." Fifty years ago the same was true of someone who said that homosexuals deserved to be treated just like everyone else. You want to see inequality preserved under law and you're going off on some tangent I don't care for about a document written over two centuries ago for support.

Just admit you're a frothing bigot, it's OK, you have a lot of company. Pretty much everyone in your party, so why bother hiding it?

Posted by: caothien9 | December 17, 2010 4:28 AM | Report abuse

" That was my point about the apples-to-oranges comparison"

No, your "point" was to retierate the imbecilic suggestion that sexual orientation is something one can choose, and that all anyone has to do to avoid the bigotry of conservative imbeciles is choose to be heterosexual. As if any of you have any recollection of making that choice.

Posted by: caothien9 | December 17, 2010 6:52 AM | Report abuse

Marvel Comics - leftwing social engineering tool

"A US white supremacist group has called for a boycott of the Kenneth Branagh-directed superhero movie Thor on the grounds that a black actor has been cast in the role of a Norse god.

The Council of Conservative Citizens is upset that London-born Idris Elba, star of The Wire and BBC detective series Luther as well as a number of Hollywood films, is to play deity Heimdall in the Marvel Studios feature. The group, which opposes inter-racial marriage and gay rights, has set up a website, boycott-thor.com to set out its opposition to what it sees as *an example of leftwing social engineering.*

"It [is] well known that Marvel is a company that advocates for leftwing ideologies and causes," the site reads."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/dec/17/white-supremacists-boycott-thor

Posted by: bernielatham | December 17, 2010 7:26 AM | Report abuse

Sort of like when the fundies protest Halloween because it encourages *witchcraft*

AND YOUR LITTLE DOG TOO

Posted by: caothien9 | December 17, 2010 7:47 AM | Report abuse

How many more days will America be held hostage by this gang of dead duck losers??

It's an outrage that they continue to give America the finger with their raft of stink bomb bills.

I hope voters remember well the names any and all the feckless RINOs that enable these creeps.

If repeal of DADT happens, the terrorists will have won.

The Marines will be defeated.......by US.

Posted by: battleground51 | December 17, 2010 7:48 AM | Report abuse

Kevin said:

"Your compulsion to use garnish your commentary with substanceless epithets ("batsh*t crazy bigots of the goober base","Gomers", etc) suggests to me that either you aren't serious in your largely faith-based critique, or that, at some level, you have doubts about the undeniable truths you traffic in. "

It could be something of the latter, but I think it's mostly that this person is simply a frothing-at-the-mouth, permanently engraged psychopath. His hatreds run deep. Why else is he even here? That's what you are seeing in this thread, and it isn't much different than every thread he pollutes with his flailing imprecations.

After all, Kevin, you are talking about someone who actually advocates mass murder, Soviet-style, of the "banker castes" and other members of the captialist class. I wish I were making that up or exaggerating. But he has repeatedly and explicitly said it. He would be okay with mass imprisonment, but he prefers they all be liquidated. Then we could all enjoy the blossoming of economic prosperity of the early Soviet Union.

And that is cao, who felt so strongly about communism that he disowned the US and moved to a one-party communist dictatorship, at his most sober and rational. Of course, he's also the person who warns that there are ancient corpses under the polar ice caps that will destroy mankind by contagion. And he's happy about that. Can't get much more delusional and hateful of humanity than that.

I'm interested in the reaction of the liberals to him. 12bb treats him as respectable, but I don't see others responding or commenting on him. I have theories about both, but I'll leave them unsaid.

Posted by: quarterback1 | December 17, 2010 7:52 AM | Report abuse

"Neither is race. What does the Constitution have to do with it?

Oh, that's right, you saw the need to throw up an irrelevant distraction.

Equal treatment under law is the basis of it. If you have a problem with that extending to people you're squeamish about, perhaps you'd be happier in Iran. Dinnerjacket says they have no gays there."

So now the communist who dreams of mass murder so fervently that he decamped to Vietnam presumes to decide who belongs in the U.S.? Interesting. This is such a vile and immoral country that he had to move to a communist one-party state, but he presumes that anyone who doesn't support the gay rights agenda doesn't fit. This guy really is mixed up.

For the record, race is "mentioned" in the Constitution -- it's in the 15th Amendment. You know, one of those three Civil War Amendments. No, race isn't explicitly mentioned in the 14th. But between the 13th (abolition), 14th, and 15th (all races can vote), there was much confusion in anyone's mind that the 14th was intended to ensure equal rights regardless of race.

Homosexuality? No, not so much. It takes 20th and 21st century sophists and nihilists to invent "intepretations" to corrupt the "Constitution" to mean whatever is the latest mania of the extreme left.

Posted by: quarterback1 | December 17, 2010 8:07 AM | Report abuse

"Speaking of which, in another thread now gone off the edge of the world qb was trying to claim, with that signature snide dishonesty of his, that (1) the batsh*t crazy bigots of the goober base comprise the political center and (2) they always have."

Really? Produce a link to that thread. Let's see who's honest.

Posted by: quarterback1 | December 17, 2010 8:10 AM | Report abuse

Clawrence and quarterback

It is obvious that Cao/Chris Fox/noacoloer does not understand how the law works.


First, for something to be illegal, there has to be a law against it.


It sounds fundamental, but something this guy simply does not understand.

Discrimination law rests on "protected classes" which have to be DEFINED, either by the Constitution, or by a Federal law, or by some action of a State.


A Court can not create a "protected class" out of thin it - anyway


____________________

This is the issue with the gay community now - they have adopted the terminology of the Civil Rights movement - and somehow they have convinced themselves that entitles them to the protection of laws which do not exist.


There are many in the black community who are offended by this taking of the terminology - and feel that both groups would be better off with each having its own set of words.


So perhaps the gay community should come up with its own set of words.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | December 17, 2010 8:27 AM | Report abuse

cao- While I think the general reason race is brought up is to insinuate that gays choose the lifestyle that leads to...well just take a look at some of these messages...there is Constitutional significance regarding homosexuals not being a protected class. So it is an apples and oranges comparison for purposes of Constitutional analysis, but the post certainly didn't make it clear that was the the area the comment was directed.

That said, simply because a group is not a protected class does not mean they can be discriminated against by the government any nobody can question it. The governmental action still has to pass the rational basis test. While that is a rather low level of scrutiny, it's not a slam dunk that DADT would meet it.

I do think it's hilarious that those of us who want repeal of DADT are apparently sophists and nihilists. I'll be sure to let my Mom, who voted for Bush twice and for McCain, know what QB thinks of her.

"Ve believe in nothing Lebowski."

Posted by: ashotinthedark | December 17, 2010 8:29 AM | Report abuse

All, Morning Roundup posted:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/12/the_morning_plum_153.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | December 17, 2010 8:32 AM | Report abuse

"Speaking of which, in another thread now gone off the edge of the world qb was trying to claim, with that signature snide dishonesty of his, that (1) the batsh*t crazy bigots of the goober base comprise the political center and (2) they always have."

Really? Produce a link to that thread. Let's see who's honest.

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

That wasn't your (QB's) position at all. Not even close really. See, I'll stick up for a Republican on occasion.

Posted by: ashotinthedark | December 17, 2010 8:34 AM | Report abuse

"I do think it's hilarious that those of us who want repeal of DADT are apparently sophists and nihilists. I'll be sure to let my Mom, who voted for Bush twice and for McCain, know what QB thinks of her."

You should probably focus a little more on reading comprehension.

Posted by: quarterback1 | December 17, 2010 8:42 AM | Report abuse

Why, thanks, ashot. And just after I wacked you for poor reading. mea culpa sorta. You still got my statement above wrong. It was not quite what you said.

Posted by: quarterback1 | December 17, 2010 8:45 AM | Report abuse

"Counterintuitive take of the day: Mark Murray says the real story about Obama's numbers, given all the setbacks he's suffered, are how stable they've been."
-----------------------------------------
Yes, the lower in the septic tank one goes, the more stable the situation becomes. There isn't much movement at the bottom of the toilet, until it gets flushed that is.

Posted by: illogicbuster | December 17, 2010 8:48 AM | Report abuse

If repeal of DADT happens, the terrorists will have won.

==

I call troll.

The terrorists won when we invaded Iraq.

Posted by: caothien9 | December 17, 2010 8:50 AM | Report abuse

Why, thanks, ashot. And just after I wacked you for poor reading. mea culpa sorta. You still got my statement above wrong. It was not quite what you said.

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

Yeah, I realize that, but if I'm not allowed to stretch what you said a little bit I'll have no fun here at all.

Posted by: ashotinthedark | December 17, 2010 8:58 AM | Report abuse

quarterback, thanks for the catch. I did mean 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments in my post. I think you also meant "there wasN'T much confusion . . ."

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 17, 2010 9:32 AM | Report abuse

clawrence,

Yes, I really should proofread myself.

Your point about the shift since 1993 is the same one I was making earlier. It's something how conservatives have the same position that was fine with the left then, but that now represents extreme right-wing craziness, and this somehow proves the right has moved farther right. Nutty.

The GOP isn't any farther right than it was in 1960. But the Dems are way, way to the left.

Posted by: quarterback1 | December 17, 2010 9:46 AM | Report abuse

It wouldn't be as fun without the typos.

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 17, 2010 10:09 AM | Report abuse

At least you scared away caothien9. Also conceding defeat is suekzoo1.

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 17, 2010 10:48 AM | 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