Drizzled in Bullshit
The brain rot of the FireDogIdiots has reached epic proportions. There’s no turning back for these nut jobs. It doesn’t matter how many Obama supporters (aka Obamabots, Obama Zombies, Obamaphiles, Kenyans) tell these jackholes that they aren’t the base (You’re not the base; You’re still not the base; You’re no more the base than you were two seconds ago) — they simply will not listen.
They are so filled with Obama-hate that they have become one-note drones: Obama killed my grandma. Obama stole the cookie from the cookie jar. Obama is a wuss. Obama doesn’t know how to fight. Obama hurt my feelings. Obama drank my milkshake; he drank it right up.
On and on they drone. It never stops, no matter what Obama says or does. He could give every person in America a lifetime supply of Awesome, and these asshats would complain that the Awesome they received wasn’t awesome enough.
That’s the sheer absurdity of it: IT.NEVER.STOPS. Even when these asshats are demonstrably wrong, it doesn’t matter to them. They just brush it off and move on to the next item on their Outrage List.
At this point, I doubt that any of these people are actually liberal. It’s the intertrons; You can say or be or do anything on the intertrons. No liberal could be this angry at Obama all the fucking time. It has become a personal grudge to these people, and it makes no sense. It makes no fucking sense at all. Obama could cure cancer, and firebaggers would ask him why he didn’t go back in time and prevent the Black Plague from killing half the people on earth back in 13-whatever.
Please just stop it. Just stop. Remove your heads from your colon, and go take a nap.
But these self-centered asshats aren’t getting the message. As they stare down the barrel of their own irrelevancy, their Obama-hate has turned to desperate outrage: “Obama is betraying his base. KILL PRIMARY HIM!”
Look, FDL is supposed to be a liberal blog, yeah? I can’t remember the last time I saw anything positive written about Obama over there, can you?1 Moreover, most of the negative crap is based on little more than speculation. (Obama gave Boehner the stink eye, which signals that he’s pre-caving on Social Security! KILL PRIMARY HIM!)
Most of the FDL posts start from the baseline of “Obama is the devil” and then proceed to view everything through that lens: An example: [This is a long one, so proceed at your own risk!]
President Obama, like all presidents, often says he “wants” or is even “fighting” for something [Sarcastic air quotes--clearly the superior opening salvo in all propagandistic pablum], but in fact puts no real effort into actually making it happen. ["In fact"? Where are the facts? Well, if you say it's a fact, then I suppose I'll just believe it. Notice how the author doesn't explain what "no real effort" means until after he's already made his point; at the end of the article, "no real effort" is revealed to be the "'if there is time' approach to DADT." ZOMG! MOAR SARKASTIC QUOTES!!] It could be he doesn’t want to spend political capital because he thinks it is a lost cause, thinks it is fairly unimportant, or even doesn’t really want it, but thinks it is smart politics to pretend he does. [The author has already stated the "fact" that Obama is a wuss (essentially), but come on! Don't expect him to have any "facts" regarding from whence the wussiness came! The author will throw out some ideas, though. He's just speculatin'. He's not saying for sure either way. It's Fox News 101: "Do Democrats hate America? Maybe they do, maybe they don't. We're just asking questions here."]
That is why it is important to recognize what a president acting as a “fierce advocate” actually looks like so you can distinguish the real thing from empty rhetoric. ["Fierce advocate"? Is that a gay advocate? I'm so confused. I'm sure I will be enlightened shortly.] We are seeing a what a real full-court press from the administration is when it comes to the START treaty. [What are you seeing? Because I'm seeing the news reporting that the Senate voted to repeal DADT. How did that happen? Well, "in fact," Obama promised Jane Hamsher that he wouldn't run for a second term if the Senate repealed DADT. Okay, fine--what I just posited doesn't make any sense, but how do you know it didn't happen that way? I just said it was a "fact," damnit! Or maybe, just maybe there's shit going on in the White House that you don't know about. Could it be? Maybe? Just a little?]
* It starts with actions like having your Director of National Intelligence tell senators his opinion about the ratification of a new START treaty: “I think the earlier, the sooner, the better.” [Or like waiting so the Pentagon could conduct a study to shove into the faces of the Republican obstructors? Like appealing DADT decisions so the Republicans can't whine about judicial activism?]
* You get as many respected experts, like former Secretary of State Colin Powell, to join you in the push for legislative action, both publicly and privately. [Or like getting respected experts on the military aka The Fucking Pentagon to come out in favor repealing DADT? Or maybe like surveying service members to make sure that they were cool with having gays all up in their military?]
* You have the Vice President, Secretary of State, Defense Secretary, and Director of National Intelligence all personally call senators, like the just-sworn-in Mark Kirk (R-IL), to tell them how important it is that they support the legislation. [I see. He didn't bother to do anything to repeal DADT. Obama hates the gays and doesn't really want to repeal DADT -- he's only saying he does because -- oh what's that? It passed? Oh. You've got stupid on your face. You might want to wash that off.]
* Make life uncomfortable for those who oppose the legislation by having the Senate Majority Leader threaten to keep the Senate in session during the holidays if they try to kill it through delaying tactics. [Because Lord knows that threatening to make one work over the holidays is “fierce advocacy.” I guess my boss is a fierce advocate, too, because guess what I'm doing this holiday season? My boss will be so pleased that he's striking a blow for Amurika.]
* Put Vice President Joe Biden on TV to make the case that failure to pass START puts the country at risk. “I hope I don’t get in the way of your Christmas shopping, but this is about the nation’s business. This is national security at stake. Act. Act.” [Seriously? Joe Biden telling people to do something is supposed to be “fierce advocacy”? The man considered by most to be a walking gaffe, and whom I last saw on The Colbert Report handing out hot dogs to returning soldiers from Iraq (not that there's anything wrong with that!) Ninja, please.]
* Then, the next day, have Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hold a bipartisan press conference to push the Senate to ratify the START treaty. [Requisite mention of Hillary, the Lost Candidate: CHECK!]
* If that is not enough, then, at a press conference with your top generals, you have them advocate for the treaty with the strongest language possible, such as “All the Joint Chiefs are very much behind the treaty. We need START, and we need it badly.” [Kind of like when Defense Secretary Gates and Joint Chiefs Admiral Mullen held a press conference and reported that 70% of troops support repeal? You mean like that?]
This is what fierce advocacy on an issue looks like from the White House: making the case to the public through a series of important surrogates, and heavy private lobbying of individual members of Congress. [Agreed. Which is what the White House did, jackass.]
Because this is a treaty, the president’s room to maneuver is constrained on this issue by the Constitution [Wow! Just like DADT!] but on most other issues, a president can enhance his push with threats. [Obama is going to hold his breath until you get it together, Congress!] It can be small, like promising to kill a senator’s pet project, or as sweeping as threats to use executive orders to get the same result [which result can be undone in the blink of an eye by a subsequent president, who -- if you asshats have your way -- will be in 2012. Hello Madame President Von Wolfhuntress!], push it through with reconciliation, or even call for the nuclear option to eliminate the filibuster, as George W. Bush did with some of his judicial nominees. [Are you stupid or somethin', son? Do you not understand that Obama is laboring in an entirely different political climate thanks, in part, to jerkwads like you and your Hamstress? How can you not understand that?]
If you see the administration using this multi-pronged, public and private push on an issue, you can be confident it is something the president really wants to make it happen. [Wow! Just like DADT! Remember when he said this at the State of the Union address on January 27, 2010: This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are. (Applause.) It’s the right thing to do. (Applause.)] If you don’t see this across-the-board push from the White House, you know the President’s commitment to the issue is soft at best, and, at worst, he is really signaling to the people that matter [Oooh conspiracy theories! The people that matter! I wonder who they are? I know one thing. It's not you.] that his promises are empty rhetoric he doesn’t want to see fulfilled. [You know what's empty? Your fucking skull.]
Compare the White House action on START with the “if there is time” approach to DADT. The latter is not fierce advocacy. [Oh really? Still think so, now that DADT has been repealed, you unstoppable jackass?]
I dissected the article to make a point. And that point is: The article could have been written by a drunk monkey. It probably was written by a drunk monkey. But it doesn’t matter; the sycophants — like Pavlovian dogs — chime in with some version of the Obama Sucks song. Every single comment is a riff on the same tune.
And the racism. Oh, the racism. What was once a bouquet of racism has turned into a full-fledged stench; and because The Hamstring doesn’t allow any differing viewpoints on her blog, one can presume that’s how she likes it. (It’s not surprising, given her brand of “humor.”)
Those who don’t agree with her false assessment of the Obama presidency (which is more than 80% of Democrats) are either shouted out of the comment section, or outright banned. A lot of liberals–those who still have fully functioning brains–see the firebaggers as a bunch of animals trapped in a zoo run by a crazed zookeeper who keeps her minions in check with a steady stream of lies, deception, and misinformation (that is when she isn’t misappropriating their money.)
The FDL sycophants are monkeys throwing poo at one another, and unfortunately, that poo sometimes leaves the outerbounds of The Lake and starts splattering on those of us who are actually trying to keep the Republicans from crapping all over the country again. This doesn’t mean we are worshipping at the altar of Obama; it means being realistic about what he can and cannot do. It means not reading malice into every word or action he takes. It means blogging in fora that permit dissenting views, and then hashing those views out. It means learning and growing and changing. It doesn’t mean blocking out everything one doesn’t want to hear.
But that’s not how Jane rolls. No dissenting comments exist in her FireDogWorld. Moderation is the spice of life in the Land o’ Lakes. The result? Comments like these:
A couple of points before I wrap this tl;dr up:
From Comment 9:
“This is where Clinton is a much better Kabuki player than Obama
Clinton would at least act like he was fighting for something, though behind the scenes he had killed it.
Another Big mistake Obama makes is ignoring the fact he is doing this Kabuki in a DEPRESSION. (People are not just mad at OBAMA, they are FURIOUS at OBAMA and the PHONY DEMS)
And let us not all forget the other big issue Obama forgets, someone on his staff needs to tell OBAMA, hello Mr. President here is a mirror, please look at it, you will notice that your are BLACK, I have a feeling a Black candidate doing Kabuki is not going to go over well with the DEM BASE. (this is just a fact) [You're stupid. This is just a fact. See how that works?]
What is funny about all of this, is the fact that a lot of DEMS in congress don’t see the Hell OBAMA is causing them come re-election time. :)
How many Dems want to be in the commercial with the lying Black Presidential Candidate for President? The GOP and The Left are going to tie you to OBAMA.
the 23 Dem Senators up for re-election are going to have tp defend some tough stuff in 2012!
1. Bob Dole Health Care Bill
2. Bush Tax Cuts
3. The Lying Dem Black Presidential Candidate [Seriously?!]
three strikes and you are OUT! :)
Good luck Dem Senators
this is just the facts [You wouldn't know a fact if it punched you in the babymaker.]
This is the quote that is helping Progressives Organizations Raise Money
” We HATE OBAMA and THINKS HE IS SCUM”2
say that, and you get liberal and progressives to donate
Laughing” [You cannot convince me that some of the comments like this weren't written by teabaggers. The grammar? The glee at the prospect of Obama's failure? Then again, the firebagger is the lowest form of teabagger.]
From Comment 13:
“At this point, I have such distrust for him and for the Senate that I feel compelled to fight everything they propose and to discount everything they say.
Obama is a capricious fuck.
Sorry but I can’t find who posted this link, but it’s worth posting again – The Left and Obama-Trauma“ [Notice how the Sycophant posts a link to The Black Agenda Report, which is part of Hamsher's Common Sense Media? Do you see how circular this all becomes? Her minions cannot even point to a non-Hamsher source in support of their claims that everyone hates Obama OMG LOL. Also, really? Pointing to one black blogger and hold him up as representative of all black people? We are not a monolith, assholes!]
From Comment 23:
Obama Triangulates the left, it is only right the left Triangulates the Black Vote
Are Black Voters going to vote for Palin, Romney, Newt, etc.? NO
The intelligent left needs to stress to Black Voters Obama is More Clarence THomas, Alan Keyes, he is no Martin Luther King.
Every commercial with Obama should feature a picture with him hugging Clarence Thomas, this is just good politics
We must make the Black Voter ask why Obama hugging Clarence Thomas. [Uncle Tom jokes kill with "Black Voters."]
It’s like Lord of the Flies over there; the racism that has infected the comment section is appalling for a group of people who claim to be “better than Republicans.” At this point, I would prefer the company of the Freepers; at least with the Freepers you know from the outset that most of them are a bunch of racist asshats. The racist asshats who comprise the FireDog Sycophant Brigade don’t even understand that their actions and words are racist because they are liberals, damnit, and liberals are Not Racist, and don’t you even think it! The dreaded “R” word to a white liberal is like the dreaded N-word — the mere use of the “R word” causes such severe cognitive dissonance that the mind of the firebagger, essentially, short circuits. Don’t you dare call them racist! NO DISASSEMBLE!
If you’re still reading this (congratulations!), here’s my point (at long last): I find it appalling that Jane Hamsher — the self-anointed leader of the progressive movement and the woman who appears on MSNBC as a matter of course (and Fox News occasionally despite decrying all Democrats who appear on that network) – is so insecure in her own political views and her ability to make cogent arguments, that she does not allow any opposing views on her blog. It is downright reprehensible that she allows (or champions?) the blatant racism that is oozing from her Lake.
Jane, the surest way to maintain a belief that you are always right is to never have anyone tell you that you’re wrong. If you delete all of the comments that question your views and leave only the laudatory comments, eventually you will begin to believe your own bullshit. (That is, of course, if your goal hasn’t always been to undermine the Democrat party from the inside. It seems more and more likely that your endgame is to make money off the backs of your hapless sycophants, since you’ve accomplished absolutely nothing thus far besides moving PAC money from one pocket to the other.)
The bottom line is this: If you refuse to allow opposing views on your blog, then you own the racism of your commenters.
Stop it, Jane. Just stop it. You’re hurting America.
1 No liberal is that one note, unless that liberal is either stupid or a Republican. Which one are you?
2 Notice how none of these sycophants can get it through their empty skulls that they are not the base! They are a distraction. A pimple on the ass of humanity.