Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Morning Fix: Creigh Deeds's Presidential Dilemma



President Obama and Virginia state Sen. Creigh Deeds. Photo by Joshua Roberts/Bloomberg

Two-thirds of Virginia voters said that President Obama's support of Virginia state Sen. Creigh Deeds (D) either makes no difference or makes them less likely to back the Democratic gubernatorial nominee, according to a new Washington Post survey.

Thirty four percent of voters said that Obama's endorsement made them less likely to vote for Deeds, the same number that said the backing of the president made them more likely to back the Democratic state Senator. Three in ten voters said Obama's support made no difference in their vote.

Inside the numbers, Obama's backing was a major plus for self-identified Democrats (71 percent said it made them more likely to vote for Deeds) and a major minus for Republicans (59 percent less likely to back an Obama-supported Deeds).

Most interestingly, however, was that just 23 percent of Independents said the support of Obama increased their likelihood of voting for Deeds while 37 percent said it made them less likely to support the Democratic nominee. Nearly four in ten (38 percent) said Obama's endorsement made no difference in their vote.

As we have written in this space many times, independents formed the backbone of not only Obama's winning coalition in 2008 -- particularly in previously Republican leaning states like Indiana, North Carolina and Virginia -- but also of Democratic gains in the House and Senate last November and in 2006.

These numbers suggest that Obama's hold on independents has faded since last November in Virginia -- the inevitable result when campaign promises and governing reality clash.

They also seem to argue in favor of the idea that Virginians -- and perhaps Americans more broadly -- favor divided government with independent voters swaying in between the Republican and Democratic parties depending on who holds control in Washington.

While the numbers suggest that Obama is not the unalloyed benefit to Deeds that he was regarded for downballot Democrats last year, he is nowhere near the anchor status that former President George W. Bush achieved during the 2005 Virginia governor's race.

A Post survey conducted in October 2005 showed nearly half of voters saying that Bush's backing of former state Attorney General Jerry Kilgore made it less likely they would back the Republican nominee for governor. Just one in four said Bush's backing made it more likely they would support Kilgore, who went on to lose to Gov. Tim Kaine (D).

Unlike Kilgore who avoided Bush -- skipping a chance to appear with the president just 11 days before the election -- Deeds will almost certainly welcome Obama to the state at least once more before November.

But, the Post poll numbers suggest that Deeds must be careful not to overplay the Obama endorsement for fear of a backlash -- particularly among independents.

Monday Fix Picks: When did customer service go down the drain? The 1980s? 90s?

1. The economic perils of affluent individuals.
2. Is the public option a goner?
3. What life after the public option means.
4. Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick (D) is in deep.
5. Bob Dylan: Arrested.

KBH For Gov (Finally): Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison will end years of speculation today when she formally announces that she will challenge Gov. Rick Perry in a primary next year. In advance of Hutchison's announcement, her campaign released a two-minute web video previewing the case she will make to Texas Republican voters. That case? Heavy on results -- particularly on the economy -- and light on specifics. And, very tough on Perry who, although unnamed, is blasted for "grandstanding" and "chasing headlines" as the state struggles. Our favorite part of the ad? The quote from Perry (circa 2005) calling Hutchison a "true champion for Texas." (Of course, that quote came from when Perry was trying to convince Hutchison to stay out of the governor's race.) This is going to be a humdinger of a primary; it's hard to imagine it slipping from the number one slot on the primary Line.

Replacing Doyle: Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle's (D) expected announcement today that he will not seek a third term sets off a competitive primary race with any number of candidates looking at the contest. The most-often mentioned name is Rep. Ron Kind who has held the southwestern Wisconsin 3rd district since 1996. Kind, a college quarterback at Harvard, is seen as a rising star within the Democratic party and has long been talked about as a statewide candidate. Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, who held a Milwaukee- area congressional seat during much of the 1990s, ran unsuccessfully for governor in 2002. He has drawn huge statewide attention of late for his intervention in an attempted assault outside the Wisconsin State Fair that led to the mayor being hit with a lead pipe and hospitalized. Lt. Gov. Barb Lawton could well be the heir apparent but she has a shaky (at best) relationship with Doyle and there are questions about her fundraising ability. Dane County (Madison) Executive Kathleen Falk ran for governor in 2002 and is likely to consider it again.

Specter's Netroots Problem: The distrust with which many in the Democratic base feel toward party-switching Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) was on display over last weekend at the Netroots Nation conference in Pittsburgh. Specter and his primary opponent -- Rep. Joe Sestak -- both participated in Q & A sessions with the liberal audience before after a straw poll was conducted by Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg. Sestak took 46 percent to Specter's 10 while 33 percent were undecided. It's important to remember that a straw poll of online activists is not the same thing as a statewide primary poll but the skepticism seen among liberals toward Specter is a problem the incumbent must solve before next year.

Click It!: Looking for the most up-to-date information on the coming special election in New York's 23rd district? The candidates -- state Assemblywoman Dede Scozzafava (R) and Plattsburgh attorney Bill Owens -- have been chosen and the special will be called as soon as Rep. John McHugh is confirmed as the Secretary of the Army sometime this fall. Thanks to a loyal Fix reader, here are three blogs to check out: The In Box, PolitickerNY and the Oswego Democrat. Have others? Email me at chris.cillizza@wpost.com. (And, don't forget to check the Fix's list of best state political blogs.)

Say What?: "I will never vote for a bill to kill old people, period." -- Arkansas Democratic Rep. Mike Ross in an interview with CNN's John King Sunday.

By Chris Cillizza  |  August 17, 2009; 5:45 AM ET
Categories:  Morning Fix  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Doyle Won't Seek Third Term in Wisconsin
Next: Morning Fix: Rust Belt Revival

Comments

The day after the election there will be the same number of Democrats in the House and Senate as there were the day before. Congress will be no more or less divided no matter what happens in the VA gov race. Therefore, it doesn't make sense for independents to vote against Deeds simply for the sake of "divided government."

Posted by: xcrunner771 | August 20, 2009 10:08 AM | Report abuse

If Obama stays out, Mr. Deeds stays focused on fiscal discipline issues, and Warner and Kaine campaign for Deeds strongly, Deeds has a good chance of winning. But if we see too much of Obama - who is governing with an extremely aggressive style with an excessive and costly agenda that will bankrupt this country - and if Mr. Deeds goes about this state talking about his pro choice record, he has no chance. I liked Warner and Kaine, but at this point and think Mr. Deeds could be a good governor as well, but at this point, if he attempts to force Obama and the national Democratic party's far left agenda on our State, he will lose big. The Democrat's win of Virgina in 2008 was more about Obama's positive personality and fatigue with Bush-Cheney policies then about an endorsement by Virginia of the leftist agenda.

Posted by: chrojo01 | August 18, 2009 12:32 PM | Report abuse

drindl I am so with you on this.

The Republican bloggers here make Obama responsible for everything. It's like 8 years of George Bush trashing this country doesn't exist. It's all on Obama -- from the mistrust of government to the expense of getting us back on a sounder financial footing to the unemployment rate. The fact that all of this goes back to Bush and his policies is lost on them.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | August 18, 2009 10:14 AM | Report abuse

frt -- but the fact that repulbican caused the fiscal meltdown to begin with doesn't bother you -- you're a damn fool.

Posted by: drindl | August 18, 2009 8:29 AM | Report abuse

Although I have occasionally voted for Democrats in the past, I will not consider voting for one at the Federal, Commonwealth or County levels during the 2009 or 2010 election cycles. The irresponsible fiscal mischief being perpetrated at the Federal level by the Democrat led Executive and Legislative branches prevents me from doing so.

Specifically, the $787 billion stimulus bill (much of it un-needed), this year’s $1.8 trillion deficit, next year’s projected $1.3 trillion deficit, an estimated $900 billion over ten years for national health care, the government take over of GM, a potential enormous and regressive tax increase due to Cap and trade, projected government borrowing of $9.3 trillion over ten years and an estimated, eventual debt to GDP ratio of 82%, etc. characterize President Obama’s unsustainable, ruinous, fiscal juggernaut. New or higher taxation is not the solution.

Arguably, my attitude is unfair to Democrats vying for elected office at the Commonwealth and County levels. However, my refusal to vote for Democrats at any level is a subtle yet well warranted backlash against the Obama administration’s reckless fiscal policies and out of control spending. I refuse to be even remotely duplicitous in the Democrat‘s fiscal folly. Commonwealth and County Democrats have the titular head of their party, President Obama, and a Democrat controlled Congress to blame for losing my consideration and my generally negative attitude towards Democrats.

Democrats or those Democrats surreptitiously masquerading as Independents need not visit my residence requesting my vote.

McDonnell - YES!

Deeds - NO!


Posted by: furtdw | August 18, 2009 6:55 AM | Report abuse

bill, most of us who are regular on here understand what jake and jerk and rush are -- the enemies of the age of reason, of enlightenment. The Hydra, Medusa, the many-snake-headed creature that fights truth at every turn. They are the savage and primal past, the Lizard Brain, the embodiment of hate and violence.

We have to get past this mindless violence, or we will not survive as a species.

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 11:58 PM | Report abuse

Poor Barry. So far out of his depth. What part of "no experience" didn't you get. Well at least you got it now.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 11:27 PM | Report abuse

RE: JakeD--politics is a complex issue. Repubs actually do things Dems like and vice-versa. And then there's JakeD. Less erudite people hate JakeD for reasons that he makes hard to quantify. So they call him "liar, racist, Fox News stooge, etc.". He then is able to show that his comments offer no 'proof' that would stand up in a court of law. Do not be frustrated. Trust your gut feelings. After observing over time, he IS a racist and a Limbaugh stooge. More than just Democrats, it's Pres. Obama he hates. Here's the key: If Pres. Obama discovered the cure for cancer is there any doubt here that JakeD would 'find' a reason to denigrate it? Trust your instincts. Most people, regardless of party, find at least a FEW things to agree with in an opposing party's Pres. I certainly didn't hate Everything Pres. Bush did. On posts that offer a chance to "recommend", he attracts only the rabid 'wingnuts' like "ekim". Everytime I read about someone who died because of being denied health care I will think of JakeD and his knee-jerk rejection of any equitable solution solely because it was proposed by a Democrat. No, wait, this should read "because it was proposed by a Democrat-- during the Obama administration." Questions:#1 Does anyone believe "I'm not a liar and hypocrite" really voted for Alan Keyes? ("LOL"). #2. Are there any intelligent Conservatives out there who think "I'm not a liar and hypocrite" is Not hurting the Repub. Party with his "Birther" nonsense? #3. Is there anyone out there that thinks "I'm not a liar and hypocrite" hasn't proved by his 'snarky' comments that he is a disciple of Rush whose only goal is fighting the last election, proclaiming "Obama must fail", and screw the rest of the country? Finally, #4. Is there anyone out there that doesn't think "I'm not a liar and hypocrite" isn't part of the problem this country faces?

Posted by: billalves714 | August 17, 2009 11:22 PM | Report abuse

@broadwayjoe - Both points acknowledged. When Vic posts on topic, I think he has a lot to say. It is a shame as I think his could be one of the most interesting voices around here. Heck, I remember that CC has picked him for best comments of the day. Unfortunately, this obsession drowns out his voice. Even worse, if you dare disagree, then you're part of a government fusion center. It's insulting to all other posters. One cannot disagree with Vic unless you've been paid to do so.

With regards to Deeds, I think we're looking at summer doldrums. Don't forget last year the political talk was of McCain's advertising painting Obama as a celebrity. Given the state of the economy, Deeds has an uphill climb. Biding ones time during difficult economic conditions isn't a bad strategy. He's building resources for what promises to be a nasty and expensive fight.

I don't buy Bob McDonnell as a moderate. So, beginning to stake out some social ground has the potential to gain some traction.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | August 17, 2009 9:45 PM | Report abuse

Blade: Apology. I probably used the wrong words. Any lack of effectiveness may well be due to lack of funds for Deeds. But geez, McDonnell has been on TV and emailing the past year or so. I don't think I have even heard Deeds say one word on TV. Hoping he wins, though. Otherwise, they'll blame it on BHO.

Re: s50 -- S50 is/was a journalist but I'm guessing things went sideways for him. I don't buy into his "agenda" but I don't laugh at him either. At the end of the day, he may well have the last laugh.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | August 17, 2009 8:55 PM | Report abuse

@broadwayjoe - Deeds took on a better funded candidate and another from NoVa. Accusing him of a poorly run campaign is simply trying to explain something away by diminished expectations.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | August 17, 2009 8:42 PM | Report abuse

Here's what you'll also find if you look at that ACLU thread. Fully 125 out of 174 messages were posted by Vic Livingston, aka The Scrivener. And 75 out of the first 100! And, dear sir, you actually have the gall to accuse others of spamming a blog. All I can say is thank goodness that the Post doesn't allow you to deluge The Fix with posts. Sheesh.

Signed,

Your friendly neighborhood disinformation troll. Otherwise know as The Fairlington Blade.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | August 17, 2009 8:40 PM | Report abuse

Broadway Joe, you have awesome powers!

Posted by: margaretmeyers | August 17, 2009 8:28 PM | Report abuse

In the words of Bud Fox, they bagged the big one, Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart has ended its sponsorship of Glenn Beck.

"Walmart, Best Buy, CVS, and GMAC are among eight major advertisers that have confirmed pulling their advertising from Fox News' "Glenn Beck" program in light of his comments that President Obama is a racist.

The advertisers did not pull their spots from Fox News, but rather requested that their ads do not air during Beck's 5PM program."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/17/gmac-financial-services-c_n_261148.html

Posted by: broadwayjoe | August 17, 2009 8:19 PM | Report abuse

It is typical that the ruling party loses seats in the mid-term elections. The repubs are so down that they will take anything and try to make it look like a massive victory.

They are going to have to take a lot more than a few seats in the mid-terms to be in power.

Posted by: JRM2 | August 17, 2009 8:05 PM | Report abuse

With all due respect to Fix, I cannot buy into this odd effort to turn the Deeds-McDonnell race into a referendum on BHO.

In Virginia, state and local races have traditionally turned on the quality of the campaigns and the importance of local issues. For instance, years ago, Gilmore won solely based on his promise to abolish the car tax.

McDonnell is ahead because he is a high profile official who has run the better campaign, and, facing a weak candidate, he has not had to discuss his ultraconservative beliefs.

Just as important, he has done enough outreach to convince black and suburban voters he's no George Allen. Deeds has done little effective outreach. Also McDonnell owes some of his lead to Richmond mayor and sometimes BHO surrogate Doug Wilder who has kinda endorsed McDonnell by not endorsing Deeds.

Virginians don't care whom the WH supports.
In the end, the race will have everything to do with the Deeds and McDonnell campaigns and nothing to do with BHO...IMO.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | August 17, 2009 8:05 PM | Report abuse

"Fix" readers, Team Obama, Now Hear This:

MORE ENTRIES FOR THE 'FUSION CENTER HALL OF SHAME'...

...EVIDENCE THAT GOVERNMENT SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMS ARE A PRETEXT FOR HARASSMENT AND CENSORSHIP.


Please scroll to the bottom of this ACLU "Freedom Blog" link to apparently see your tax dollars at work.

HOMELAND SEC. NAPOLITANO:

These government fusion centers are administered by your department. Why are these facilities apparently allowed to HARASS and CENSOR American citizens via their telecommunications?

Team Obama: Are you aware of this, or are you being misinformed by your (too) many Bush holdovers?

http://blog.aclu.org/2009/01/26/internet-filters-voluntary-ok-not-government-mandate

http://nowpublic.com/world/govt-fusion-center-spying-pretext-harass-and-censor

Posted by: scrivener50 | August 17, 2009 6:27 PM | Report abuse

(((((((I regret my part in it, as I realize I commented on birther nonsense as well as chasing down plagiary. I'm going to take a vacation of my own. See you in September.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 5:15 PM | Report abuse)))))))


TRANSLATION:

The Obama administration has finally gotten wise to the paid blog-spamming that pollutes discourse on political blogs near and far...

...and the gravy train on the public's dime is coming to an end...

Posted by: scrivener50 | August 17, 2009 5:48 PM | Report abuse

I can't help but notice that regardless of the topic(s) or potential topic(s), Klansmen cannot help but find a way to expose themselves -- and they seem either clueless or surprised that normal people identify what they are about.

Posted by: matthewjblack | August 17, 2009 5:38 PM | Report abuse

It truly is the dog days of August. Congress is out, even CC is on semi-vacation. There is only so much real news-of-the-day to chew over, and so the discussion turns to tired rants and meta-debates.

I regret my part in it, as I realize I commented on birther nonsense as well as chasing down plagiary. I'm going to take a vacation of my own. See you in September.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 5:15 PM | Report abuse

@Mike - I remember a previous warning to Zouk based on that behavior, but mainly because it was off topic. Anyone spending time around here recognizes that there are generally two types of Zouk posts: those copied from conservative sites--never attributed--and name calling (Obimbo, Pelooney, chrisdoessomething, etc.) There is the occasional attaboy, but I noticed that Zouk mainly attracts outraged responses, which is, of course, exactly what a troll desires. It's kinda like Monsters, Inc.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | August 17, 2009 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, I noticed he toned down his interaction with foxy.

jakey must be happy his only friend is back. Two idi0ts in a pod.

Posted by: jasperanselm | August 17, 2009 4:48 PM | Report abuse

jasper: Unfortunately, CC gave him a "final warning" and zouk laid low for a while. Now he's just copy-and-posting us to death. I don't think CC will ban him for that, despite it being a violation of the rules here, since it is not what he warned him about.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 4:41 PM | Report abuse

I thought CC put king_of_puke in time out?

What a bummer; wasting a lot of time today scrolling passed his nonsense.

Posted by: jasperanselm | August 17, 2009 4:32 PM | Report abuse

Now stealing from the New York Times. That would be the well-written paragraph, right before comparing Obama to the Messiah.

Still waiting for an original idea.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 4:26 PM | Report abuse

I was thinking of someone with an Indian name who took on a nickname. I work with a scientist who goes by "V" (the first letter of her given name).

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | August 17, 2009 4:18 PM | Report abuse

"This has become a sort of interesting scavenger hunt.

http://www.alligator.org/articles/2007/11/20/news/campus/gonzales.txt

Yes, jaked posts on the Independent Florida Alligator!"

I used to read the Alligator. Joked hangs out on a message board WITH COLLEGE KIDS. He is pathetic.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | August 17, 2009 4:17 PM | Report abuse

The white flag is flying over Camp Obama, which makes a pleasant change from the red flag that, metaphorically speaking, has been flying there since January 20. Barack Obama’s plan for socialised health care on the Stalinist model across the United States is now in full retreat. Not only will it not play in Peoria, it will not play anywhere.

For months Obama had been trumpeting the indispensable nature of his “public option” in a new health care system. Suddenly, it is no big deal. Kathleen Sebelius, the Health and Human Services Secretary, is now telling Americans that taxpayer-funded insurance was “not the essential element”.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 4:08 PM | Report abuse

So typical. Not a word from conservatives about the stock market as it climbed all through the second quarter. Now it corrects a bit, as it always does, and they're all over it.

The Recovery Act, and many other stimulative actions, are Obama's and Bernanke's responsibility. While the economy looks better than it did in March or April, they have always said it would take 18 months or more.

The daily fluctuations in the market are not cause for doom and gloom.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 4:06 PM | Report abuse

President Obama has made health care his top priority. He says the cost of Medicare and Medicaid is “the biggest threat” to the nation’s fiscal future. But to the puzzlement of Congress and health care experts around the country, Mr. Obama has not named anyone to lead the agency that runs the two giant programs.

Just how does government work again - asks the newcomer

Oh yeah, Messiah comes down from the mountain, gives a speech and water turns to wine.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 4:01 PM | Report abuse

"Not that I care, but Piyush Jindal is an American, not an Indian. I don't know whether he spent any time as a customer service rep."

For the purposes of this discussion, we're counting first generation Americans. But yeah, I forgot about Bobby Jindal. I was trying to think of Indians I know personally.

"@DDAWD - Meant to modify that. I couldn't remember if my former office mate was from Taiwan or mainland China."

I think Taiwanese tend to take on American names more often than mainlanders.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 17, 2009 4:00 PM | Report abuse

What happened to all the optimism? Less than a week ago, many people were celebrating the beginning of the recovery. The Federal Reserve itself claimed the economy is ''leveling out.'' Now some investors and market watchers say the stock market may have overestimated the prospects for an economic rebound (

what was it about "mission Accomplished" lesson that you dimwit Libs forgot about??

Must be the general desperation for love and affection that is inherent in the Messiah cult. Perhaps that explains all the tortured and produced town hall events for The One. He simply could not stand the stress of rejection. I would not want to be his lead polling guy right now then.

Of course when you are spiraling down so fast, you would do anything to correct the pitch and yaw.

Three options left for Obimbo:

Blame Bush
Blame Racism
It's the return of the VRWC starring none other than the hydrant dressed as an easter egg.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 3:59 PM | Report abuse

A sign of their weak minority status: "major gains" in the house and senate would not give them majority status.

I expect some slippage, perhaps to 57-58 seats in the Senate next year. And a few freshmen Dems in conservative districts will be out of the House.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 3:57 PM | Report abuse


Not that I care, but Piyush Jindal is an American, not an Indian. I don't know whether he spent any time as a customer service rep.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 3:52 PM | Report abuse

CC wrote: "While the numbers suggest that Obama is not the unalloyed benefit to Deeds that he was regarded for downballot Democrats last year, he is nowhere near the anchor status that former President George W. Bush achieved during the 2005 Virginia governor's race."

Give it time. The election is not until November. While I belong to that group of people who believe Obama's numbers will probably recover (I would give him a 60% probability of re-election), I would say there is a 90% chance that his numbers will get worse before they start getting better.

The GOP will probably take both the governorships on the ballot this year and make major gains in the mid-terms next year. Though I don't see much of a chance that they will take control of Congress, I do see them holding a majority of governorships, and possibly of state legislator positions too.

Posted by: qlangley | August 17, 2009 3:49 PM | Report abuse

@DDAWD - Meant to modify that. I couldn't remember if my former office mate was from Taiwan or mainland China.

As for an Indian with an American nickname, I can think of one: Piyush "Bobby" Jindal.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | August 17, 2009 3:45 PM | Report abuse

why do you suppose zouk would want to be in a room all day long full of people who wish he would go away?

some kind of persecution complex? or just a desire to be really obnoxious?

oops, answered my own question.

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 2:56 PM

____________________

I still stick by my theory that He is really a left-wing agent-provocateur, trying to give the conservatives a bad name by Regurgitating the most vile examples or vitriole he can find.

I find it significant, that when I posited this before, he didn't deny it.

Posted by: sourpuss | August 17, 2009 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Bet they have the TV tuned to Fox 24/7 in the day room.

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 3:39 PM | Report abuse

The thing is that FOX does well for cable news, but they would be wetting their pants if they got anything close to the numbers that the major networks get for their nightly news. Couric, Williams, and Gibson are still the big names.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 17, 2009 3:38 PM | Report abuse

too bad, fox news is so popular and all your nutworks are spinning in the bowl.

==

Bragging that a TV channel is popular is like bragging that a cigarette brand is popular. Check it, bleed .. television is for losers. FOX is popular because conservatives watch more television. Sitting like houseplants in front of an appliance that doesn't even know if anyone is watching.

I doubt very many politically active liberals have the patience to sit in front of a TV for hours and hours a day.

But since you're in a mental institution you probably have little else to do.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 3:34 PM | Report abuse


Well-informed healthcare protestors:

Another protester held a sign that made clear her opposition to the president's health-care reform plans.

"Under Obama, everyone will get the same health care, that's socialism," she said. "It has failed in other countries, you know, like Europe."

IQ -- about 5.

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 3:29 PM | Report abuse

This has become a sort of interesting scavenger hunt.

http://www.alligator.org/articles/2007/11/20/news/campus/gonzales.txt

Yes, jaked posts on the Independent Florida Alligator!

Posted by: DDAWD | August 17, 2009 3:26 PM | Report abuse

"Late update: CNN now reports that there were two men carrying assault rifles, reportedly AR-15s, outside President Obama's event in Phoenix."

how much does this make your skin crawl, people? what in god's name is wrong with this country that we allow this crap?

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 3:24 PM | Report abuse

Wow, all those facts just drive you moonbats nuts don't they?

It interferes with the unadulturated spin culture you rely upon to fool the voters.

too bad, fox news is so popular and all your nutworks are spinning in the bowl.

It took less than a year for the voters to catch on to the Liberal fraud. Only 18 months until we kick the sheisters out.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 3:22 PM | Report abuse

these people are 'professionals'. that's all they do with themselves.

"Late update: CNN now reports that there were two men carrying assault rifles, reportedly AR-15s, outside President Obama's event in Phoenix."

how much does this make your skin crawl, people? what in god's name is wrong with this country that we allow this crap?

these men ought to be thrown to the grond and with a lot of Tac Squad guys with their feet on their necks.

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 3:18 PM | Report abuse

If you find joked and kingofjerk's rants to lower the discourse on this blog-- and especially if it drives you away -- write to Chris Cilizza personally. Just click on the 'About Chris Cilizza" link under his photo and it will take you toh is email.

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 3:16 PM | Report abuse

"I did a search a few months ago .. JakeD has been posting the exac same crap with all the same verbal tics for at least three years. I tracked them down by searching on "registered independent," since I figure so absurd a phrase as that wouldn't come up too often. I was right."

Wow, I did the same thing. Did you know that he apparently does this on a bunch of forums?? Even a reference out there to getting banned from the TPM site.

Ah, the Monday doldrums.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 17, 2009 3:14 PM | Report abuse

this is how crazy violent and f*cked up this country is because of the rightwing nutbags:

"A man is carrying an assault rifle and a pistol outside the VFW Convention in Phoenix where President Obama will speak later today, a local newspaper reports. (Click through for a photo.)

Local police say it's legal under Arizona law, but two officers are keeping close by him.

"If we need to intervene, we will intervene at that time," said Detective J. Oliver.

The man, who declined to give his name, was asked why he was armed. "Because I can do it," he said. "In Arizona, I still have some freedoms."

There are currently hundreds of people demonstrating both for and against heath care reform outside the convention, where Obama will speak about Iraq, Afghanistan and veterans affairs. His prepared remarks mention little about health care reform.

This is the third report in a week of someone bringing a gun to a presidential event. At Obama's town hall last week in Portsmouth, N.H., a man was arrested for having a gun hidden in his car after the Secret Service found him at Portsmouth High School hours before Obama arrived carrying a pocketknife. He didn't have a license for a concealed weapon.

Another man in Portsmouth was spotted carrying a gun in a leg holster outside the school.

And that's not all. A man brought a gun to a town hall with Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) last week, without incident. At an event with Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), someone dropped a gun, but he had a permit and no police report was taken. And two weeks ago, a New Mexico man tweeted that reform opponents should bring guns to town halls and "badly hurt" SEIU reps."

I thank god I don't live in arizona, where lunatics are free to take assault rifles to presidential events.

We really are now an idiocracy.

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 3:12 PM | Report abuse

As an alternative, you could take on the substance of the argument for a change and lay off the insults and name calling. I seriously doubt any have any wit or wisdom to offer so I understand if you continue in your usual vein.

Posted by: king_of_zouk


what was the definition of insanity again? take a gander at the response to this post. We have on display the usual gang of idiots in their sandbox.

too bad. this blog used to have some substance.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 3:10 PM | Report abuse

I hold non-thinking zealots from the left in low regard.

==

That's pretty funny coming from the only guy here who can't even write his own material

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 3:08 PM | Report abuse

It's the repetition that really makes the wingnut trools most annoying -- like robotic parrots. Not only can they not form their own opinions, they have to repeat the words of others endlessly. the same drool for years.

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 3:07 PM | Report abuse

zouk's whole shtick is rage and mockery about Obama's popularity. Messiah, The One, all that crap.

Jake's whole shtick is that Obama is black.

Just think how much better this forum would be if they were both gone for good.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 3:06 PM | Report abuse

I know you Libs love rules for everyone else but I feel I should inform you that neither do I look to you or big government for prescribed behavior, nor do I complain to them when it goes against my wishes.
I hold non-thinking zealots from the left in low regard. As you can surmise I do not engage kooks. you know who you are.

If one of you ever comes up with a single, interesting, intelligent thought, I would be happy to engage. I am not holding my breath based on past performance.

there is some hope for DDawd but the rest of you seem to be of little mind and big mouths.

BTW, this is not a for-profit enterprise for the bloggers, nor is it an academic environment (clearly).

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, but it's really annoying to be bombarded by copy and pastes.

==

Not as annoying as reading the same repetitive lines over and over and over.

I did a search a few months ago .. JakeD has been posting the exac same crap with all the same verbal tics for at least three years. I tracked them down by searching on "registered independent," since I figure so absurd a phrase as that wouldn't come up too often. I was right.

Not only a liar, but an awesome limited intelligence.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 3:00 PM | Report abuse

"now could you please locate any of the "constitutional professor's" writings? any of the "law review editors" compositions? Any papers from college?"

First you have to copy and paste large sections of them on here and posit them as your own ideas. Then once we realize that the use of the English language is far above your own skill level, we'll take the ten seconds to google a phrase.

That's how it works, right?

Posted by: DDAWD | August 17, 2009 2:58 PM | Report abuse

Others who quote from articles give attribution, Zouk. It is not only polite, it is one of the rules of the forum. If you take the time to cut and paste, you can at least spend two seconds to type "From the Washington Times" or similar.

As for the Law Review, apparently you don't understand what it is. The editors edit. They don't compose, other than perhaps an occasional editorial. Get the connection? Editor, edit, editorial. The papers published in the Law Review are written predominantly by judges, not law students.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 2:58 PM | Report abuse

why do you suppose zouk would want to be in a room all day long full of people who wish he would go away?

some kind of persecution complex? or just a desire to be really obnoxious?

oops, answered my own question.

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 2:56 PM | Report abuse

As an alternative, you could take on the substance of the argument for a change and lay off the insults and name calling.

==

PHYSICIAN HEAL THYSELF

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 2:54 PM | Report abuse

Buckley's oil-pan rag again:

http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=MWRmMjAxNmNhZDRhMjllYmFjYTZjYmRlYTZmYWNjYTA=

poor zouk, can't compose his own stuff, unless you count "Obimbo"

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 2:53 PM | Report abuse

"Thankfully, unlike the poor long-suffering souls who actually want to listen to their congressmen at town hall meetings, we don't have to listen to the shouting. We just scroll past.

Posted by: mikeinmidland"

Yeah, but it's really annoying to be bombarded by copy and pastes.

Incidentally, this violates the very first rule on this board. (thou shalt not copyright infringe)

Posted by: DDAWD | August 17, 2009 2:52 PM | Report abuse

I am so happy you dimwits are so good at finding sources. now could you please locate any of the "constitutional professor's" writings? any of the "law review editors" compositions? Any papers from college?

As an alternative, you could take on the substance of the argument for a change and lay off the insults and name calling. I seriously doubt any have any wit or wisdom to offer so I understand if you continue in your usual vein.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 2:52 PM | Report abuse


Thankfully, unlike the poor long-suffering souls who actually want to listen to their congressmen at town hall meetings, we don't have to listen to the shouting. We just scroll past.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 2:50 PM | Report abuse

Democratic populism turned out to be largely aristocratic elitism. Obama spends more money on himself than did Bush. The liberal Congress has a strange fondness for pricy private jets. Those environmentalists and racialists who lecture us about our ecological and ethical shortcomings prefer Martha’s Vineyard and country estates to Dayton and Bakersfield. Offering left-wing populist sermonizing for others while enjoying the high life oneself is never a winning combination.

the Obama cabinet is sounding downright uncouth and boorish. The tax-challenged Treasury secretary, Tim Geithner, unleashed a profanity-laced diatribe against bank regulators. Hillary Clinton’s recent outburst in the Congo, captured on YouTube, was something out of Days of Our Lives. Joe Biden cannot speak extemporaneously without causing an incident with the Russians or misleading the public about swine flu. Attorney General Holder sounds like a tired scold, only to be overshadowed by the president’s off-the-cuff cuts about the Special Olympics, Las Vegas, and the Cambridge police. Press Secretary Robert Gibbs makes Scott McClellan sound like a Cicero by comparison.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 2:48 PM | Report abuse

zouk's latest unattributed source:

http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=MWRmMjAxNmNhZDRhMjllYmFjYTZjYmRlYTZmYWNjYTA=

lower and lower. Buckley's rag this time.

Copying and pasting to fill up this blog with crap nobody will read?

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Another board ruined by Joked and king_of_kook.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | August 17, 2009 2:45 PM | Report abuse

And the latest is from AmericanThinker. Of which zouk is apparently not one.

August 17, 2009
White House in disarray over public option
Rick Moran

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 2:44 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 2:44 PM | Report abuse

Americans wanted a new brand — youthful, postracial, mesmerizing abroad. At first they got that, too. But after eight months, their president has proven not so postracial, but instead hyper-racially conscious. Compare the Holder “cowards” outburst, the Sotomayor riff on innate racial and gender judicial superiority, and the president’s Cambridge police comments. All that sounds more like Jesse Jackson than Martin Luther King Jr. Demagogues, not healers, trash their predecessors at the beginning of every speech. When a once-eloquent president now goes off teleprompter, the question is not whether he will say something that is either untruthful or silly, but simply how many times he might do so at one outing. Some once worried that George W. Bush could not articulate our goals in Iraq; far more now sense that Obama is even less able to outline his own health-care reform.

there is a growing fear that Obamism is becoming cult-like and Orwellian. Almost on script, Hollywood ceased all its Rendition/Redacted–style films. Iraq — once the new Vietnam — is out of the news. Afghanistan is “problematic,” not a “blunder.” Tribunals, renditions, the Patriot Act, and Predators are no longer proof of a Seven Days in May coup, but legitimate tools to keep us safe. Words change meanings as acts of terror become “man-caused disasters.” Hunting down jihadists is really an “overseas contingency operation.” Media sycophants do not merely parrot Obama, but now proclaim him a “god.” New York Times columnists who once assured us that Bush’s dastardly behavior was proof of American pathology now sound like Pravda apologists in explaining the “real” Obama is not what he is beginning to seem like.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 2:44 PM | Report abuse

here just aren't any credible presidential R's out there. All of the prominent names are lying sacks of dung and shills for industry, or simply just plain wild-eyed loony.

==

Lying sacks and industry shills are no problem for GOP voters. They'd stick knitting needles into their own testicles if they thought it would piss off the liberals.

No, the problem for a GOP presidential victory is twofold

(1) there aren't enough voters. GOP identification is at about 19%, and many of them are crazy

(2) the lying sacks / industry shills are boring and uninspiring people. Nobody is going to go door to door Disney-eyed in excitement over Romney or Pawlenty or Gingrich, and while Sarah Palin may excite a percentage of that 19%, a lot of them would stay home.

And none of the GOP dwarves will get substantial numbers of independents.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 2:43 PM | Report abuse

'Cut-and-post is not a discussion. Of ANY caliber.'

he doesn't do discussions. only loony unmoored rants.

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 2:42 PM | Report abuse

Meanwhile, the wailing and gnashing of teeth on the left is becoming quite entertaining. How liberals ever believed that Obama was anything except a hack machine politician who could give a decent speech only shows the capacity for self delusion on the left.

Obama can't decide what to do. If he scraps the public option, he has a war on his hands with the far left and the netnuts on blogs. If he insists on keeping it, he probably loses health care reform altogether.

As opposition to reform builds, not even his vaunted grass roots organization is doing much of anything to help. And few Democratic politicians seem willing to stick their necks out and rescue the president from his own incompetent leadership. He has given little direction to lawmakers, preferring to stay in the campaign mode that he has never left and go to town halls, give speeches, and let others do the heavy lifting to get the bill passed. This is a president who either refuses, or doesn't know how to govern - and can't tell the difference between a political campaign and being president.
The press has been able to shield the president so far, but even they will not be able to mask his utter failure if health care reform dies. Chances are still about 50-50 that the president will get some kind of health care bill to sign. Odds are good that it won't contain a public option or much in the way of Medicare cost savings - two essential elements that the president has insisted all along must be in the bill.

Watching him trying to spin whatever watered down version of health care reform as a "victory" should be almost as entertaining as watching his administration flail about wildly on the public option.


Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 2:41 PM | Report abuse

My daughter had a friend in high school who had just immigrated from China. Her name is Xiu. For about a week, everyone called her 'shoe' because that was the best they could manage.

She was too polite for about a month to tell them it was actually pronounced 'shway'.

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 2:41 PM | Report abuse

zouk's unattributed source:

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/aug/15/a-failed-single-term/print/

Trying to pass others' work as your own writing, zouk?

Great choice. The Moonie tabloid.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 2:38 PM | Report abuse

Zouk's latest is from the Washington Times:

A failed, single term?
The prospect of going the way of Argentina
By Jeffrey T. Kuhner | Saturday, August 15, 2009

Cut-and-post is not a discussion. Of ANY caliber.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 2:38 PM | Report abuse

There just aren't any credible presidential R's out there. All of the prominent names are lying sacks of dung and shills for industry, or simply just plain wild-eyed loony.

Except Huntsman, and he is someone that could possibly draw independent votes. I would consider him. Unfortunately for him, the R base won't -- he's too sane.

And that's why it's gonna be 8 years.

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 2:38 PM | Report abuse

So is it still in or not? Not even the White House knows at this point. This was made evident by the Obama administration walking to the edge of eliminating the public option and then scurrying back. This kind of thing, by all rights, should have spurred a host of stories and opinion pieces on the total, laughable incompetence of the president and his people. Of course, it won't. The press is still in "protect at all costs" mode -

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 2:38 PM | Report abuse

"@DDAWD - I had a good friend in grad school who was from India. He went by Tony. I also noticed that some Asian students went by an English nickname as well. I think it made it just a little easier to get by. I didn't think any the less of them for it.

BB"

By Asian, do you mean east Asian? I've met a lot of Indian and Chinese people in my lifetime and overwhelmingly, Indian people have Indian names and Chinese people have American names. (I'm talking about first generation Americans) When it comes to people from China, like grad students, they usually have Chinese names, but they are also the ones to adopt nicknames.

I'm sure I know some Indian people that go by American names, but I really can't think of any off the top of my head.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 17, 2009 2:36 PM | Report abuse

President Obama is on the way to joining an exclusive club. It is the club of failed one-term presidents.

==

Uh, for Obama to lose in '12 would mean that there was a candidate on the GOP side who could win.

Yeah it's over three years away but one would think that by now the next GOP savior would at least be known. And who do you guys have?

Mitt Romney? Tim Pawlenty? Mitch Daniels?

Sarah Palin?!?

Long EIGHT years ahead. Better get used to it. You might need to get your dosages raised.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 2:34 PM | Report abuse

rest of piece and link.

"The story notes that the rumor emanated "from many of the same pundits and conservative media outlets that were central in defeating Bill Clinton's health care proposal 16 years ago, including the editorial board of The Washington Times, the American Spectator magazine and Betsy McCaughey, whose 1994 health care critique made her a star of the conservative movement (and ultimately, the lieutenant governor of New York)."

The big PR firms that work for the industry have close connections with those media outlets and stars in the conservative movement. One of their PR firms, which created and staffed a front group in the late '90s to kill the proposed "Patients' Bill of Rights," launched a PR and advertising campaign in conservative media outlets to drum up opposition to the bill.

The message: President Clinton "owed a debt to the liberal base of the Democrat Party and would try to pay back that debt by advancing the type of big government agenda on health care that he failed to get in 1994."

The industry goes to great lengths to keep its involvement in these campaigns hidden from public view. I know from having served on numerous trade group committees and industry-funded front groups, however, that industry leaders are always full partners in developing strategies to derail any reform that might interfere with insurers' ability to increase profits.

So the next time you hear someone warning against a "government takeover" of our health care system, or that the creation of a public health insurance option would send us down the "slippery slope toward socialism," know that someone like I used to be wrote those terms, knowing it might turn many of the very people who would benefit most from meaningful reform into unwitting spokespeople for the industry.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/17/potter.health.insurance/index.html

I might also add that BetseyMc Caughey thoroughly demonstrated that she's a cackling nutbag during her tenure.

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 2:33 PM | Report abuse

President Obama is on the way to joining an exclusive club. It is the club of failed one-term presidents. During the presidential campaign, Mr. Obama sold himself as a pragmatic moderate. In fact, he is the very opposite. He is an internationalist socialist whose policies will lead to ruin at home and defeat abroad. They will also doom his re-election efforts. He is flirting with political disaster.

Mr. Obama is frequently portrayed as the heir to Franklin D. Roosevelt. The more apt analogy, however, is Lyndon Baines Johnson. Just like Mr. Obama, President Johnson believed he could have guns and butter. He sought to implement the Great Society while escalating America's military involvement in Southeast Asia. Unable to choose, Mr. Johnson lost both: His domestic agenda and prosecution of the Vietnam War proved to be disastrous. His reckless ambition reduced his administration to political rubble, costing him any chance for re-election in 1968. This is why he (smartly) decided not to run again.

Social democracy and interventionist nation-building do not work. They destroyed the Johnson presidency and are on the verge of destroying Mr. Obama's as well.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 2:33 PM | Report abuse

President Obama is on the way to joining an exclusive club. It is the club of failed one-term presidents. During the presidential campaign, Mr. Obama sold himself as a pragmatic moderate. In fact, he is the very opposite. He is an internationalist socialist whose policies will lead to ruin at home and defeat abroad. They will also doom his re-election efforts. He is flirting with political disaster.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 2:30 PM | Report abuse

What you are percieving as compelling comedy is actually cognitive dissonance.

You hold the notion that President Obama is a left-wing, tax-and-spend liberal. Therefore, when he does something you might agree with, such as using defense dollars more productively, it goes against your previous notion. Holding both ideas in your head "I hate Obama" and "I agree with Obama on that point" is jarring, and your initial response is laughter--it must be a joke. Or he's lying and we'll catch him at it.

In another 7 or 8 years, the symptoms should abate with your illogical hate of Obama.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 2:29 PM | Report abuse

@BB: I move people to Linux every chance I get. None of them, however nontechnical, are having any problems.

Chinese take on Western names for different reasons than Indians. I work with Indians all the time and I've never known one to take on an American name, that appears to be limited to customer call center workers. But Chinese almost always take on western names here, because we won't pronounce their names right. We'll get the tones wrong, and that's a lot worse to their ears than simple mispronunciation.

Say that Cantonese word for "I" with the wrong tone and it becomes "pear" or "poetry." Say a name wrong and it becomes gibberish. People who speak tonal languages here the tones first and the syllables second. I'm studying Vietnamese and I'm pretty advanced but still years away from hearing the tones first.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 2:28 PM | Report abuse

Administration Official:"Sebelius Misspoke."
"The official asked not to be identified in exchange for providing clarity about the intentions of the President." Clarity. Right. That does it.

White House Acknowledges Unsolicited E-Mails on Health Care
In a weekend long CYA scramble, White House finds "third parties" to blame

More comedy from The Joker.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 2:28 PM | Report abuse

Confession of a former insurance man, about how those on the right are dupes and tools of the big insurance companies:

"It was my job to "promote and defend" the company's reputation and to try to persuade reporters to write positive stories about the industry's ideas on reform. During the last couple of years of my career, however, I became increasingly worried that the high-deductible plans insurers were beginning to push Americans into would force more and more of us into bankruptcy.

The higher I rose in the company, the more I learned about the tactics insurers use to dump policyholders when they get sick, in order to increase profits and to reward their Wall Street investors. I could not in good conscience continue serving as an industry mouthpiece. And I did not want to be part of yet another industry effort to kill meaningful reform.

I explained during the press conference with Rep. Slaughter how the industry funnels millions of its policyholders' premiums to big public relations firms that provide talking points to conservative talk show hosts, business groups and politicians. I also described how the PR firms set up front groups, again using your premium dollars and mine, to scare people away from reform.

What I'm trying to do as I write and speak out against the insurance industry I was a part of for nearly two decades is to inform Americans that when they hear isolated stories of long waiting times to see doctors in Canada and allegations that care in other systems is rationed by "government bureaucrats," someone associated with the insurance industry wrote the original script.

The industry has been engaging in these kinds of tactics for many years, going back to its successful behind-the-scenes campaign to kill the Clinton reform plan.

A story in Friday's New York Times about the origin of the absurdly false rumor that President Obama's health care proposal would create government-sponsored "death panels" bears out what I have been saying."

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 2:28 PM | Report abuse

"The reason? The move the accents of words. Listen next time you get a chance. The acCENT goes on inAPproPRIate sylLAbles. It's jarring."

Well, English is an official language of India and the kids learn it right along with Hindi, so it's usually going to be rural, non-schooled people who didn't learn English early on. But it's more of a British style of English than American. There are a few quirks. The most striking one to me is that they often omit articles before nouns as this is allowed in the major Indian languages. But to me, listening to Indians speak English sounds more like modified British than anything else.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 17, 2009 2:27 PM | Report abuse

Afraid I don't see the comedy, zouk. The Defense Department has remained fixed on a WWII style conflict and on the Cold War while the nature of warfare has shifted to regional insurgencies and ethnic conflicts. What use is a bomber fleet against guys who strap on dynamite vests and blow themselves up in the marketplace?

What good are aircraft carriers against guys who hijack planes and fly them into buildings?

You have a screwy idea of comedy. Take it up with the nurses tomorrow morning when they do the meds.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 2:24 PM | Report abuse

@CF8 - You know, there is a simple remedy to Windows installation problems. Join us, Luke. ;-)

@DDAWD - I had a good friend in grad school who was from India. He went by Tony. I also noticed that some Asian students went by an English nickname as well. I think it made it just a little easier to get by. I didn't think any the less of them for it.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | August 17, 2009 2:23 PM | Report abuse

President Barack Obama took on both the defense establishment and freespending lawmakers on Monday, saying they were draining the defense budget with "exotic projects."


you can't write comedy this compelling.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 2:19 PM | Report abuse

I'm not sure there is anything "below" cut-and-posting from right-wing blogs without attribition. Even if this was a cat fight, it would be above that.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 2:17 PM | Report abuse

I think what bothers me the most about this is that they need to pretend to have American names. Is our country really that bigoted that we can't take customer service from a guy with an Indian name?

==

What bothers me isn't so much the accent, as the accent shift. I finally figured out what it is about Indian accents that's so irritating. I've lived with three lovers none of whom spoke English as their first language and their accents never bothered me for an instant. Yet an Indian accent is like fingernails on chalkboard to me.

The reason? The move the accents of words. Listen next time you get a chance. The acCENT goes on inAPproPRIate sylLAbles. It's jarring.

Anyway, it's not that they need to call themselves Charlie and Skip, so much as that we'll never be able to remember seven-syllable names, no two alike.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Agreed and agreed, margaret.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Justice Roberts and the governor of Hawaii have both cerified Obama's legitimacy. To believe that something as profound as a presidential candidate's eligibility could be "overlooked" shows a riotously thick-witted incomprehension of how the world works.

Of course there is no doubt. This is been established dozens of times, but no amount of documentation will ever satisfy the birthers, because it never really was about where the President was born, it's about the color of his skin.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 2:12 PM | Report abuse

CCCP shows up and the blog spirals down into a cat fight.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 2:11 PM | Report abuse

"That was when customer service representatives started having impenetrable Indian accents"

I think what bothers me the most about this is that they need to pretend to have American names. Is our country really that bigoted that we can't take customer service from a guy with an Indian name?

Posted by: DDAWD | August 17, 2009 2:11 PM | Report abuse

mikeinmidland, I think that anyone who objects to government health insurance but then ACCEPTS government health insurance because they are now old enough to get it, is a hypocrite.

The essay by Dr. Clark is long on opinion and italic, but short on fact and insight. Seeing as his line is gastric bypass, it's only natural that he should be concerned about the financial well-being of the poor insurance companies. I'm sure he would see a 95% drop in his business if that procedure wasn't covered and people had to pay for it themselves. Such a profitable way to use his medical degree.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | August 17, 2009 2:09 PM | Report abuse

When did customer service go down the drain? The 1980s? 90s?

==

Whenever it was that the offshoring started, I believe it really took off in the 90s. That was when customer service representatives started having impenetrable Indian accents and were no help at all, five minutes of boasting about what excellent service was ahead, then going in circles.

Just LOVELY with Microsoft .. you couldn't even start to say what problem you were having before the imcomprehensible fool at the other end was telling you to please be inserting Windows CD and reinstall the whole OS.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 2:08 PM | Report abuse

Please explain how Roberts' actions were not worthy of impeachment, given your hypothesis.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 2:07 PM | Report abuse

"No, scrivner actually posted it a few days ago."

I had no idea.

Posted by: bsimon1 | August 17, 2009 2:00 PM | Report abuse

mikeinmidland:

I do not advocate impeachment of CJ Roberts or the Republican governor of Hawaii (neither of whom "certified" Obama's citizenship). Next canard?

Posted by: JakeD | August 17, 2009 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Ok, people. Friendly reminder that we don't talk to jaked. Let's not get out of hand here.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 17, 2009 1:56 PM | Report abuse

Back to the Obamacare debate:

Former Gov. (and doctor) Howard Dean has criticized any move to delete the "public option" on the Today Show this morning. Very funny stuff.

In addition, pResident Obama addressed the Veterans of Foreign Wars conference in Phoenix today, laying out his strategies for Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan again, saying the way Won't Be 'Easy' in Afghanistan. Oh no ...

Posted by: JakeD | August 17, 2009 1:56 PM | Report abuse

Obviously he is a natural-born citizen, therefore you have no problem with him.

John Roberts is too conservative, and to much of an activist justice for my taste, but he is an extremely smart fellow and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. He dismissed all those nutbar lawsuits back in the fall. Then he administered the Oath of Office to our 44th President.

Unless you advocate impeachment of CJ Roberts, along with the Republican governor of Hawaii (who certified Obama's citizenship), I consider your continued harping on this subject to be illogical.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 1:54 PM | Report abuse

@bsimon1: I foresee her in a donkey act in Tijuana, ending up dead of OD in a hotel room.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Given the news that former Speaker of the House Tom Delay is joining the ranks of washed-up politicians appearing on 'reality' television, what are the predictions for which show the once & future Ms Sarah Heath will appear?

Posted by: bsimon1 | August 17, 2009 1:52 PM | Report abuse

Careful with the vulgar insults, chrisfox8.

==

go to hell you racist swine

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 1:52 PM | Report abuse

"9 out of 10 on 'sadness' points. Did you read The Fix's post before reading scriveners?"

No, scrivner actually posted it a few days ago.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 17, 2009 1:50 PM | Report abuse

It's really fascinating to sit back and watch the deluded nuts slamming health care reform, and especially the public option. These lemmings stand in line at free clinics, crowd into emergency rooms, or watch their children die, and rant about A government takeover of medical care. They spout the talking points handed out to talk radio hosts, many times along with money, without even thinking. Morons.

Similarly, the economy is falling off a cliff, about ready to plunge below those March lows, and fools from both the right and left are blindly spouting the "global economics" nonsense printed in newspapers like this one, and blathered by their elected "representatives". This country has been so shredded and diced by PR firms that we will commit economic and actual suicide and cheer each other on while doing so. Deeds is merely a canary in the mine, dying because the blithering idiots in the general public are too cowardly and too lazy to think for themselves and have opted to let all of those PR firms do it for them. The one thing fortunate is those PR firms are composed of fools blinded by their paycheck and just as suicidal, so the nest they are fouling will choke them to death as certainly as it kills the rest of us.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | August 17, 2009 1:50 PM | Report abuse

Careful with the vulgar insults, chrisfox8.

Posted by: JakeD | August 17, 2009 1:50 PM | Report abuse

libs

==

The word is "liberals," JerkD. You don't see us abbreviating "conservative."

Quit writing like a third grader.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 1:50 PM | Report abuse

"I have a problem with OBAMA if he's not a natural-born citizen."

==

There is no reason to doubt Obama's birth. This is just proxy racism. Obama is black, and you can't deal rationally with that. But calling him a ni66er is not longer acceptable in our society so you fasten on to this phony side issue.

Who exactly do you think you're fooling?

God damned cracker racist. I hope you go to your grave without ever seeing a white male president ever again.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 1:48 PM | Report abuse

mikeinmidland (I think you mis-read):

"I have a problem with OBAMA if he's not a natural-born citizen." Even if he's a natural-born citizen (procedure), I've got big problems with his policies (substance). First things first.

Maybe you could at least let "chrisfox8" know that libs were indeed calling GWB "pResident".

Posted by: JakeD | August 17, 2009 1:44 PM | Report abuse

ddawd asks
"So how sad is it that I actually first learned of the Bob Dylan arrest from a scrivner post?"

9 out of 10 on 'sadness' points. Did you read The Fix's post before reading scriveners? I ask because The Fix wrote, under fix picks:

"5. Bob Dylan: Arrested."

Maybe 10 out of 10 wouldn't be too harsh. And that's sad.

Posted by: bsimon1 | August 17, 2009 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Did you denounce your side calling GWB "pResident"? No, I didn't think so. I have no problem with an African-American as President (I voted for Alan Keyes last time around).

==

I never saw Bush called "pResident" once in eight years, and I certainly never called him that. On the other hand, I couldn't bring myself to respect him, but I didn't defile his title as you do. He was not worthy of respect, and what he got from his office he squandered with "bring it on" and "mission accomplished" and other sophomoric stunts. He also brought the United States into disgrace even more than Reagan did and that's saying a lot.

As for your Keyes vote, well, given that most everything you post here is a lie it's safe to presume that's one too. And even if so, Keyes is a nutbar first and a black man only incidentally. For a nutbar like you to vote for a nutbar like him really doesn't mean much.

You post racist swill here every day, all day.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 1:38 PM | Report abuse


Glad to hear you have no problem with President Obama, Jake. Now how about you try giving him a fraction of the respect that McCain, John Roberts, and Nancy Reagan give him?

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 1:35 PM | Report abuse

Uh, reports are that the reason Palin is divorcing is because both she and Todd cheated on each other.

So here's this vicious stupid woman sneering and mocking her way through the campaign last year, parading her family with their whackado0dle names around as an example of wholesomeness and moral purity, and all the time they're screwing around on each other, not to mention waving around the mentally retarded infant by one leg for political points.

Pure hypocrisy.

More Palin implosions ahead.

Let's see her run in '12.

(*chortle*)

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 1:34 PM | Report abuse

BREAKING NEWS:

House Democratic leaders now say the House will put off a vote on health reform until the END of September (although officials say a "public option" will remain in their version of a health reform bill, even now that the White House has acknowledged it may be dropped later).

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/26180.html

LOL!!!

Posted by: JakeD | August 17, 2009 1:34 PM | Report abuse

"A singer who continued to smoke and now can barely croak?"

No one is perfect. And he's still good.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 17, 2009 1:33 PM | Report abuse

mikeinmidland:

Thanks.

chrisfox8:

Did you denounce your side calling GWB "pResident"? No, I didn't think so. I have no problem with an African-American as President (I voted for Alan Keyes last time around). I have a problem with OBAMA if he's not a natural-born citizen.

Posted by: JakeD | August 17, 2009 1:32 PM | Report abuse

So how sad is it that I actually first learned of the Bob Dylan arrest from a scrivner post?

==

Who cares about Bob Dylan? Far as I'm concerned he peakes in the early 70s. A singer who continued to smoke and now can barely croak?

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 1:31 PM | Report abuse

pResident Obama's

==

How infantile.

Hey, it was only a week ago that "Gov." "Sarah Palin" was sneering that the press for reporting her divorce, saying they were "making things up."

Does the fact that "she" will soon be single and "available" excite you? Will that make your sessions with her Runner's World gam pics more stimulating?

Hey JerkD, quit it with the "pResident" crap. And the long form crap. Obama is the President of the United States. Show some respect, even if you can't stand having a black president.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | August 17, 2009 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Well, Jake, I would never call you a hypocrite and a liar. You have never posted anything here that could be proved in a court of law to be slander.

And certainly you would never take advantage of a government program while at the same time claiming it was unconstitutional--that would be hypocritical.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for the clarification though: (only) Ronald Reagan and Sarah Palin are "liars and hypocrites".

Posted by: JakeD | August 17, 2009 1:22 PM | Report abuse

So how sad is it that I actually first learned of the Bob Dylan arrest from a scrivner post?

Posted by: DDAWD | August 17, 2009 1:21 PM | Report abuse

P.S. the Boland Amendment(s) were un-Constitutional.

Posted by: JakeD | August 17, 2009 1:18 PM | Report abuse

mikeinmidland:

No, I was concerned you were claiming that I am a "liar and hypocrite" -- since your post was, in part, a response to my point about Ronald Reagan being divorced -- I guess that she's been called worse by better than you.

Posted by: JakeD | August 17, 2009 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Oh, I guess I mentioned your God, Ronald Reagan, at the same time. I do not regard him a hypocrite for kowtowing to the Moral Majority despite being divorced.

He was, however, a liar and a hypocrite for selling arms to Iran in order to illegally fund the Nicaraguan Contras.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 1:17 PM | Report abuse

In other "political" news, former House Majority Leader Tom "the Hammer" DeLay will be a "Dancing with the Stars" contestant starting next month. LOL!!!

Posted by: JakeD | August 17, 2009 1:10 PM | Report abuse

mtcooley:

I guess you've forgotten about all of pResident Obama's campaign promises?

Posted by: JakeD | August 17, 2009 1:09 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin is a liar and a hypocrite.

Who did you think I was writing about--Tina Fey?

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 1:06 PM | Report abuse

Ok, then give me the quote where Obama says the pediatrician performs the tonsillectomy.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 17, 2009 1:05 PM | Report abuse

Lede story on CNN.com:

"After weeks of battles over proposed health care reforms, the debate is now focused on whether the government will offer a public insurance option. The administration stepped back from insistenting on the option over the weekend, with President Obama saying it is "not the entirety of health care reform." Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told CNN's "State of the Union" that a public plan is "not the essential element."

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/17/health.care/index.html

LOL!!!

Posted by: JakeD | August 17, 2009 1:05 PM | Report abuse

>>you and "drindl" seem to think that Obamaniacs won't fault him for withdrawing the "public option" -- I just wanted to see if you are going to also claim that he wasn't even involved in the negotiations.

Why would I fault the President on something he attempted to push through and failed due to lack of party support and public support? It's not like it got implimented or anything at this point beyond the planning stages.

I mean seriously you're going to crucify him because a policy which at this point is pretty much DOA was worked on. I mean seriously how shallow and naive are you in the world of politics? Surely when the same thing happened to Clinton he totally fell apart politically.

Posted by: mtcooley | August 17, 2009 1:04 PM | Report abuse

mikeinmidland:

Who are you calling "Liar and hypocrite"?

Posted by: JakeD | August 17, 2009 1:04 PM | Report abuse


President Obama is a Constitutional scholar, unlike his "daddy-bought-me-an-MBA" predecessor. He understands and respects the limits of his office. It is his job to lead on issues he believes are vital to the country, but not to write legislation. That's congress's job.

How hard he is pushing for health care reform is obvious. Exactly which portions are vital to him and which are negotiating positions are best known to him alone.

Hoping, praying or prematurely claiming that health care is Obama's "Waterloo" will not make it so.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 1:03 PM | Report abuse

king_of_zouk:

Even "DDAWD" realizes that the Democrats are going to take the heat for this one; I was just having a little fun pointing out this inconvenient truth.

Posted by: JakeD | August 17, 2009 1:03 PM | Report abuse

ddawd, this was when he went off prompter at his town halls/press conferences. He claimed pediatricians perform tonsilectomies for the money. On another occasion he quoted a price of 30,000 for a foot removal. the medicare price is $1050.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 1:02 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: amsatprovider3 | August 17, 2009 1:01 PM | Report abuse

he wasn't even involved in the negotiations.

Posted by: JakeD


My guess would be "PRESENT". and hence the leadership vacuum that is Lib legislation.

Bush made the same error with social security. How about a listening tour to gather ideas? the sign that you have none of your own and that your finger is in the wind.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 12:59 PM | Report abuse

"A doctor responds to Obama's NYT op-ed
G. Wesley Clark, MD
Mr. President, I just read your op-ed in the New York Times. You must either be incredibly ignorant (e.g., pediatricians performing tonsillectomies, surgeons being paid $50,000 for an amputation), or else you believe that Americans are incredibly stupid."

Hey, if you want to believe that Obama doesn't know what a pediatrician is, then be my guest.

But let me give you the link for Obama's op-ed. Can you quote where there's anything about pediatrician performing tonsilectomies?
Hell, just find me an incidence of the word "pediatrician"

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/16/opinion/16obama.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&ref=opinion

It's only two pages and you're oh so very smart. Can you point it out to us simpleton libs, please?

Also, can you find me the part about amputations? Perhaps there's a third page us libs aren't smart enough to find.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 17, 2009 12:57 PM | Report abuse

@Fairlington Blade:

McCain was tied with Obama at this point last year in Virginia polling, then pulled out a lead when he picked Northern Legs. That lead held until the end of September.

Virginia wasn't even supposed to be a battleground state. That's all I'm saying.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 12:55 PM | Report abuse

mtcooley:

Yes, I'm sure you chastized those who used the same exact "title" for GWB -- regardless, you and "drindl" seem to think that Obamaniacs won't fault him for withdrawing the "public option" -- I just wanted to see if you are going to also claim that he wasn't even involved in the negotiations.

Posted by: JakeD | August 17, 2009 12:54 PM | Report abuse

>>Which one is it then, pResident Obama was deeply and personally involved in back room negotiations on healthcare, or not?

It's President Obama. Even if you don't agree with him show him some respect. Many of us here do still respect that office regardless of who holds it. Immature troll.

Also that doesn't have any bearing of the willingness of the other party to negotiate. Even if he is involved ultimately it's the other's decision on what to do and I don't think there is going to necessarily be any reason for them to take carrots if it risks their constituency. It's one of the classic downfalls to democracy. Change is curtailed by fear of voter reaction and we're steadily reaching the point of ineffectiveness and stagnation. Which is frankly a worse thought to me.

Posted by: mtcooley | August 17, 2009 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Today, Rasmussen reports a new Strongly Disapprove high for President Obama, 41%, as his overall approval revisits his previous low of 47%.


now where did I put those Greek columns???
Can we get another puppy to cure this???

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 12:47 PM | Report abuse

A doctor responds to Obama's NYT op-ed
G. Wesley Clark, MD
Mr. President, I just read your op-ed in the New York Times. You must either be incredibly ignorant (e.g., pediatricians performing tonsillectomies, surgeons being paid $50,000 for an amputation), or else you believe that Americans are incredibly stupid.


You justify a hasty and massive healthcare "reform" to save money, by spending an additional trillion dollars. You would fix a "broken" and broke Medicare system by adding another 47 million beneficiaries to government programs while arguing this will reduce overall costs.


I've itemized your inaccurate claims, with my comments in italics.


You assert that your healthcare reform will:

Force insurance companies to insure pre-existing conditions. That's like allowing bettors to wait till after the race has been run, to place their bets. That won't cut costs.
Eliminate lifetime limits on coverage. Unlimited lifetime coverages must increase premiums to pay for them and will raise total costs.
Require insurance companies to pay for routine examinations, preventive care, and screening tests like mammograms and colonoscopies. Once again, how can you be insured against a sure thing? The only way my company can pay for a colonoscopy is to add enough onto the premium to pay for it, plus their overhead.
Make Medicare more efficient, so tax dollars won't enrich insurance companies. Insurance companies do not derive income from Medicare, because it is a federal program. Incidentally, its costs per patient have increased much faster than private insurance.
Cut hundreds of billions of dollars in waste and inefficiency in federal health programs like Medicare and Medicaid. These programs have been in effect over 40 years -- and I've seen the waste and inefficiency for most of that interval. Did you just find out about the waste and inefficiency now, and why hasn't something already been done about it?


Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 12:43 PM | Report abuse

mikeinmidland:

Who are you calling "Liar and hypocrite"?

Posted by: JakeD | August 17, 2009 12:41 PM | Report abuse

Self-identified conservatives outnumber self-identified liberals in all 50 states of the union, according to the Gallup Poll. At the same time, more Americans nationwide are saying this year that they are conservative than have made that claim in any of the last four years.

Keep digging Libs. the effect of your policies is beginning to show.

Maybe we're just not that into you??? surely you have experienced this in your personal life.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Oh, I'm sure the conservative democrats are getting an earful back home from all sorts of directions.

I think Obama's lukewarm endorsement of the public option was due to seeing the difficulty in getting it passed. The real problem is writing it in such a way that it is competitive without being predatory.

That didn't concern me too much because I really wouldn't mind if it was predatory, and everyone ended up with "Medicare for the rest of us." The insurance companies would not fold; they'd be administering it just like they administer Gov. employee health care and Medicare.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Mike, he's going to stick up for her regardless so it does no good to try to point out anything to him.

I mean heck last week he was maligning Brinkley's comment about Palin because she was a divorced woman. But of course that's not going to apply to Sarah Palin. She's infallible or something. Frankly I think the woman is a few bricks shy of a full load.

Posted by: mtcooley | August 17, 2009 12:38 PM | Report abuse

FairlingtonBlade:

Very funny.

Posted by: JakeD


except drivl has already posted it at all her moonbat websites as fact. but the level of analysis and intellect is in accord.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 12:37 PM | Report abuse

mtcooley:

Which one is it then, pResident Obama was deeply and personally involved in back room negotiations on healthcare, or not?

Posted by: JakeD | August 17, 2009 12:36 PM | Report abuse

@mikeinmidland - I think you're misreading Virginia. Outside of NoVa and Richmond, Virginia is still a conservative state. However, Virginia now has urban areas with different priorities. The Republicans have been losing the suburbs and this changes the outlook. One could hardly be shocked that Obama might win Virginia given that the last four Senate and Gubernatorial races have been won by Democrats.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | August 17, 2009 12:35 PM | Report abuse

FairlingtonBlade:

Very funny.

Posted by: JakeD | August 17, 2009 12:34 PM | Report abuse

To quote Tina Fey, "I believe marriage is meant to be a sacred institution between two unwilling teenagers."

Lucky for those teenagers that Sarah isn't the VP, or they would have had to go through with the shotgun wedding.

Yeah, Reagan got divorced while he was a Hollywood actor. That's a bit different from showing off your strong marriage and wonderful family to the country, and then dissolving it a year later.

Liar and hypocrite.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 12:31 PM | Report abuse

@drindl - Just released statement from the office of the ex-Governor:

I am determined to take the right path for my marriage even though it is unconventional and not so comfortable. My choice is to take a stand and effect change – not hit our heads against the wall and watch valuable time and money go down the drain in this new environment. Rather, we know we can effect positive change outside marriage at this moment in time, on another scale, and actually make a difference for our priorities – and so we will, for ourselves, our family, and Americans.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | August 17, 2009 12:31 PM | Report abuse

wow, according to moonbats the entire country is so stoopid that they don't even want to ruin their health care to pray at the alter of government takeover.

As if cars, banks, energy, mail, taxes, military, disaster, schools, retirement, the existing government medical programs, the stimulus, even a simple thing like cash for clunkers, trains and even food are not enough for them to screw up.

Keep digging Libs.

the further off teleprompter you get, the funnier it becomes.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 12:30 PM | Report abuse

What's even more amazing in Bozo Obama's slipping poll numbers among independents, is that it's happening DESPITE the American Main Stream Media's combined efforts to do everything they can to cheerlead for him and his Marxist agenda. DESPITE the MSM's censorship of all news that might damage him politically. DESPITE the fact that they've tried to put lipstick on the pig of every one of Obama's gambits. And DESPITE their probaganda efforts to try to cheap-shot and to destroy the reputations and characters of all Americans, who disagree with their tin foil little god Obama.

Posted by: armpeg | August 17, 2009 12:30 PM | Report abuse

>>IF the public option is dropped from the legislation, it will be in negotiations between liberal and conservative Democrats in congress.

I don't agree with that. It's downfall is shaping up to be by and large at the hands of ignorant, mostly elderly constituents on both sides of the aisle. The town halls and protests are ridiculous and will cause the majority of the more conservative democrats to avoid it completely. I am starting to doubt they'll even want to negotiate.

And then we all suffer because the status quo remains unchanged. I'd even take minor regulation changes over none at all.

Posted by: mtcooley | August 17, 2009 12:28 PM | Report abuse

"If the public option doesn't pass, Obama supporters will not likely blame him, but rather the dishonest R leadership who have frightened voters by telling them Obama wants to kill them.

Posted by: drindl"

Nah, the Democrats are going to take the heat for this one as they should.

We've had two wave elections, a dominant majority in Congress, an almost historical majority in the Senate, a President who had double the votes of his opponent. And yet Democrats are still running scared of progressive change. The public option was killed by the blue dogs just as much as any Republican.

And Democrats have been doing this for as long as I can remember. They want to pander to the Rush crowd as much as the Republicans do and end up paying for it at the ballot box.

It's just ridiculous. The public option isn't liberal overreaching. This is exactly what the public wanted when they overwhelmingly voted for Obama last year. It's something that has polled well. However, a few bucks from the insurance companies and a few screamers at town halls have the Democrats quaking in their boots.

With Bush and his much slimmer majority, the Republicans were able to pass a myriad of upper class tax cuts, start two wars, give a trillion dollars to oil companies, and weaken environmental laws. Yes, Democrats didn't create an environment where 60 votes were needed to pass every damn thing, but Dems haven't been showing much backbone even with their huge numbers.

Enthusiasm is gone to wan for them and it's reasons like this that it will.

But hey, I just got Federal funding for my research, so I've been switched to Fed. health insurance. At least I've got mine, right? Let's see how the people who aren't so lucky respond at the polls.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 17, 2009 12:27 PM | Report abuse

It's OK, drindl, even Ronald Reagan was divorced.

Posted by: JakeD | August 17, 2009 12:24 PM | Report abuse

"watch the creature circle back to spew some hate. when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail."

I don't think it's polite to call Sarah a "creature."

wrt the article, I agree that it is a little disengenuous to lump the "doesn't matter" crowd into the "less likely" crowd to infer that Obama's support is a loser for two-thirds of Virginians.

Yes, Obama won Virginia, narrowly, last November. A year ago you couldn't find a single Republican in Virginia that would have believed it. It's still a conservative state.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 12:23 PM | Report abuse

sorry, i see that now dawd, but as I said, I still think it's making a mountain out of a molehill.

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 12:19 PM | Report abuse

Obviously the country is not being run from Sarah Palin's facebook page. The fact that she simple-mindedly and fallaciously added her opinion to a chorus of insurance-company shills doesn't convey any influence, let alone political power.

IF the public option is dropped from the legislation, it will be in negotiations between liberal and conservative Democrats in congress.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | August 17, 2009 12:18 PM | Report abuse

DDawd - numbers are logical

moonbats, not so much.

watch the creature circle back to spew some hate. when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 12:15 PM | Report abuse

"Maybe you ought to go back and check your poll numbers.

I see the poll evenly split -- so I don't see where your coming from.

It says 'does the support of President Obama make you more or less likely to vote for Deeds?

And the answer is :

34% -- more likely----------- 34% less likely."

Um, he does state this in the column.

And yes, it's even, but that's not what you'd expect from a state that Obama dominated a year ago.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 17, 2009 12:12 PM | Report abuse

"or a gaggle of splooge-brained Clockwork Orange droogies begging to drool on his Health Scare plan in the Granite State."

pretty accurate description of your fellow wingers, zouk. who'd you plagerize it from?

As for the 'Achtung, baby!' -- you folks on the right sure seems obbssessed with Hitler. Why do you suppose that is?

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 12:06 PM | Report abuse

The always wobbly Ms. Palin seems to be divorcing...

9:20pm Saturday - AlaskaReport.com receives letter from Palin lawyer Van Flein evidently confirming some details

"AlaskaReport has learned that Todd Palin and former Alaska governor Sarah Palin are to divorce. Multiple sources in Wasilla and Anchorage (including a former Palin staffer) have confirmed the split. The sources preferred to remain anonymous for fear of repercussions from the Palins and their coworkers."

http://www.alaskareport.com/news39/x71283_divorce_palins.htm

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 12:03 PM | Report abuse

Y’know, our good old Mr. Hope & Change has a cabal handy at the drop of the red fez, whether it’s ACORN lug nuts ready to register Mickey Mouse to vote, some SEIU hooligans waiting to whup a conservative black guy’s butt outside a town hall meeting, or a gaggle of splooge-brained Clockwork Orange droogies begging to drool on his Health Scare plan in the Granite State. Achtung, baby!


Now, thanks to Obama’s Rent-a-Mob, thoughtless people watching this past week’s Clown Hall were left thinking after Tuesday’s tête-à-tête that everyone is cool with his granny-slaying, obfuscated to the hundredth power, 1,100 page bill (Or is it bills? Heck, who knows?). Yes, “everyone loves it, everyone wants it by tomorrow, and unicorns and centaurs are real!”

The high low point (or low high point) in Obama’s deceptive dance was when they trotted out little Julia Hall, you know, the daughter of Kathleen Manning Hall, the high rolling operative who ran Massachusetts Women for Obama during the election? Little Julia was so worried about the “mean things” people were saying about Obama, and she was wondering how kiddos can “know what is true, and why do people want a new system that can help more of us?”

I couldn’t believe it. When the White House trotted that little pony out it was the final straw that made me think they must believe we are a bunch of stupid, stupid ba*tards. Or, or, the white House, blinded by hubris, has just moved into daft mode and gone stupid. Yeah, the conservatives are the ones who are fabricating questions and protests. Puh-lease. After that SNL moment I was expecting Barack to turn to Will Ferrell dressed up like Jesus in the audience for the next softball puff query. Where are Penn and Teller when you need ‘em?

Yes, Virginia, when I saw the ‘prompter mechanically collapse into the stage and realized B-HO was about to go off script, I thought, “Yee-frickin’-haw. What’s he gonna say, Lord? Is he going to insult an upstanding white cop? Is he gonna channel Michelle and call America a mean nation?” Nope, he compared his health care bill to a crappy postal system. Obamacare is going postal.


Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 12:02 PM | Report abuse

If, as is being reported, President Barack Obama is prepared to pull the plug on his previously vigorous support for a government-run public healthcare option, the president’s stinging policy defeat will have come as the result of his Administration’s mendacious policy rhetoric marked by its snobbish dismissal of critiques from concerned townhall participants and, most notably, former Governor Sarah Palin.

What Democrats seem unwilling to grasp is that there is an inverse relationship between how harshly Democrats demonize their opponents and how devastatingly silly they subsequently appear when those same conservative “simpletons” triumph over them in the policy arena.

Now ask yourself this question: If conservatives like Gov. Sarah Palin are such vaporous fools, then how can they “hijack” a national debate from the most powerful man on the planet…and all with a simple Facebook posting no less?

Indeed, if Sarah Palin is the “whack job” and “intellectual lightweight” Mr. Begala claims her to be, then what does that make Mr. Obama who, according to Ms. Dowd, just got his clock cleaned by a Facebook message written by the unserious likes of a “nutty puppy” like Ms. Palin?

And therein lies the rub: Democratic elitism never ceases to backfire. The worse liberals trash Sarah Palin and all those insurance company shills (a.k.a. everyday Americans) showing up at townhall meetings across America, the more devastating Mr. Obama’s defeat will be if and when he officially reneges on his much-touted support for a government takeover of healthcare.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 11:56 AM | Report abuse

The big question for President Barack Obama right now isn't about health care, but his own political survival.

If he fails to deliver health legislation, Obama will prove right those who said he was in over his head. That would make him something of a lame duck after only seven months in office.

But if he does manage to squeeze a bill out of Congress, it would be a Pyrrhic victory. By delivering unwanted changes to unwilling voters on a life-or-death issue, the president would squander the goodwill he earned during the campaign.

.........
But worse for Obama, his end run damaged what was once his greatest asset -- the belief among voters that he was something different.

Endless evasions and then a crackdown on opponents has made Obama look like just another president -- and a cynical one at that.

Emotionally invoking his grandmother's November death over the weekend to shame his critics was just the latest in a series of shoddy ploys.

Can President Obama escape the wreckage of his health care effort? Yes, but only if he stops being so slippery and starts leveling with voters.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | August 17, 2009 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Sorry, that should read 61% 'definitely vote' for Deeds and 50% 'definitely vote' for McDonnell....

Posted by: RickJ | August 17, 2009 11:48 AM | Report abuse

I wouldn't start writing Deeds obituary yet. As usual, not all the poll results are reported. Looking further into the results, 61% say they're likely to vote for Deeds with only 35% saying they could change their mind. IN contrast, only 50% say they're likely to vote for McDonnell and 46% say they could change their mind. This is hardly a ringing endorsement of McDonnell....

Posted by: RickJ | August 17, 2009 11:46 AM | Report abuse

trep1-
I think reason5 is correct in so much that Specter, like Lieberman, could lose the primary in the face of a more traditional Dem primary opponent. You are right that the loser cannot run in the general as an R. I think reason's point is that this benefits Toomey, who is more viable in PA than whomever the sacrificial lamb had been in the Lieberman-Lamont race. This last point is the most debatable: is Toomey viable in PA, or will he get Santorumed?

Posted by: bsimon1 | August 17, 2009 11:30 AM | Report abuse

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_08/019508.php

This is a piece I think media-watchers will enjoy, by Bruce Bartlett, a veteran of the Reagan and H.W. Bush administrations

"The expansion of television news from the traditional 30 minutes per night on just three networks to 24 hours a day on several cable channels. The talking head format fit nicely into segments between advertising breaks and it just caught on. But as time went by I think that knowledgeable, responsible commentators got tired of the format, decided it was a very poor way of getting their points across, and mostly stopped doing it. Also, scholars will tend to agree with each other too often to make good television. So they were replaced by political hacks who know that their only job is to get the talking points of the day across and do everything possible to discredit their opponent. This has led to a deterioration in discourse that benefits those most willing to be outrageous."

"Far-right conservatives of recent eras have been every bit as hysterical, irresponsible, and ridiculous as the one we see today, and as Rick noted, in recent generations, they were dismissed as "extremists" outside the American mainstream, and unworthy of serious thought.

Fox News, however, changes the game. If you're crazy, Fox News will have you on as a guest to spew nonsense. If you're really crazy, Fox News will give you a show of your own to spew nonsense all the time."

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 11:29 AM | Report abuse

On top of that, according to this weekend's Washington Post poll, likely independent voters lean Republican by a margin of 20-11. The Post provides similar data that goes all the way back to 1993...and the next largest margin was 12-10 back in 2001.

In other words, Republicans in Virginia are winning swing voters by the widest margin in at least 16 years.

I go into more detail here: http://thirdbasepolitics.blogspot.com/2009/08/its-all-in-numbers.html

Posted by: ThirdBasePolitics | August 17, 2009 11:24 AM | Report abuse

Reason5, your comparison with CT Senate race does not work well because PA has a "sore loser" claus. Who loses the Dem primary is out (as I understand it). Lieberman won because he got enough Repblucan votes in a three-way race. I do not think that this would be possible in PA.

Posted by: trep1 | August 17, 2009 11:14 AM | Report abuse

"folks on Medicare seem content-- people in their late 50's look forward to qaulifying. "

margaret is sure right about this. most of us just hope with the skimpy care we get now, that we live that long.

you are right, mark, it just seems a very slight point to hang a premise on. there are more relevant numbers in the poll.

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 11:12 AM | Report abuse

If the public option doesn't pass, Obama supporters will not likely blame him, but rather the dishonest R leadership who have frightened voters by telling them Obama wants to kill them.

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 11:07 AM | Report abuse

No "public option".

Posted by: JakeD | August 17, 2009 10:58 AM | Report abuse

fluf, if the GOP had any ideas higher than my ankles I wouldn't have to grab at low hanging fruit.

They flood the air and the internet with lies, and are willfully misdirecting their electorate. The gov't already manages several health programs that run well. The folks on Medicare seem content-- people in their late 50's look forward to qaulifying.
VA hospitals used to be a mess, but they are much improved, and cutting edge in some areas (still have a way to go).
Medicaide is swamped with applicants that will find better coverage available once the existing system is reformed to benefit subscribers not insurers.
Soldiers and their families are happy with the services they receive.
The Federal Employee Health Benefit program supplies well-defined policies at fair prices for all non-miltary Federal employees across the country -- this is the same insurance Congress has (this is the insurance people at the Town Halls are always asking for). It pays for itself the same way private industry pays for health insurance. FEHB is the model for the reform bills now in Congress. So if the public really wants the same insurance Congress has, they should press for the reform bills.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | August 17, 2009 10:47 AM | Report abuse

With the problems Obama is facing, and likely another problem here if he passes a bill without the public option on healthcare (very likely), the left will also be highly upset. This could be a disastrous deal for Deeds & Corzine. McDonnell already leads Deeds by a good big and he's a great campaigner, fundraiser and he's way ahead in the race. In NJ, it looks like Corzine is trying to make a comeback but is still down & hated by the people of New Jersey. But this poll is more good news for the McDonnell campaign.

It's something else that Sestek leads Specter among Democratic activists 48%-10%. This reminds me of the 2006 D primary between Lieberman vs. Lamont. Could Specter be in for the same fate? The Washington crowd vs. the Netroots. Nasty, nasty fight! Except this time, Pat Toomey is actually going to benefit where there was no Republican to benefit in the Conn. 2006 race.

In Texas, that's gonna be some primary. I still have to mark Rick Perry as the favorite. It will be very hard fought & tough. Perry vs. Huctchinson & Specter vs. Sestek in the same election primary cycle is a political junkies dream!

Posted by: reason5 | August 17, 2009 10:44 AM | Report abuse

drindl, unless he is misreporting the numbers, CC does explain the issue: the Prez campaigning will slightly hurt Dees with Indies.

"...just 23 percent of Independents said the support of Obama increased their likelihood of voting for Deeds while 37 percent said it made them less likely to support the Democratic nominee."

Posted by: mark_in_austin | August 17, 2009 10:43 AM | Report abuse

Also, asked if a abortion should be legal, 55% said it should in either 'all' or 'most' cases.

Also, asked if W's endorsement would make them more or less likely to vote for Kilgore, 47% said 'less' while 26% said 'more.'

Seems like pretty selective cherry-picking of numbers which you perceive as Bad for Democrats.

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 10:43 AM | Report abuse

NOTE TO CC:

Maybe you ought to go back and check your poll numbers.

I see the poll evenly split -- so I don't see where your coming from.

It says 'does the support of President Obama make you more or less likely to vote for Deeds?

And the answer is :

34% -- more likely----------- 34% less likely.

COULD YOU PLEASE STATE YOU GOT YOUR NUMBERS?

Because it isn't in this poll.

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Another link worth promoting: is it time to stop the war on drugs?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/16/AR2009081601758.html

Posted by: bsimon1 | August 17, 2009 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Joked's hopes will be dashed, once independents see the GOP alternative to Obama in 2012 will be a rightwingnut loon.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | August 17, 2009 10:31 AM | Report abuse

drindl writes
" in the poll, after jobs, the second most important issue to VA voters is 'health care reform.'"

Interestng point. You have to wonder how that will play out among Virginians. Do they view HC Reform as a state responsibility, or as one for the Feds?

Posted by: bsimon1 | August 17, 2009 10:28 AM | Report abuse

Joked praying for the president to fail. Typical con.

It's sad, Margaret, that Ross even had to say such an utterly stupid thing. But people have gotten so terrified he really has to reassure them that he won't murder them, as certain irresponsible people in the gop leadership have been warning.

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 10:27 AM | Report abuse

Perhaps a far more important point, CC -- one that you didn't choose to mention -- is that in the poll, after jobs, the second most important issue to VA voters is 'health care reform.'

Posted by: drindl | August 17, 2009 10:23 AM | Report abuse

Let us hope and pray that Obama's hold on Independents continues to fade.

Posted by: JakeD | August 17, 2009 10:12 AM | Report abuse

Wow. "The economic perils of affluent individuals."

I honestly wonder why people try to write things like this. I've never lived in a family that made that much, I will probably never make that much a year, and yet they want some kind of sympathy for not being able to shop at Ann Taylor whenever they want?

I wonder how they'd take not being able to afford a light bill or groceries.

Posted by: mtcooley | August 17, 2009 9:50 AM | Report abuse

AndyR's point about a brightening economic picture helping the Ds is seemingly valid.

see:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/16/AR2009081601757.html?wpisrc=newsletter&wpisrc=newsletter

wherein Fareed Zakaria describes how we came together to meet the immediate financial crisis and contrasts that to how poorly we are meeting the long term fiscal crises of burgeoning health care costs and dependence on foreign oil. A good op-ed on its own merits, but he points out that it will not be beyond the opposition to claim the economy would have rebounded without federal intervention. After all, to each individual voter the TARP seems disembodied and unrelated to what he is doing unless s/he works for a bank. The stimulus package seems even more removed. Ds should get a bump, but Rs will certainly be able to minimize it.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | August 17, 2009 9:42 AM | Report abuse

I have an older friend in Virginia who is a West Point graduate and life-long Republican, who walked away from the party last fall and has not looked back. He likes Obama's leadership qualities and decisive actions, greatly admires Michelle as First Lady, and is very upset by what has become of the GOP, including Rush Limbaugh who he previously liked. He has not put it this way, but I think "the Republican Party left him, he didn't leave the Republican Party," to paraphrase Ronald Reagan. Still, I think of him as a Republican at heart, so I was amazed to learn that he voted in the Democratic primary this spring, of course for Creigh Deeds.

To me, the lasting effect of the 2008 election was that it shook up some conservative or Republican (or conservative independent) Virginia voters enough so they at least considered voting for a Democrat or changing the voting patterns of a lifetime. Without the experience of 2008, my friend would be an automatic McDonnell voter. Now, the challenge is for Creigh Deeds to keep that unexpected vote and earn others like it.

I suspect my friend, though admiring Obama, doesn't care one way or the other about the Obama endorsement, which of course is what any Democratic president would offer. He cares about cementing his new interest in Deeds with concrete, clear proposals and leadership decisions from Deeds that show why he would be a better governor than McDonnell. Focusing on McDonnell's pro-life record, however extreme or out of the mainstream it may be, is not the solution for landing this particular vote.

Posted by: fairfaxvoter | August 17, 2009 9:41 AM | Report abuse

Deeds doesn't have a dilemna. He will take the money that Obama can raise for him and then have Mark Warner in the commercials that he is going to run. Also I would expect that if the economic indicators continue to look up the numbers in that poll will start to switch to be in favor of the Obama endorsement.

Posted by: AndyR3 | August 17, 2009 9:16 AM | Report abuse

CC, you forgot to mention that the Conservative party in the NY 23 also nominated a candidate (Huffman) instead of supporting the GOP pick. There basically said she wasn't conservative enough (she is pro-choice and for equal rights for same-sex couples).
As we all know special elections are about turnout and if the conservative party members which are a decent part of the dedicated GOP base vote for their candidate the Democrat (who is a registered independent) could win. The DCCC should really think about dropping some serious cash into this election and they might just steal one.

Posted by: AndyR3 | August 17, 2009 9:03 AM | Report abuse

Wow, Ms. Meyers is grabbing for the low-hanging fruit on this one. You're arguing that it's the republican party's fault that a democratic senator is spewing bologna? That's a new one on me and just goes to show how far Obama's backers will go to preserve his image. Can't stand to see him soiled! Don't worry, after 4 years of the kind of smut the you democrats put Bush through, Obama will have a nice callused surface - he'll be able to take anything!

Posted by: fluF_puf | August 17, 2009 8:44 AM | Report abuse

Deeds is falling into a conservative trap. Any help he gets from any president is important for him in this race. The GOP obviously doesn't want Obama campaigning in VA, so they're cooking up scare tactics to feed to the media...

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: parkerfl1 | August 17, 2009 7:58 AM | Report abuse

URGENT: President Obama, WH staff, members of Congress, cabinet secretaries

THE U.S. GOVERNMENT HAS WEAPONIZED THE ELECTROMAGNETIC SPECTRUM.

MICROWAVE / LASER 'DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPON' SYSTEMS HAVE BEEN DEPLOYED TO DEGRADE THE LIVES OF UNJUSTLY TARGETED AMERICANS AND THEIR FAMILIES.

A GOV'T-OVERSEEN CIVILIAN VIGILANTE GESTAPO USES COVERTLY IMPLANTED GPS DEVICES AND CELL PHONES TO STALK AND HARASS THOUSANDS OF UNJUSTLY TARGETED AMERICANS...

...IN EVERY COUNTY IN THE COUNTRY.

***

PRESIDENT OBAMA: WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT THE DEPLOYMENT OF DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONS...

...AND WHEN WILL YOU BAN THEIR USE ON U.S. CITIZENS?

...AND BAN THE WARRANTLESS GPS / CELL PHONE TRACKING OF INDIVIDUALS...

...THE ELECTRONIC BACKBONE OF AN AMERICAN GESTAPO THAT IS OPERATING ON YOUR WATCH.


http://nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-network-terrorizes-america

OR (if link is corrupted / disabled):

http://NowPublic.com/scrivener RE: "GESTAPO USA" ("stream" or "stories" list).

***

BOB DYLAN'S 'W.W.I.' (WALKING WITHOUT I.D.): THE JOHN LENNON TREATMENT?

http://nowpublic.com/world/dylans-w-w-i-walking-without-id-john-lennon-treatment

Posted by: scrivener50 | August 17, 2009 7:42 AM | Report abuse

If Congressman Ross has to make a point of saying THAT in an interview America is going cracker-dog. The conservative opposition has no concern for the well being of America or Americans, and there is no vicious, malicious lie they will not feed to their rabid following to get them worked-up and vocal.

The GOP and conservatives are forcing a dangerous game on our country. They care more about "winning" than about a healthy citizenry or a healthy Democracy.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | August 17, 2009 7:00 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company