The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

When does the head of the Democratic Party refuse to endorse the Democratic nominee in the MOST Democratic state in the union.

In the age of Obama it seems.

Obama's Press secretary said that Obama was not endorsing the Democratic nominee for governor of Rhode island because Obama and former Republican Senator Chaffee, who now has taken the lead in the polls since Obama's visit to R.I., were "friends."

WHAT!?

Let us remember that in 2006, Caprio, the endorsed candidate of the Democratic Party, was elected General Treasurer of Rhode Island, receiving 73% of the vote. He won by a larger margin than any candidate for a contested statewide office in Rhode Island that year.

Very simply, in 2010, Frank Caprio IS the Democratic Party's choice to be the Ocean state's next Governor.

ALL of the coverage about how Obama very publicly chose not to endorse Democrat Frank Caprio, our candidate for Governor and the currently RI's Democratic Treasurer, in Rhode island has been about the "shove it" comment.  I have only seen two people in the ENTIRE media mix (thank you google) even mention how unprecedented it is for the titular head of a political party to help elect someone NOT in his own Party.  (Thats taught on day one of Party politics 101 for you people new to politics)

It is unforgivable to every Democrat who cares about his country and his Party that the head of our Party made a big public thumbing of his nose at our Democratic nominee for Governor of Rhode Island.

Making such a public show has very possibly killed our chances of winning there. That was to be expected and sadly, it was intended to do just that.

Proof of this is David Axelrod press statements that added fuel to the fire, further damaging Democratic chances to win.

White House senior advisor David Axelrod said Demcratic gubernatorial candidate Caprio sought the same presidential endorsement he told Barack Obama to "shove."

The Caprio camp was blindsided to see the front page of Monday’s Providence Journal carrying a banner headline about the White House telling reporters Obama would not endorse the Democratic nominee out of respect for Chafee.

“The issue for us was not around his decision not to endorse – the issue for us is more the way the White House handled the situation,” Cario spokesman said.

By speaking to the press without contacting the Caprio campaign first, the White House “basically dropped on us” a negative story amid a high-profile Obama visit in the midst of a tight three-way race for governor.

When Obama came to R.I. he actually held the DCCC fundraiser (which was the purported reason for the trip) at the home of a major supporter of former Republican Senator Lincoln Chafee's and pointedly said he wasn't endorsing the Democratic nominee.

Not good form coming to the state and then embarrasing and then Kicking your Party's own Candidate Under the Bus. Is that any way to build Party loyalty in a election where so many good Democrats are threatened with losing their seats?  I think not and I think many will remember this when Obama in the future asks endangered Dems for support or a favor.

What gives Obama the right to undercut and destroy the electoral chances of his own Party.

As President Obama IS the head of the Democratic Party, not the Barack Obama Party.

The message he sent:

"It doesn't matter if you vote for the Democrat in the race.  I don't care."

I would say that Caprio's response validate's Obama's decision completely.

What Obama did in Rhode Island was shocking, outrageous and unprecedented.  Ive never heard of anything like this happening before, its troubling and it leaves a lot of Rhode Island democrats out in the cold in a very terrible situation. This is a close three way race and President Obama's act can easily swing the liberal vote up there by this and cause the Democrats to lose the Governor's mansion.

The Executive Director of The Democratic Governors Association agrees:

"This is disappointing. Frank Caprio has spent his career fighting for the values of the Democratic Party, and I think he deserves the full support of our party and its leaders. While this might not be what the White House intended, the president’s refusal to endorse a fellow Democrat in the worst environment since 1994 sends a bad message to everyone who’s working to get Democrats elected this year."

 

Even Maureen Dowd in today's New York Times sees that Obama has damaged the choice and chances of his own Party.  

She wrote:

"Hey, dude, you’re a politician. Act like one."

"As the head of the Democratic Party, the president should have supported the Democratic candidate for governor in Rhode Island, the one the Democratic Governors Association had already lavished more than $1 million in TV ads on. If Obama was going to refuse to endorse Frank Caprio out of respect for Lincoln Chafee, the former Republican who endorsed him for president and is now running as an independent, the president should have at least stayed out of Providence."

---

Actually the DGA has spent $1.5 million trying to elect a Democrat Governor for Rhode Island and Obama comes in and takes a knife to these efforts.

---

Paul Begala who once was the political director in a Democratic White House understands what Obama did here but can not in any way understand why he did.

---

From CNN's 360 with Anderson Cooper

COOPER: So the Senator Chafee he is referring is Lincoln Chafee, independent candidate for governor. Back in 2008, Chafee who is a former Republican endorsed then candidate, Barack Obama. So the White House says out of respect for that relationship the president is withholding an endorsement in the race.

Let's bring back in Paul Begala. Paul, are you surprised that a sitting Democratic president would opt not to endorse a viable Democratic nominee in a heavily Democratic state like Rhode Island?

BEGALA: I wish I had my thesaurus -- surprise doesn't begin to explain it. It's unimaginable to me. The notion that the leader of the party is being disloyal to his party is I think its own precedent. I can't think of a time -- and he went to the state today. That's the thing too. You go to Rhode Island -- it's the most Democratic state in the union.

The Democratic Governor's Association has spent $1.5 million trying to elect Mr. Caprio there. And the president has just completely undercut them. Keep in mind, in a three-way race with Linc Chafee, who is a moderate to liberal former Republican, the key vote here unlike anywhere else, the swing vote here, is the liberal vote.

So liberals are the most prized voters in this three-way race in this very liberal state. And so Barack Obama, still beloved by liberals, he might have cost the Democrats this seat. He might have cost the Democrats the governorship in Rhode Island. And he's -- I think is still a Democrat, Obama -- Mr. Obama is -- it's unbelievable.

COOPER: It certainly got a lot of attention.

BEGALA: It did. It's not the language I would recommend. But he is a -- a -- by all accounts from Democrats, perfectly qualified. This is not, say this guy Alvin Green. Ok, the Democratic nominee for Senate in South Carolina, every Democrat has disavowed him.

Well, they have. He's -- he's not a serious or -- or qualified person to be in the United States Senate and I understand if President Obama doesn't want to support him. I agree with that. But this -- this -- Mr. Caprio, for Democrats, perfectly attractive candidate -- 

COOPER: Yes.

BEGALA: -- it's very odd to me.

-----

Damn right it's odd.

Many angry Obama apologists have gone to the blogs to attack Caprio and claim that hey - Chaffee is the more liberal candidate in the race.

Well, on taxation he's sure not.   During these hard times Chaffee calls for an increase in the state sales tax which is NOT in any way progressive policy.  

And Chaffe surely is not a real progressive on a key issue that matters very much to environmentalists like me.

Any hopes I ever had for a truly progressive environmental Obama administration ended when he announced that the Administration was overturning the 40 year ban on new offshore drilling and opening both the east and west coasts to bidding for new leases to the big oil companies.

Color me unsurprised that Obama is now backing a candidate in R.I. that opposes the thoughtful alternative to offshore drilling - which is offshore wind power.

Obama indeed blew it big in Rhode Island by not endorsing the Democrat Caprio who is the only candidate squarely supporting the Deepwater Wind project planned for the Ocean State. The offshore wind proposal for 8 turbines to test new installation technology is an enormously important project for Rhode Island as well as for offshore wind power development in the US. Obama's failure has broader implications.

Former Republican Senator Chafee has waffled badly in failing to support Deepwater Wind after the legislature forced the PUC (Rhode Island Public Utilities Commission) to reconsider its original rejection by making economic development AND environmental protection factors to be considered in reconsidering the proposal. Previously the PUC based on price alone had no choice but reject this project.

Chafee instead of leading has followed uncritically the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) and Save The Bay (STB) two groups that make you scratch your head and wonder whether they are on the payroll of the brothers Koch or BP.

Both of these organizations went to the mat trying to stop it. While initially CLF and STB supported it now that the PUC through negotiation extracted a better deal for Rhode Island they are bad-mouthing it is as “sweetheart deal”. 

The Deepwater Wind proposed 8 turbines will enable Deepwater Wind to test new installation technology that will make it possible to install hundreds of offshore wind turbines along the eastern seaboard. The economic development stakes for RI are huge. How can a so called progressive like Chaffee oppose the potential for a new industrial revolution based on clean energy that the new technology will make possible?

An immediate impact of Deepwater Wind will be the installation of a cable that will enable the wind electricity to meet 100% of Block Island’s needs and take excess electricity to the mainland. During the winter when the Block Island population shrinks to few hundred most of the offshore wind electricity will go to the mainland. The cable will also provide back up electricity for Block Island for the few hours per year that there is no wind off Block Island. This cable will totally eliminate the need for the small and inefficient diesel power plant that currently burns 1,000,000 gallons of oil per year on Block Island. The question is can a so called progressive like chaffee oppose a project that will eliminate the need for transporting and burning 1,000,000 gallons of oil per year on a little island that is a nature preserve?

How can Obama fail to support Caprio when Chafee is experiencing a leadership meltdown as indicated by his wrongheaded opposition to this most important environmental and economic development project that by-partisan leadership has developed in Rhode Island? Chafee's explanation? The Conservation Law Foundation and the Save The Bay are opposing it.

Hmm we need better leadership than that in Rhode Island and it seems that Obama has blown any chance of that.

Thanks a lot Dude.

Bill Clinton knows better.  Back in July he endorsed the Democratic nominee.

---

Bill Clinton campaigns for Caprio

The Associated Press 
Published: July 29, 2010 
»   
PROVIDENCE --

Former President Bill Clinton is urging Rhode Islanders to vote for Democrat Frank Caprio for governor.

Clinton told supporters at the Rhode Island Convention Center on Thursday that Caprio had old-fashioned family values and understands what it takes to get the state out of its financial crisis. 
Rhode Island has one of the nation's highest unemployment rates, at 12 percent.

Clinton said he loves coming to Rhode Island because it's among the state where he always gets the most support. His wife, Hillary Clinton, easily beat President Barack Obama in the state's Democratic primary in March 2008.

Clinton said governors are critical to states' success since they're the ones responsible for implementing federal social services programs.

----

Remember that RI went for Clinton, not Obama, in the primary, and there are a lot of Clintonites among the Dems.  So there is still hope that Rhode island can have a Democratic governor in a year that Republicans are set to sweep up a score of Governors across the nation.

President Clinton is campaigning for Caprio today in Rhode island.  The Big Dog stands by our party's choice.

Clinton knows how important it is for Democrats to be elected as state governors.  Maybe if Obama had a bit more experience politically he would understood this too.  (But if that were true - maybe we wouldnt be about to lose the House and end up with maybe less than 20 democratic governors out of 50 come Wednesday morn.

Obama's withheld endorsement - and the after effects of it - is most likely going to give us another Republican governor, just in time to redistrict Rhode Island for the next decade. (RI possibly may pick up one more House seat)

I expect that Obama's personal friendship with Chaffee is more important to him than Democratic victory, next week and through 2020. So much for "the old kind of politics". Instead we get the oldest.

It seems obvious that Barrack Obama is no "Yellow Dog Democrat".  

Well, you know what?  2010 campaign polling shows that neither are 33% of those Democrats who voted for him in 2008 and are now voting for the GOP.

After this kind of self indulgent betrayal - who could blame them??

Surely not the titular head of the Democratic party or any of his enabler apologists defending him and this historic act of Party disloyalty.

During the fall of 2008, Clintonites like me were told over and over and over that primaries had consequences and that if i was a REAL Democrat I had no choice to back the party on election day.

That argument was valid and even though I felt even then Obama was not the best choice we had - my vote for him helped put him in the White House.

Why doesn't Caprio now deserve the same proof of Party loyalty that Obama supporters demanded back then? 

Is Obama the leader of the Democratic Party or now the PARTY itself?

Sounds pretty Royalist to me.

To update Louis XIV for these times:  "Je suis le Parti Démocrate. Le Parti me est."

Sad.

 

Tags: obama, caprio, sell out, traitorous acts, obamocrats, Rhode Island, Chafee (all tags)

Comments

126 Comments

if anybody

would like to post this diary at Kos or anywhere else - please do.

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 12:32PM | 0 recs
RE: if anybody

Did you forget Bil Clintn went on Larry kIng and said that it did not matter who won - Lieberman or Lamont during the CT senate election? Obmaa is not the first Democrat to "support" a third party guy.

by Pravin 2010-11-03 09:16AM | 0 recs
RE: if anybody

Clinton also asked Meek to step aside for Crist.

Obama was wrong on this.  

Clinton was wrong on both of those.

But this diary and its comment section, in case anyone fails to notice, isn't really about those questions.  We could have a real debate, for instance, about whether Crist would have been significantly better than Rubio.  I doubt it.  But there's a discussion to be had.  

This diary is about personal grudges, a need for personal vindication, and the impulse to divide progressives on the eve of an election in service of promoting imagined grievances.  

Anyone who disagrees with the degree of egregiousness of Obama is obviously a thug and a hypocrite who deserves to be threatened with physical violence.  An empty threat over a broadband connection.  But it reveals the moral bankruptcy of the endeavor.

Is this really what MYDD should be about?  What purpose does it serve?

by Strummerson 2010-11-03 11:16AM | 0 recs
HULLO OUT THERE...ANYBODY HERE?

Seems I was right before.

Did Obama Royalist Enforcer Thugs Run Everybody Off From MyDD?

sad.

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 03:01PM | 0 recs
Of all places, I would expect this blog...

...to finally support Obama for something.  Essentially, Obama chose ideology over party loyality to chose the more progressive candidate.  And we are not happy about this?  Don't we wish Obama had done this more often, such as Ark?

by zmus 2010-10-31 03:39PM | 0 recs
RE: Of all places, I would expect this blog...

did you even read the post?

chaffe is NOT more progressive on economic or environmental issues than Caprio.

thats low info obama apologist bullsh$te.

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 04:20PM | 0 recs
Didn't Chaffee...
Vote against the AUMF? That's got to count for something. I can think of a few Democratic senators who famously failed that test.
by Shaun Appleby 2010-11-01 05:16AM | 0 recs
RE: Didn't Chaffee...

I dont think Attorney General Caprio would support invading Massachusetts under any circumstances.

He's not that kind of General.

by changeagain2012 2010-11-01 10:30AM | 0 recs
RE: Of all places, I would expect this blog...

"Essentially, Obama chose ideology over party loyality to chose the more progressive candidate.  And we are not happy about this?  Don't we wish Obama had done this more often, such as Ark?"


What makes you think Chafee is the more progressive candidate? Anything at all to back that up? Secondly, in Arkansas, the issue was which Democrat to back in the primary, not whether or not to back the Democrat in the general election. From all appearances, Obama did what he did in RI out of personal loyalty to a Republican who backed him, at the expense of the party's chance to win the governorship. Unless some compelling case can be made for Chafee, I see nothing whatsoever to be "happy" about.

by freemansfarm 2010-10-31 11:19PM | 0 recs
Hey changeagain2012

Congrats on your front page status!

This'll show the o-bot fanboy royalist enforcer thugs.  From the ashes of their storm-trooping, vicious, savage, thought policing, soul crushing, party killing pumacidal holocaust, the voice of a true progressive rises.

The arc of history is long, but it bends toward justice.

NEVER AGAIN!!!

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 04:50PM | 1 recs
RE: Hey changeagain2012

your type are  smug, snide, silly and less than useless.

a perfect example of a online oboma royalist.

hope you enjoy election night - your type sure did EARN it. 

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 06:47PM | 0 recs
RE: Hey changeagain2012

OK.  You don't like snide, I'll give it to you straight.

First, I don't have a "type."  I don't leap to pre-judging others by forcing them into "types" either.  Your posture as the object of political repression shows a total lack of historical perspective and ethics.  Read a book, you stupid fuck.  Real blood has been spilled, voices have actually been silenced, entire peoples and perspectives have been materially marginalized with actual weapons and at the cost of actual lives.  Some of them in my own family.  This poseurism is offensive to anyone who is actually engaged in the history of progressive politics, or history in general.  It's the same self-aggrandizing bullshit victimology exhibited by the tea thugs.  Just the mirror image.  Anyone been interred in a re-education camp, sent to the gulag, disappeared in the past two years?  Don't even try to equate anything that has happened with political repression.  It's disgusting.  Beneath contempt.

It's your "silly" mentality that paints everyone who disagrees with your self-serving tone and absolutist perspective.  You reveal yourself as a hypocrite by using your supposed victimhood to attack others.  You don't like vicious savage name-calling?  Don't call others names.  You don't want to be branded with a broad brush, don't paint everyone else with a broad brush.  I agree with many of the critiques of Obama, but you wouldn't know that, because you are too busy pigeon-holing people so that your limited worldview can make sense of them.  For the record, I have no real beef with Jerome.  I don't always agree with him.  If he wants to ban me, then fine.  But it won't be because I showed him any disrespect.  And while you are busy defending him, remember that he's no victim.  He runs the place.  He can ban whomever he likes at any time.  He banned plenty whom you would label "o-bots" during the primary and afterwards.  I know it doesn't fit your idiotic narrative, but that's how it works.

I'll remember your description of me as "less than useless" when I am putting aside my students and my family to work GOTV this Tues. to try to "earn" something positive while you will no doubt be crafting another self-righteous diatribe and reveling in your glorious grievances.

So let loose another bile-soaked diatribe that accomplishes nothing.

Just remember that YOU are why moderates and independents mock liberals and progressives.  You are a fucking cartoon.  I've just been letting off some steam with you and providing you with more rope.  Now I have a life to get back to.

That's what I really think.

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 07:32PM | 1 recs
RE: Hey changeagain2012

you dont think i actually got past the first paragraph do you?

sincerly, no offense meant whatsoever but nobody EVER thinks they are a "type" - but fella oh ho ho - you are most exactly representative of that type of online obot bullier that i wrote of before.

for example - this diary has NOTHING to do with what you wrote here - but that seems to be as always with your "type".

again, your insistence on coming to this site in order to write how much you simply hate this place IDs you as a subset of the greater net obot bully and makes you representative of those that came here to run out all and anyone who dared to not see obama as the "One".

what i find amusing is that even though you love the man so much - instead of helping him tonight by making calls for OFA and save him from an oncoming GOP congress that is going to investigate and very possibly hound him out of office - you are here instead beating up one of those hated Puma teabaggers "types".

why because you must.  thats what your "type" do....

to me, that really says it all.

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 08:31PM | 0 recs
RE: Hey changeagain2012

Case in point.

Paramecia exhibit more self-awareness.

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 08:35PM | 0 recs
RE: Hey changeagain2012

back to baseball...

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 08:40PM | 0 recs
RE: Hey changeagain2012

Lemme guess.  Rooting for Texas.  It suits your "type."

I'll take the Giants myself.

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 08:45PM | 0 recs
RE: Hey changeagain2012

even baseball makes you spit and demean others.

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 10:22PM | 0 recs
RE: Hey changeagain2012

right back at you sweetheart

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 10:27PM | 0 recs
RE: Hey changeagain2012

May I ask if suggesting that you are of a "type" that roots for a particular baseball team seems like an demeaning insult of the caliber of "thug" or "censor"?

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 10:36PM | 0 recs
working stiffs endorse

Teamsters endorse Caprio

IBEW endorse Caprio

LABORERS endorse Caprio

Rhode Island State Lodge Fraternal Order of Police endorse Caprio

The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) endorse Caprio

 

(The White House political director previously was the political director of the SEIU which was the only major union that backed Obama in the primaries.  After that the political operations of that union and team Obama in all reality...merged.

What a surprise...SEIU have endorsed Obama's "friend " too)

 

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 05:31PM | 0 recs
RE: working stiffs endorse

Obama probably helped Caprio with his statement.   But changeagain is a little tiring with his one note.  He know any other tunes?  

And for the record, SEIU Rhode Island endorsed Chafee.  And the Gov endorsement is a state call, not the International Union's. And the White House political director was the political director of Local 1199 in New York, not the International Union

The largest union in RI, AFSCME, is staying neutral in the Gov's race.  But RI NEA and RI AFT-the big nurses union there- are also supporting Chafee. And Caprio is mad at labor for defeating his brother, a legislator, in the primary this summer.

by Skipster 2010-11-01 04:16PM | 1 recs
AND....

Obama is thinking 2012, not 2010. This is just more evidence of his selfish political behavior. It is all about Obama and how decisions help him. The party is a means to an end.

At a time when Democrats are on the ropes this election cycle, the last thing they needed within a week of a crucial election is this distraction and self-inflicted wound of hurting a Democrat candidate who did not deserve such treatment. This is a national story. The problem is not with the White House political staff; the problem is with the poor judgment of the president. Bill Clinton is sweeping into Rhode Island today to help Caprio, while last week obama swept in on Air Force One to Rhode Island to disrespect him and hurt the Democratic choice.

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 05:39PM | 0 recs
Obama not supporting Democrats--this is not the first time

I remember it was December 2008. Obama's huge campaign team who worked like crazy to get him elected was still in place. Runoff elections for 2 Senate seats that we could win--the one in Georgia for the world class JERK Saxby Chambliss would have been a gain of a Republican senate seat.......the other seat was open and Al Franken was a good bet to win in Minnesota.  Okay, these guys needed a push to win from Obama and some help i.e. a little money and some leadership from the President's campaign staff.

BUT NOPE--nothing---Obama just turned and walked away from both these guys.....Franken won (seven months later) and Martin narrowly lost in Georgia.  Had Obama gone to Georgia and really pushed the black voters to honor him and go the the polls we could have picked up that seat.

Next we have the death of Ted Kennedy. Obama was not even engaged in the pursuit to make sure we kept that seat. Had he really gotten into that fight we would have kept that Massachusetts Senate seat....but NO, he dodged working for the candidate until the last weekend......he made a speech and the Tea Party claimed victory---that was a portend of what was coming in November 2010....a HUGE REPUBLICAN LANDSLIDE and the Tea Party is now a force to be reconded with all the country....had they been stopped last year in Massachusetts, they might have gone away in defeat forever.

ITS HIS EGO...he doesn't need us, he can win on his own or so he thinks!  But now his EGO isn't going to help him.  With the GOP running the House, he could even be impeached--let's see him charm his way out of THAT PROBLEM......

HE DESERVES IT FOR IGNORING THE WORK OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

by hddun2008 2010-10-31 05:43PM | 2 recs
RE: Obama not supporting Democrats--this is not the first time

everything is about the obama BRAND and his plans to be re elected in 2012.

we were saddled with a horrific fake hcr bill because obama just HAD to have his personal political WIN - even though the bill was crap and now is costing us dozens of Dem house members.

and for what?

so 24 to 26 year olds can stay on their parents policies?

for FRIGGING HEALTH CLINICS?!

CLINICS?

thats reform?

lord...

 

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 06:43PM | 1 recs
RE: Obama not supporting Democrats--this is not the first time

All progressive critics of the bill I know and have read actually tout the clinics, championed by Bernie Sanders, as one of the real achievements of this admittedly flawed bill.

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 07:33PM | 0 recs
RE: Obama not supporting Democrats--this is not the first time

well, you dont know very many progressive critics of the bill then do you?

are clinics better than the nothing that was the obama plan up till the last second?

yes.

does that make them any less degrading and not much better than nothing at all?

no

and laying them on bernie as if he thinks theyre anything but rock bottom is is...well, bad. 

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 08:36PM | 0 recs
RE: Obama not supporting Democrats--this is not the first time

Sanders pushed for and proposed them.  Sorry to interrupt your self-reflexive narrative once again.

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 08:47PM | 0 recs
Can you read?

From Sanders own site.  Given that you have already announced your attention deficit, just skip to the bottom where I bolded it for you.

Can't WAIT to see you explain away and dismiss this.  Tea thugs also foreground their simplistic perspectives at all costs.

"During the 2009 health care reform debate, Sanders worked to create a strong bill to bring affordable coverage and greater access to quality health care, including dental and mental health, to every American.  Sanders was among the most active proponents of including a strong public option in any reform package.  He said, "Clearly, if we are serious about cost containment, private insurance companies must have competition from a public plan."  Sanders believes states should be able to take the lead in demonstrating that single-payer health care is the best method of providing quality, affordable care to all Americans - and that the federal government should not stand in the way of these efforts by states to provide the best care to their residents.   As a member of the health committee, Sanders was able to include in that committee's contribution to the health care debate a number of important provisions.  He successfully added a provision to double penalties for health care fraud to address the billions of dollars in fraud and abuse committed by major corporations in the health care industry.  He also included greater funding for community health centers to improve access to care and the health service corp to bring more health care professionals for underserved communities."

http://sanders.senate.gov/legislation/issue/?id=a5823331-b1c8-46a1-864f-a5986cf82a9b

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 08:54PM | 0 recs
RE: Can you read?

proves my point exactly

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 09:38PM | 0 recs
RE: Can you read?

Wow.  Take off your goggles.  Just for a second.

Actually, strike that.  I'm pretty sure you couldn't take the shock.

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 09:45PM | 0 recs
RE: Can you read?

rhode island?

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 10:21PM | 0 recs
RE: Can you read?

So you still contend that Sanders is not a chief proponent of these clinics?

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 10:36PM | 0 recs
From Brad Bannon
Brad Bannon is President of Bannon Communications Research, a Washington DC based political polling and consulting firm that helps Democratic candidates, labor unions and progressive issue groups win political and public affairs campaigns.

 I am a native of the Ocean State and I believe the president's snub of Frank Caprio was a mistake.


I know that Lincoln Chafee endorsed Barack Obama in 2008 while Frank Caprio supported Hillary Clinton. But personal feelings aside, I suspect that the president's refusal to back the Democratic gubernatorial candidate will have far-reaching negative effects on the other Democrats running for statewide office and for state legislature in Rhode Island. 

The president is also the leader of the Democratic Party. The president's calls for party unity next year from congressional Democrats may ring hollow because of the president's action. Even if Frank Caprio isn't the greatest candidate, he and the president are both players on the Democratic team. And sometimes, you just have to take one for the team. And a number of congressional Democrats who won't be in the next Congress took one for the team when they voted for health care reform and clean energy legislation this year.

I hope this is not the beginning of a strategy for the president to win reelection by distancing himself from Democrats. The president is a big sports fan and he knows that the great players lead by example.

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 05:47PM | 0 recs
Progressive/Liberal or Democrat?

I am a democrat.

 

I am not progressive.  I am not liberal.  I am center left.

 

I got the message mr Obama.

 

You and yours want to see how things look without me and mine.

 

Have a nice tuesday.

by donkeykong 2010-10-31 07:38PM | 1 recs
RE: Progressive/Liberal or Democrat?

Mssrs. McConnell, Boehner, and Palin send their complements.

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 08:31PM | 0 recs
RE: Progressive/Liberal or Democrat?

this election is all about obama and you.

not about him or me.

own it - you earned it.

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 08:47PM | 0 recs
RE: Progressive/Liberal or Democrat?

Only in your self-serving perspective.

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 08:52PM | 0 recs
RE: Progressive/Liberal or Democrat?

rhode island?

not one comment about the topic instead of insults.

how many comments have you made - all to batter and brow beat?

you are such that type...

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 10:20PM | 0 recs
RE: Progressive/Liberal or Democrat?

be sure and leave em a number - team obama will get back to you in 2011 for your money and 2012 for your vote.

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 08:38PM | 0 recs
RE: Progressive/Liberal or Democrat?

omg they have been sending sooooo many emails.

by donkeykong 2010-11-01 11:19AM | 0 recs
Royalist Enforcer Thugs

 

This is such bullshit.  No, it doesn't bother me that Obama didn't make an endorsement in this race and I can imagine him not endorsing Alvin Greene in South Carolina.   As for Obama Royalist Enforcer Thugs running everybody off from Mydd--I think it's Jerome Armstrong and posts like this that croaked the blog.  And just the kind of batshit crazy paranoia that would lead someone to postulate Obama Royalist Enforcer Thugs.  

Thank you, Strummerson, for taking the time.  I wouldn't have bothered.

As for being driven from this blog, I think Jerome and Obama-hating posters like ChangeAgain2012 (oh-oh!  Do I smell a PRIMARY CHALLENGE?!!) have had a lot more to do with the declining readership.  There is only so much paranoid bat-shit crazy that one can take in a day.

 

by Thaddeus 2010-10-31 08:29PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

simply, if you hate jerome and this site so much - why do you feel compelled to come here -- except to attack and denigrate those you want to censor and silence?

you are exactly the type of obot royalist enforcer thug that compelled me to write that piece in the first place.

your lack of self awareness of this is typical of your net thuggish crew.

enjoy election night - you and your crowd sure EARNED it.

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 09:19PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

Censorship and silencing.

Yes.  We disappear people in the middle of the night.

If Obama had a secret police, I doubt he'd expend any energy on you.

How again has anyone been censored and silenced?

Why didn't Jerome stop them?  He could have?  Seems like you should be pissed at him for not defending your absolute right to speak unopposed.  

Your inability to argue successfully isn't anyone censoring you.  It's just your rhetorical deficiency.  Take some responsibility.

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 09:31PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

What bothers me the most about folks such as "changeagain" is not that they criticize Obama.  He's a big boy and he can handle criticism, and there are many things worth criticizing.  It is the adopting of rightwing talking points that drives me nuts. 

by zmus 2010-10-31 09:45PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

GOD!  What a FANBOY!

How many people did you torture into silence in your absurd devotion to your Master today?

Thousands?

Tens of Thousands?

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 09:58PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

rhode island?

 

anything about rhode island?

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 10:06PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

does it make you feel better about yourself - smarter - stronger- more manly - to insult strangers?

id say its one very weird hobby?

anything about rhode island?

thought not.

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 09:47PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

It feels good to confront bullshit.  How do you enjoy insulting others?

And again, can't you explain exactly HOW you've been censored and silenced?  How has Jerome been marginalized by some gang of thugs?

Given the history of political repression, such charges require substantiation.  At least if you don't want to be confronted as a bullshit monger.

Let's remember who has done the lion's share of name calling here.

Oh, sorry, forgot that paramecia exhibit more self-awareness than you.

Care to change that?

Can you?

Are you capable of justifying your self-aggrandizing bullshit?

Or would your world totally crumble.

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 09:55PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

wjy not just write "insult" instead of all those words.

itd be just the same.

we both know its because you ENJOY insulting others

its FUN to you.

rhode island?

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 10:08PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

Pot.  Kettle.  Anything?

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 10:10PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

who came to whose diary and started hurling insults at who?

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 10:18PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

who came to whose diary and started hurling insults at who?

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 10:18PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

And I see you aren't capable of substantiating anything.  Why not answer even ONE of my questions?

And where in that comment is there an insult?  When I want to insult you, I'll call you a silt-dwelling troglodyte.  But here I challenged you to produce an argument, and you refused with a feeble attempt at witty deflection.

As for the number of words, I read and type pretty quickly.  It's a skill called literacy.

As for RI, I agree Obama should have endorsed Caprio, for what it's worth.

Guess that PROVES I'm an "o-bot royalist enforcer thug."  Not that YOU approve of insults.

And I have much bigger disagreements with him.

But the barbarians are at the gates and you are cheering them on because you think it vindicates you.  If you can't see any daylight between Obama and McConnell/Boehner/Palin, you are really a silt-dwelling troglodyte.

Problem is, I think you can.  That's much worse.

Shame on you.

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 10:18PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

And I see you aren't capable of substantiating anything.  Why not answer even ONE of my questions?

And where in that comment is there an insult?  When I want to insult you, I'll call you a silt-dwelling troglodyte.  But here I challenged you to produce an argument, and you refused with a feeble attempt at witty deflection.

As for the number of words, I read and type pretty quickly.  It's a skill called literacy.

As for RI, I agree Obama should have endorsed Caprio, for what it's worth.

Guess that PROVES I'm an "o-bot royalist enforcer thug."  Not that YOU approve of insults.

And I have much bigger disagreements with him.

But the barbarians are at the gates and you are cheering them on because you think it vindicates you.  If you can't see any daylight between Obama and McConnell/Boehner/Palin, you are really a silt-dwelling troglodyte.

Problem is, I think you can.  That's much worse.

Shame on you.

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 10:18PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

fella - every single one of your comments has some insult or all insult in it.

heres an idea - why dont you write a diary about how swell health clinics are for the poor instead of private doctor care and if i feel like doing the research to argue my personal point of view and CHOOSE to discuss it with you ill join you there and my comment - i promise - wont start with how uneducated you are or however your normal salutations start.

this diary is about rhode island.

youve written about twenty comments here insulting and/or attacking me about various things - but not one has even mentioned how obama is going to lose democrats rhode island.

seems that i may have a point about how you act at this site with those you dislike because you disagree with them

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 10:37PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

I know you think you gain credibility by labeling all comments insults, even as they critique your risible approach.

You wanted my response to RI.  

You got it.  

And all you can do is play an unconvincing victim.

You don't want comments?

You only want folks who agree with you?

Don't write diaries.

Especially not with this taunting and infantile tone (that's analysis not insult right there, not that you can differentiate).

I've asked you to substantiate various aspects of your approach.

You hide behind your accusations of thuggery.

And if you really think that it validates your perspective, you should be glad.

You want to compare me to a repressive censor, go right ahead.

But you keep responding, though not much more than to cry "bully," and I keep engaging.  Seems like the speech is flowing.

Now your diary has more comments than any other.  

Lots of speech.  Little silence.

As for your RI point, there just really isn't that much to debate.  Either one agrees with you that Obama should have endorsed Caprio or you don't.  I do.  But I also think that this is hardly the damning disagreement that you contend it is.  AND I think using it to justify cheerleading for McConnell, Boehner, Palin and the tea thugs is twisted and disgusting.

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 10:48PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

ooops in your millions of literate words - i missed this first time.

"As for RI, I agree Obama should have endorsed Caprio, for what it's worth."

ok thanks for your comment.  We agree.

Now please stop hijacking this diary as your soapbox to insult me and my fellow troglodytes.

if you want to scream about whatever and write about it like the oh so literate fellow you say you are - why not write your own diary about whatever you wish and leave this one about discussion about the problems up in the ocean state?

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 10:44PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

Where exactly did I "scream?"

And why are you trying to restrict speech?

Aren't you against repression and censorship?

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 10:59PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

Stop feeding the trolls.

The best way to respond to shit diaries is to not respond to them.

by Vox Populi 2010-10-31 11:01PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

oh good.

your scorecard as you exit:

6 comments

6 personal insults

0 comments about diary topic

 

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 11:15PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

go write ten diaries

speak freely

i ask you to stop hijacking mine

with endless insults and non stop bullying

this diary is about rhode island 

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 11:13PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

So, your diary is not a forum where freedom of speech is respected?

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 11:16PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

verbal assault is not protected free speech

 

again if you wish to comment on ehode island, pleas do

if not - you have come here simply to harass

which was the singular point of my other diary.

of course, in that diary your arguments that your abusive bullying is just opinion might have some credence 

in this diary - your simply a harassing net bully

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 11:26PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

Verbal assault?

Really?

At least you didn't accuse me of "nuking" you.  That's an improvement.

And this litany of demands that I address RI comes off as a bit shrill given that you only began to repeat it after hurling insult after insult at me.  And you have refused to address any of my points, though I have addressed yours.

Your venomous and self-pitying perspective is germane to this diary.  And it requires a defense.

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 11:34PM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

self pity?

oh lord...

 

by changeagain2012 2010-11-01 02:47AM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

Is there any other way of describing your posture?

Oh yes.  Righteous victim of thuggish bullying suppression.  Forgot.  You're practically Pastor Niemoller.

by Strummerson 2010-11-01 03:32AM | 0 recs
RE: Royalist Enforcer Thugs

So, your diary is not a forum where freedom of speech is respected?

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 11:16PM | 0 recs
hahaha

Just when I thought there couldn't be a worse front-pager than Jack Landsman, you go and prove me wrong.

by Vox Populi 2010-10-31 08:44PM | 1 recs
RE: hahaha

nothing to say about obama costing the dems rhode island?

nothing about the DGA wasting 15 million that might save ohio or florida?

not a word.

just quick insults to the diarist and the site itself.

yeah hahaha - losing a state by screwing a hated clinton supporter is fun.

yup, youre one of the obama enforcer crew.

a question -

do you obama enforcer thugeetypes share a schedule? are you like a royalist net-nightwatchman who visits here regularly to make sure the peasants stay humble?

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 09:18PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

Our Master controls us with radio waves.  How did you elude his grasp?

Man, grading midterms has never gone so fast.

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 09:27PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

who came to whose diary and started hurling insults at who?

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 10:17PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

I've got a longer history here than you, and it certainly isn't one of Obama enforcing.  I'm also not someone who has criticized Jerome, with the exception of his choice of a few whackjob front pagers--yourself included.

by Vox Populi 2010-10-31 09:40PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

Oh.  Facts shmacts...

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 09:43PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

bully bonding...

cute.

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 09:51PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

i remember you very well and your insulting and bullying demeanor hasnt changed one bit.

 

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 09:49PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

You called me an Obama-enforcing-thugtype, so you clearly don't remember me well.  What was your prior handle?

by Vox Populi 2010-10-31 09:54PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

this diary is about rhode island but all youve done is come and insult

pretty much proves my opinion might be valid 

anything about rhode island?

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 10:14PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

You're embarrassed to share what your previous name is here.  That tells me all I need to know.

by Vox Populi 2010-10-31 10:20PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

what is this your fourt insult comment and not one about the diary itself.

yup.  youre a net bully.

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 10:28PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

Please tell us how pointing out that you are apparently embarrassed to reveal your previous identity qualifies as an insult.

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 10:37PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

first - this diary is about rhode island

second - why do you think you have the right to tell me to do anything?

do you think you i feel any reason to share anything with you about myself whatsoever?

anyway youve already said that im a uneducated troglydyte. feeble bullshit merchantwith no self awareness whatsoever.

BULLSEYE!

all true. you are not only literate but also a great judge of others.

ok?

are we done now?

any other thoughts on Rhode island?

if not please stop hijacking my diary.

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 10:50PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

I'm not hijacking your diary.  It takes an issue that could be posed in 25 words and wraps it in a screed.  I am responding to that screed.  I think it completely on point to do so, especially as your comments continue to label and insult all who ever supported Obama on anything as repressive thugs.

If you want more on point interaction, drop your continuous slew of repetitive insults and start to engage the points of your commenters, instead of insulting and labeling them.

And by the way, when you attempt to marginalize me on the grounds of education and literacy, you sound more like Glenn Beck than ever.  

Bill and Hillary both went to Yale Law.

Progressives believe in education.

Do you?

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 10:58PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

I went to an Ivy myself.

obviously they failed me.

now please stop hijacking my diary.

if you have a comment about rhode island.

you are welcome to share it.

if you only have further insults and your endless bullying

please have the decency to leave my diary at my request.

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 11:18PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

Address my comments substantially and I will be happy to desist.

I addressed RI.  Not much to say beyond that.

I'm no more bullying you than you are bullying and insulting me.  You set the tone with your past two diaries.  

As far as decency, anyone who casts the primary flame wars on this site as unilateral political repression forfeits their credibility to rule on decency.

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 11:37PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

fuck off dumb ass

by changeagain2012 2010-11-01 12:22AM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

Your stand against insults is really impressive.

by Strummerson 2010-11-01 12:41AM | 1 recs
RE: hahaha

This is VP's second career.  He was trained under Pinochet.  Do you know who that is?

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 09:56PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

no. im uneducated.

my family was poor and i didnt get to go to harvard like you.

feel better now?

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 10:15PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

Public school educated.

Public University employed.

I apologize once again for not conforming to your manichaean narrative.

I know it's very frustrating.

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 10:30PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

i simply dont care

not even the slightest of bits

i dont want to know about your life

and your not going to know anything about mine if i can help it.

anything more about rhode island?

if not

please stop bullying me.

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 10:52PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

Yeah.  It sucks when your self-justifying barbs fail to correspond to the facts.

If you really didn't care, you wouldn't respond.

And I don't care what your former user name was.  Just pointing out that suggesting you are hiding it does not qualify as an insult.

If you explain to me, credibly, why you think commenting on your diary, responding to your comments, and standing up to your insults qualifies as bullying, I'll be happy to engage the question.

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 11:11PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

how many restraining or protection from stalking orders have been filed against you so far in your life?

please stop harassing me and hijacking this diary.

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 11:34PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

None.

I thought you weren't interested in my life.

You might respond to my comments.  That's what comments sections are for.  

For instance, you raised the clinics.  Not me.  Then you ran away when I made my point.  Should I have accused you of hijacking your won diary and harassing me?

You want to engage in the public sphere.  You need to be ready to engage.

Crying victim in this way, or the other, doesn't actually function as effective public debate.

Or is it that you simply want validation?

That's not what political discourse is for.

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 11:45PM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

you truly are a vile piece of work.

i really cannot fathom - nor want to - what kind of man makes a hobby of going online to attack, abuse and insult strangers

you are exactly who i wrote that other diary about.

there may be very few people here now

but you are the very worst one

and when there were more here

im sure you also were the very worst one

i have no interest in engaging with you

i simply want you to stop harassing me

and go away from me

being so literate - why not go write your own diaries?

you are not at all interested in having a discourse with me - you want to bang and insult -

some how this pathetic worthless enterprise amuses you.

now being that you judge me to be far below your knowing intellect - but my rational consideration on someone who enjoys doing such a mindless emotive thing tells me that you seriously have deep psychological troubles.

actually - not really that deep

you are a net bully with issues

ive beem playing with you for days

ive been playing with you for years

you are a half educated know little nobody who actually believes that you are learned about politics. policy etc.

that is the most ridiculous thing about you.

so much more ridiculous than your silly browbeating games

ive been in real life political wars since i was 14

ive spent thousands of hours on air producing or doing political talk debating with senators, congress critters, media folk whatever

id pound you silly in a actual debate (just as id pound you silly in real life brother)

youre a fudkin amateur net nerd blah-blah-blaher

NO ONE in real life politics takes people like you even SLIGHLY seriously!

youre a dime a dozen - a pathetic joke

and the best part is YOU KNOW IT!

there were hundreds of your type online during the 2008 campaign

now there are just a few truly disgraceful and degraded left whose lives have such little meaning and joy that they spend the vast majority of their time online making themselves pretend that they are strong - involved - important

you are NONE of these things

and yes, if it was found out that ive written some of things ive written online - it WOULD cause trouble

not for me - ive separated myself from the obama world almost completely - but for people that are identified with me and who i have worked for and with.

these folks still have to pretend that obama is competent, intelligent, relevant.

well, for two more days...

discourse - what a joke

dickcourse - yeah maybe

Giants won - game over - fuck you.

by changeagain2012 2010-11-01 12:16AM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

Glad you are against abuse and insults.

There is no "Obama world."  There is a political sphere.

While you are nursing and inventing grievances, I'll be working to get people to the polls.

Obama's competence and intelligence are not my issue.  I don't think they should be yours.

I'm a voter.  I'll vote for the best possible outcome.

You'll continue to piss vinegar.

Enjoy.

by Strummerson 2010-11-01 12:21AM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

ive tried with you 

im done

piss off

by changeagain2012 2010-11-01 12:26AM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

Oh, come on.  You haven't answered a single point I've posed.

That's your idea of "trying?"

I mean, I understand that you believe that you could beat me in a debate and that you could and would subdue me with physical violence, but you haven't even attempted to refute or engage ONE SINGLE POINT.

All I've had from you is insults.

My challenges stand.

by Strummerson 2010-11-01 12:30AM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

i am not dialogging with you 

stop being such a dick

by changeagain2012 2010-11-01 02:43AM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

Hmmm.  I noticed your refusal to dialog.  You clearly prefer to hurl insults and cry victim.  My approximation of the insult score is now:

Change: 297

Strum: 17

You win.

by Strummerson 2010-11-01 03:00AM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

lord

dr. johnson once wrote about sarcasm and understanding,

if you ever read it, think of me when you realize its about you.

by changeagain2012 2010-11-01 03:11AM | 0 recs
RE: hahaha

Dr. Johnson wrote about me? 

Really?

How prophetic.

Unfortunately, I am largely uninterested in the 18th century, though I'm pretty sure I know the piece you intend here.

However, I don't intend on thinking of you again once my papers are done.

I trust you'll continue to nurse your grievance against me for years to come.  It has little to do with me, of course.  You seem to have a propensity for grievances.  Who would you be without them?

by Strummerson 2010-11-01 03:20AM | 0 recs
Gee...

This is like old times.  Good to see you again Vox.

by Shaun Appleby 2010-11-01 05:24AM | 0 recs
thad

simply, if you hate jerome and this site so much - why do you feel compelled to come here -- except to attack and denigrate those you want to censor and silence?

you are exactly the type of obot royalist enforcer thug that compelled me to write that piece in the first place.

your lack of self awareness of this is typical of your net thuggish crew.

enjoy election night - you and your crowd sure EARNED it.

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 08:46PM | 0 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

The point isn't the virtue, or not, of the clinics in the so called health care "reform" law or whether or not royalist "thugs" pushed people off this site. The point, in this diary, is whether Obama erred in not supporting the party's candidate for Governor in Rhode Island. I think we can all agree that the usual,, and usually salutory, practice is for a sitting President is to endorse his party's candidates. And nothing has been shown here that that practice should not have been followed in this case. No one has even tried to show that Chafee is more progressive or liberal than the Democratic nominee. Nor has anyone shown any need for the party nominee to be kept in the dark until the last minute as to the non endorsement. What has been shown is that the nominee was a Hillary supporter, and that Chafee backed Obama. This leads me to believe that Obama's decision was based on nothing more than his own personal agenda. So what if Chafee supported him? How does that justify a departure from the normal practice? It doesn't. The diary therefore posits a valid criticism of Obama based on his self centeredness and lack of concern for the party as a whole. And no amount of name calling and back and forthing with the diarist about unrelated issues is going to change that.

by freemansfarm 2010-10-31 10:55PM | 0 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

Yes.  Valid criticism.  Agreed.

Of course the idea that anyone would still be settling scores from the primary is just horrifying.  Almost unthinkable.

by Strummerson 2010-10-31 11:13PM | 0 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

"Yes.  Valid criticism.  Agreed."

Thank you. And that's what I think we should be focusing on.

"Of course the idea that anyone would still be settling scores from the primary is just horrifying.  Almost unthinkable."

Point taken. But, IMHO, it is more noteworthy, more important, more discussion-worthy, and more blameworthy, for the President to be settling scores from the primaries at the party's expense than for a diarist on a blog to be doing so, whatever his personal reasons for doing it.

by freemansfarm 2010-10-31 11:43PM | 1 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

Fair point.

But this diary follows on the heels of yesterday's.  Taken together, in the context of this blog, they seem aimed at suppressing and dividing the grass roots on the eve of an election where every vote counts.  Criticizing the President is all fine and dandy, but we cannot control that.  We can stand up and push back.  Regardless of what is "more blameworthy," getting people to go out and vote in a midterm legislative election seems much more important that parsing blame and settling scores.  That's what this diarist is interested in doing.  That's what this diary participates in, given it's predecessor.  I am exercising my right to speak on this diary in order to confront.

I think that the effort to rally one "group" and demonize another, to [re]construct such groups on the eve of this election merits opposition.

by Strummerson 2010-11-01 12:04AM | 0 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

ill be busting my ass from 7am tommorow to 8pm tuesday non stop geting votes out for democrats in maryland trying to save a freshman congressional seat that probably wont be

for the party

after that yeah - ill be fighting in DC inside the party

against your type

and yeah - its gonna get mighty divisive

to bad you wont really be involved

by changeagain2012 2010-11-01 12:31AM | 0 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

Yeah.

I'll be doing the politically irrelevant work of raising a family in a depressed state (MI) and teaching undergrads at 2 public universities.

There are lots of ways to be politically relevant.

Progressives generally respect such endeavors.

Progressives also generally avoid reducing people they know nothing about into "types."

But you, of course, know all about me.  Through the convenience of your stereo[TYPE]ing lens.  It's so much easier to pigeon-hole and insult and threaten and cry victim than actually engage someone who disagrees with you.

Good luck in MD.  And I mean that.

by Strummerson 2010-11-01 12:40AM | 0 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

"Fair point."

Thanks again. Still, it seems to me that you would prefer to talk about this diarist's peccadillos than the President's. I really don't understand that. What Obama did is much more likely to have an actual, negative affect on the elections than what the diarist here does.

"But this diary follows on the heels of yesterday's.  Taken together, in the context of this blog, they seem aimed at suppressing and dividing the grass roots on the eve of an election where every vote counts."

While I understand your frustration with the tone of this diarist, and I don't endorse it (see below), I also don't really buy into the constant refrain of "we can't criticize Obama/the Dems in DC/the Dems generally because we might hurt the Dems in the midterms." People who read this blog are, overwhelmingly, folks who are going to vote or have already voted, and who vote for liberal/progressive voters unfailingly. I see no reason for us to self censor even our harshest opinions about or assessments of the President, the Congressional Dems, or the Party generally out of fear of their affect on some mythical, undecided, voter/possible non voter who might be reading this blog. You mention the grassroots, but folks in the grassroots are the least likely to be affected by any efforts, intentional or not, to divide them or suppress them.

"Criticizing the President is all fine and dandy, but we cannot control that.  We can stand up and push back."

That seems a little contradictory. We SHOULD criticize the President when criticism is warrented. How can we stand up and push back if we are afraid to voice our criticisms because that might "divide or suppress" somebody?

"Regardless of what is 'more blameworthy,' getting people to go out and vote in a midterm legislative election seems much more important that parsing blame and settling scores.  That's what this diarist is interested in doing. That's what this diary participates in, given it's predecessor."

Well, there are three ways of responding to that. On the one hand, I think you are describing a false dichotomy. We can blame the President when he is wrong and still work on getting out the vote. On the other hand, if there really are only two choices, aren't you doing the same thing that you criticize the diarist for doing? You are spending your time arguing with him, deepening the divisions, instead of getting out the vote. And, on the third hand (!), the putative bad motives of the diarist really have nothing to do with the validity of his main claim. The topic he brought up is timely, and is not merely a rehashing of Obama's and his supporters' alleged sins during the primaries. And he is right that this question has not gotten much attention in the media. Obama acted badly here, and so it is only right that someone calls him on it. The fact that this particular person did so, and that you have other issues with him (even if your concerns are justified) really doesn't make that much difference.

"I am exercising my right to speak on this diary in order to confront."

I have no problem with you speaking out. At the same time, I can express my view that it would be more productive to discuss the actual topic of the diary than engage in mutual name calling and off topic digressions.

"I think that the effort to rally one 'group' and demonize another, to [re]construct such groups on the eve of this election merits opposition."

I don't disagree with the notion that it serves no purpose to reconstruct the Obama/Hillary factions of 2008 and engage in a circular firing squad, on the eve of this election or at any time. Still, that can't become an all-purpose answer to any criticism of Obama, at this or any time.

by freemansfarm 2010-11-01 12:33AM | 1 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

No time left this evening to respond point by point, as this post truly warrants.

But let me clarify, I am not against criticizing the president.  Not at all.  And of course this is an important part of pushing back.  But we can only do so by functioning as the most effective possible left flank.  I am even more disappointed with that over the last 2 yrs than with the President's shortcomings.

My point goes rather to timing and emphasis.

MOST IMPORTANTLY, I do not share your view that most of the readers and posters here are likely to vote or to have voted.  That's the primary point on which we divide.  I think this is increasingly a site that encourages readers to sit on the sidelines and blame everyone else.  I think that's what this diary does.  And I think it's counter-productive to be spewing this kind of bile (taken together with yesterday's offering) in the 48 hours before the midterms.

But again, I do not think it improper to criticize the president.  I just think it should be done with an eye toward trying to push him in the direction we want him to go.  FDR required a left flank.  Obama, no FDR, requires one even more.  But I've watched 2 years of squabbling and score settling and very little effective grass roots action.  I think it's time to take some responsibility for that.  Obama was never going to be the social democrat I would like.  I don't think his ultimate vision is far from mine.  But he's a pragmatist (in the philosophical sense) and thus methodologically a gradualist.  He's also a flawed politician, which explains his mistake here.  No surprise there either.  I knew that when I chose to support him.  In the mean time, we should be focusing on trying to prevent Boehner from becoming Speaker.  But instead it's the same broken record since the end of the primary.

In the mean time, the other side has mobilized. 

 

by Strummerson 2010-11-01 12:58AM | 0 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

I understand the point you are making, but in your statements I detect more than a little of what the diarist is complaining about. To you, and to some other posters, there seems to be some notion that every left of center, Democratic website, blog, forum, whatever, MUST act, primarily, as a cheerleader. A cheerleader for Obama, the DC Dems and the party in general. And, if they don't, that is somehow illegitimate. An illigitimacy which calls for intervention by posters like yourself. You, and others, act as if you had some sort of "duty" to enforce cheerleader uniformity on every, single blog in left blogistan. And that is similar to what happened here during the Hillary/Obama conflicts. Some folks just can't stand to see an internet voice on the left which, at that time, was not pro Obama, or, at this time, which is not directed primarily towards winning re election for Obama and the DC Dems. I didn't understand/didn't like it then, and I don't now either.

The truth is that this blog is NOT a place where uncommitted voters are going to come and get discouraged and/or "divided." Only political junkies come here. So I think we should stop the pious pretence that anything we do here has any affect on the elections. The other thing is, and I know this goes totally against the grain of the cheerleading imperative, we are going to get crushed tomorrow. The only issue left is the extent of the destruction. So, please, stop acting like there is anything that any poster here can do about it. Boehner IS going to be speaker, whatever we do or say or refrain from doing or saying here. Just closing our eyes and wishing real hard won't change that, nor, unfortunately, at this point, will hard work. And, certainly, enforcing some sort of uniformity of views on this blog won't do it either.

But, if that were your main concern, it seems to me that you would have a lot more to say about the Democratic voter suppression/division caused by a President who refuses to endorse his party's candidate for governor out of selfish, personal "loyalty" to a Republican than you would about the motives and actions of an obscure diarist on an obscure blog. But you don't. Obama gets a pass, or, at most, a one sentence, grudging admission on your part that he has made a mistake, while the blogger gets pilloried in post after post. Rhode Island is one of the (few?) places where Obama's endorsement might actually be worth something. Its governorship is one of the few that we can hope to win. Yet Obama withholds his support, and does so apparently precisely because of the two year old, primaries-based grudge that you hammer the diarist for having and perpetuating. Still, you have almost nothing to say about that, despite your professed concern with the election results. And that, on top of everything else, gives more than a little credibility to his claims of hypocricy on your part.

by freemansfarm 2010-11-01 07:58PM | 1 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

My agreement with the supposed central point of this diary is not grudging, though as a commenter above pointed out, the labor movement in RI is also split between Chaffee and Caprio.  But I still would have preferred Obama endorse the Dem.  It's not grudging.  It's just not propelled by petty score settling animus like the diarist exhibits.  What more is there to say on that?  As I noted before, I have larger disagreements with Obama than this.  So Obama doesn't get a "pass" from me.  I just don't think it is evidence of what an unprecedented embarrassment he is.  And I don't think we actually know his motivations.  Grudges are quite common among politicians.  Did you just wake up to discover that Obama is...wait for it...a POLITICIAN (gasp!).  I actually think that Bill Clinton pressuring Meek to drop out in FL is worse.  

But, here you also join changeagain in stereotyping.  Now I am only tolerant of cheerleading?  This is an absurd and baseless accusation.  It can only stand on an imaginary association.  As for hypocrisy, I've been pretty consistent.  There's a bit of nuance in my perspective, sure.  Doesn't make me a hypocrite.

Finally, if you think that the traffic on this site is all committed voting, you simply aren't paying attention.  Plenty around here are already hanging decorations for the self-aggrandizing schadenfreudefest that is already warming up.  Plenty see "Speaker Boehner" as some sort of vindication for past grievances.  If pointing that out makes me a cheerleader for a politician about whom I have always had qualified perspective, I'll plead guilty.  But who then is really involved in a cult of personality here?  

That's my case.  I think it sound.  And I hope you recognize that I took the time to communicate it to you, instead of hurling accusations as you have joined the diarist in doing.  The diarist doesn't even try to do the same.  Consider your questions asked and answered.

by Strummerson 2010-11-02 02:48AM | 0 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

(1) It sounds like a pretty grudging admission to me....conjuring up phoney excuses for Obama's action...half making the case for some notion of Chafee being the more liberal candidate, when organized labor, except for Obama's pet union, all backed the Democrat...playing the "blame game" by bringing up the unconfirmed allegations about Clinton and Meeks, which have nothing to do with it...excusing Obama on the basis that he is a "politician" (why not excuse the diarist under the same reasoning? politicans will be politicians, and diarists will be diarists, so what's all the fuss about?)...clouding the waters with your "other" concerns about Obama...and refusing to admit the obvious--that Obama is doing precisely what you are taking the diarist to task for: carrying over grudges from the primaries in 2008 into this general election.

(2) It sure sounds like cheerleading to me. Basically, your take  is that during this "critical time" (and somehow, it is always a "critical time") no one should criticize Obama, even though it is obvious he is wrong, and even though he is a wrong in a way that goes directly to the event that you think makes this time so critical, namely, the election. Obama, unlike this powerless diarist, is actually hurting the chances of a Democratic nominee for Statewide office. But no one should mention that, apparently.

(3) And those points lead to the charge of hypocricy. According to you, we all should be on our best, "party unity" behavior. We should all pull together for the party in this election. We should all stand shoulder to shoulder as Democrats. And that's why this diarist, his diary, and the "timing" of it are so dreadful. So dreadful as to merit dozens of comments from you about his terrible behavior. But Obama, who actually has the ablity to persuade people, whose every word is reported on, whose non endorsement of a Democratic candidates speaks volumes, merits only a half-assed, forced, excuse laden, one sentence and be done with it and then "why can't we move on" pseudo criticism from you. You are so ready to move on from Obama's misdeed, but, somehow, this diarist's sins are worth a gallon of ink. That leads me to believe that, in reality, you are as much concerned with keeping the grudges of '08 alive as the diarist.

(4) I am not wrong. No one comes here who is not already a political junky. That some of the viewers and users might be folks who are indulging in a little schadenfreud over the primaries may well be the case. But they are hardly undecided voters, or persons who haven't decided whether to vote or not. Again, the phony piety, which is reminiscent of some of the claims from that primary season, sounds a particularly false and sour note. No one can speak their mind, because little Johnny "I can't decide who to vote for or even whether to vote at all" might be listening. That's just bull. And convenient bull at that.

(5) I feel no need to get down on my knees and thank you for taking the time to respond to my posts. I'm not sure what you are looking for here, but as the diarist has been told, this is a discussion board. I have every right to disagree with you, and to criticize your posts, as long as I do so fairly. IMHO, your posts show a certain hypocricy. And I have no qualms about saying so. Moreover, this is not a press conference. You are not doing me some kind of favor by continuing the dialogue, which is what your "consider your questions asked and answered" smacks of. Again, while the diarist clearly has some issues, the truth is that your tone does have the flavor of royalism.

by freemansfarm 2010-11-02 04:11AM | 0 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

1) Can't control how something "sounds" to you.  I think that the other issues I raise add perspective.  And as we can only affect what we do in our ranks, I find it much MORE relevant than whatever calculus or motivations guide the alliances between professional politicians.

2) If you think that suggesting we should be "pulling together" in the days before the midterms to confront the enemies of any progressive agenda instead of ginning up grievance and division constitutes cheerleading, by me a freaking set of pom-poms.  This definition of cheerleading diverges from the cliche PUMA slur at "o-bots" who presumable cheer Obama on and quash dissent  I indeed want us to cheer one another on to face the GOP onslaught.  This diarist simply aids and abets the enthusiasm gap.  That's its effect.  It's certainly not going to bring Obama to heel.  A left flank needs to concentrate on issues not personalities.  Obama has strengths and weaknesses.  We've got to push issues so that we can enlist his strengths.  There are helpful and timely critiques.  This is the opposite. 

3) So you think I'm a hypocrite simply because we don't share priorities.  I'm not impressed.  I think this diarist indeed needs to be confronted.  I don't think confronting Obama in this place and time over this issue is important.  But a diarist who simply aims at demoralizing and dividing members of the grass roots can be effectively opposed.

4) You are wrong because you are not paying attention.  Sure this is a forum for political junkies.  But some political junkies are more interested in pissing vinegar than contributing to mobilization.  There are plenty on this site who lean towards not voting and blaming Obama.

5) No one wants you on your knees.  I simply point out here that you have confronted me with questions as I confronted this diarist.  You began civilly, so I credited you with fair questions and points and explained my position.  You can disagree with it without the ad hominem accusations.  This diarist opens with ad hominem accusations (look at the second comment, which raises his incendiary and bigoted PUMA diatribe and inserts it into this context) and he will not answer or explain his perspective.  I dignified your questions with reasoned responses and highlighted that.  But since I'm such a hypocrite, why do you bother to continue reading? 

6) It seems you ultimately agree with the diarist that this election is all about Obama.  The PUMA crowd is much more fixated on him than the imagined gangs of "o-bot royalist thug enforcers" ever have been.  At any rate, I couldn't disagree more.  I think AT THIS POINT it's about our votes and the GOteaParty we face.  Scolding Obama and blaming me for defending him, which I'm not particularly interested in doing, is just part of a distracting and self-defeating agenda.  If you share that agenda, then I think you are something significantly worse than a hypocrite.  The schadnefreude pre-post-mortems are self-indulgent crap.  On Thurs. we can take our President to the wood shed for a variety of short-comings.  But we won't get anywhere with personality-based screeds.  In the mean time, we've an election to face.

I'm off to coffee and the polls in 20 minutes.  You can analyze my "hypocrisy" and how I destroyed MYDD and Jerome and how Obama is the worst possible Democratic president on your own now.

by Strummerson 2010-11-02 05:15AM | 0 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

(1) Your admission about Obama "sounds" grudging to me because that's what it was. You wrote it, so you can "control" that. Cute semantic argument on your part though.

(2) It isn't so much that you're a cheerleader, but that you won't allow anyone else to be anything but. The critique raised here, stripped of non essentials, was timely and constructive. You admit as much yourself, grudgingly. Yet you still saw fit to repeatedly attack the diarist.

(3) Obama divides and demoralizes, but you have nothing to say. An obscure diarist allegedly does the same, and you go nuclear. That IS hypocricy, not merely "priorities."

(4) I'm not wrong. Political junkies, which is what you admit the readership here is, are not swayed so easily. They almost always vote, and almost always for the same side. The few that don't, or that switch, don't decide to do so on the basis of a random diary or two. There are no impressionable neophytes here to worry about. So, your whole rationale for "policing" this diary,  this diarist, and this site, collapses.

(5) I did not "confront" you. If you'll notice, my first response was not "nested" in your on-going, ad hominem laden mud slinging exchange with the diarist, but broken out, as a separate response to his diary. Perhaps something you had mentioned was pointed out in my post, as an example of the non responsive responses he had elicited, but I had no particular desire to dialogue with you. And I still don't. You are free to respond to me, or not. And whether you do or not is of absolutely no moment to me. Neither do I feel I have to censor myself in order to gain the privilege of your time. Nor am I bound to refrain from reading and responding to your posts merely because I detect hypocricy in them. What I had hoped was to move this thread in the direction of discussing the substance of the diarist's accurate, timely and telling critique of Obama, but that seems like a lost cause.

(6) I don't believe the election is all about Obama, but I don't believe it has nothing to do with him either. But the extent of his culpablity is an issue for another day. As is the conduct of his supporters on this blog, their attitude toward Jerome, and their ultimate effect on this blog. But the diary was not primarily about those things. And, sufficed to say, the diarist was correct in pointing out Obama's failure in this particular instance. And that instance was directly related to this election, and to the Democrats' performance in it. While it is true that the diarist had some other, irrlevant things to say, the fact remains that you refused to accept the basic validity of his point. And that you used every excuse and every argumentative and semantic trick in the book to avoid doing so. Just as you are now doing with me.

I already voted. You can continue your crusade to purge the internet of any and all criticism of Obama at your leisure.

by freemansfarm 2010-11-02 06:57PM | 0 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

Wow.

I bought your "good faith" act.

MY bad.

You are just change2012s wingman in purging anyone who doesn't consider Obama the anti-christ and Hillary the panacea to everything.

Anyway.  I didn't bother to read this one. 

You are no more capable of respectful and good faith disagreement than your buddy.

A troll is a troll is a troll.

by Strummerson 2010-11-02 07:16PM | 0 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

LOL! You didn't "bother to read" my post, yet you criticize it anyway. Does not compute! I'm no one's wingman. And I don't think Obama is the antiChrist, and I said nothing at all about Hillary. You, on the other hand, are pretty much just what the diarist said you were....a Royalist hypocrite thug who just can't stand any criticism of your Lord and Savior, no matter how timely, how correct, and how accurately presented. He's right, it's O Bot trolls like you who ruined this site. Why don't you run along to Daily Kos now and brag about how you stood up to all those meanies who dared to criticize your Chosen One?

by freemansfarm 2010-11-02 07:30PM | 0 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

he's a royalist obama enforcer freak -

 

deceitful and daft

 

i googled his screen name and found a site called the purple moose where he and a couple others (brit etc) excitedly discussing how they were going to come over here to this diary and smack around those who dare to question their 'precious"

 

i read this guy right from the first moment.

he pretends hes open minded in fair when in reality hes a deceitful dick.

his hobby - if you cam believe something so utterly pathetic - is bashing "pumas"

i take back one charge though - obviously this is one dickless SOB

by changeagain2012 2010-11-02 08:38PM | 0 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

I'm the crown prince in absentia of Kreplachistan.

You have both exposed yourselves.

Talk about self-blinding hypocrites.

Which one of you is going to validate your masculinity by threatening to beat me up...over the internet.

by Strummerson 2010-11-02 09:46PM | 0 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

ha

ha

WE

told you so!

by changeagain2012 2010-11-02 10:53PM | 0 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

 

id like to point out that the other diary i wrote last week wasnt at all about obama - it was about people like this strummerman who come to this website anytime anyone dares to write anything critical of obama or the administrations policies and swarms them their diaries and instead of discussing the diary itself just flood it with personal attacks and insults of the most juvenile and personal sort. this used to ba lively and important blog but by their childish and trully thuggish net bullying behavior they have run off 99% of the people who once came here because they had decided that this site was apro hillary PUMA enclave and so should be shouted down. they have mostly achieved their goal of shutting down this website - which once was the birthplace of the progressive democratic online community. this strummerman came to this diary and wrote probably 30 comments - everyone a personal attack on me - none of them discussing the topic of the diary itself. his type is here to shut down dissent/  he is one of the last remnants of the obama bully boy army from 2008. its not that i believe these bullyboys are sanctioned or encouraged by anyone from the obama political world.  thats ridiculous.  these childish men come here to batter others because it AMUSES them to do so. theyre thuggish and strummerman is the very worst and plays a mean game of passive/aggressive "who moi"? its funny to watch him act all innocent and interested in civil discouse when someone else enters onto the diary comments so he can play the innocent. i tried not to make this diary too harsh towards obama.  my points - are obviously only my opinion - but i dont think they went into savaging obama or anywhere outside the boundaries of acceptable discussion. but again those three or four fellows dont come to debate - they come to debase    i stated in the diary that i voted for obama because my loyalty to the party required that vote. i stand by that responsibility and only wish that the president would do the same. id like to point out that the other diary i wrote last week wasnt at all about obama - it was about people like this strummerman who come to this website anytime anyone dares to write anything critical of obama or the administrations policies and swarms them their diaries and instead of discussing the diary itself just flood it with personal attacks and insults of the most juvenile and personal sort. this used to ba lively and important blog but by their childish and trully thuggish net bullying behavior they have run off 99% of the people who once came here because they had decided that this site was apro hillary PUMA enclave and so should be shouted down. they have mostly achieved their goal of shutting down this website - which once was the birthplace of the progressive democratic online community. this strummerman came to this diary and wrote probably 30 comments - everyone a personal attack on me - none of them discussing the topic of the diary itself. his type is here to shut down dissent/  he is one of the last remnants of the obama bully boy army from 2008. its not that i believe these bullyboys are sanctioned or encouraged by anyone from the obama political world.  thats ridiculous.  these childish men come here to batter others because it AMUSES them to do so. theyre thuggish and strummerman is the very worst and plays a mean game of passive/aggressive "who moi"? its funny to watch him act all innocent and interested in civil discouse when someone else enters onto the diary comments so he can play the innocent. he lives at this site.hes both a bully and a baiter.   since i despise bullies - i bit.  sorry anybody but him had to see any of it. but his kind of behavior is what has made this site a internet ghost town when the last time i was here it was thriving. --- i tried not to make this diary too harsh towards obama.  my points - are obviously only my opinion - but i dont think they went into savaging obama or anywhere outside the boundaries of acceptable discussion. but again those three or four fellows dont come to debate - they come to debase    i stated in the diary that i voted for obama because my loyalty to the party required that vote. i stand by that responsibility and only wish that the president would do the same.

 

by changeagain2012 2010-11-01 02:08AM | 0 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

Again.

I'm happy that you are so against ad hominem attacks that you spent all this and energy attacking your commenter while not once responding to a single point or challenge.

Drop the innocent victim posture.

It's absurd at this point.  It has been all along.  My barbs in your direction don't approach the bile you've spewed here.

As for responding in this diary to the hate-mongering paranoid rant you posted prior to this one, let me point out that the second comment you posted to this diary, the second over all, was this:

"HULLO OUT THERE...ANYBODY HERE?

Seems I was right before.

Did Obama Royalist Enforcer Thugs Run Everybody Off From MyDD?

sad."

Fair game after that.  Or is that supposed to spark discussion about RI?

If you really cared about GOTV for THESE elections as your priority, you would have spent some time and energy trying to encourage it, rather than ginning up old divisions that don't begin to describe the vast majority of democrats, regardless of who they supported and at what point.  Not to mention using Tea Bag rhetoric to do so.

If you want to be engaged civilly as an ally, one who is open to disagreement, drop this destructive posture of victimization and start addressing people in a civil substantive manner.

Take a little responsibility.

Or alert Jerome to my supposedly "vile" and "thuggish" behavior.  Let him decide if I merit warning or banishment.

It's divisive diaries and comments like yours that killed the traffic on this site.  It's why I and other I know stopped participating regularly.  It's the privileged position granted diaries such as this that drove away Charles Lemos, one of the best assets of this site.

You wanna see the site's problem.

Wake up and look in the freaking mirror and stop playing victim already.

by Strummerson 2010-11-01 02:29AM | 0 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

not to draw you into this other stuff but -

thanks.

and as to RI - i agree.

what truly amazes me is that i have seen tons of coverage about the incident up there but until Dowd wrote about it in today's Times - there had been no written commentary at all - anywhere in the press about how obamas actions there were a hurtful act against those RI dems who supported our nominee in the primary and those democrats who have financially supported the campaign or the wasted 1.5 million dollars spent by the dem govs association.

at best - if obama and axelrod had decided that they were going to help the dem candidate lose - wouldnt it have been wise to inform the DGA of this - so that this vast sum could have been targeted to one of the other states where the governor race may have been impacted or even won by a timely extra 1.5 mil for a tv buy?

we are gonna lose a lot of great dems in other governor races tuesday - what if this money could have helped us in PA, FL or Ohio?

i mean - really - what was the WH thinking?

by changeagain2012 2010-10-31 11:45PM | 0 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

In fairness to the MSM, I think a lot of the coverage was understandably focussed on the candidate's remark that President Obama could "take" his recommendation and "shove" it. That's pretty strong language for anyone to use about the President, particularly a candidate from his own party. So, as a simple matter of "newsworthiness," the reaction was a "hotter" story than the snub that prompted. Even though, IMHO, the snub was much worse, and the reaction was justified.

Rather than take on the MSM, I think you might do better questioning why the so-called "A list" Democratic/left bloggers had so little to say about it. And I totally agree that Obama's actions really do seem to undercut the efforts of the DGA and others to support the candidate.

But, while I understand your anger (I too was more or less forced off this site a couple of years ago), I think you might do better to tone down your accusational style a little bit. You made your point about Obama's actions in RI, but your style contributed to the thread ending up being about extraneous matters.

by freemansfarm 2010-11-01 12:00AM | 0 recs
RE: The Only Politician Obama May Personally Get Elected Isn't Even A Dem. How Obama's Choice Is Screwing Rhode Island Democrats.

well the good news is this site front paged the diary all day and eve

in the old days that would have meant that the entire dem/prog net world would have seen it...

but since few come here anymore because of the abusive nature of a few wilding thugs - the only way to spread a diary is by eailing the link directly -

if you get my drift.

it still will be at the top of the rec list through tuesday - so if you know anyone whose got a blog in RI or has a kos account (itd get attention there quick) please change it any way you wish and post it there too.

---

now back to my temper flare up

believe me i remember these same names from before.

they dont even bother to read the diaries- they just smell a heretic and theyre off with the insults and taunts

theyre dissent killing net nerd junior fascist cyberbullies

its only like 5 guys and honestly - theyre just insufferable @#$%&

and the things they write about poor jerome...the taunts...check out the comments in his diaries

by changeagain2012 2010-11-01 02:35AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads