podcast

The End-Of-Year Emopants Blowout!

Both Glenn Greenwald and Taylor Marsh saw fit to end the year with massive anti-Obama rants where they basically announce openly their opposition to the President for 2012.  Not that their opposition didn’t exist before, it’s just now official.  First, Double G defends Ron Paul’s “effect” on our political discourse:

There are very few political priorities, if there are any, more imperative than having an actual debate on issues of America’s imperialism; the suffocating secrecy of its government; the destruction of civil liberties which uniquely targets Muslims, including American Muslims; the corrupt role of the Fed; corporate control of government institutions by the nation’s oligarchs; its destructive blind support for Israel, and its failed and sadistic Drug War. More than anything, it’s crucial that choice be given to the electorate by subverting the two parties’ full-scale embrace of these hideous programs.

I wish there were someone who did not have Ron Paul’s substantial baggage to achieve this. Before Paul announced his candidacy, I expressed hope in an Out Magazine profile that Gary Johnson would run for President and be the standard-bearer for these views, in the process scrambling bipartisan stasis on these questions. I did that not because I was endorsing his candidacy (as some low-level Democratic Party operative dishonestly tried to claim), but because, as a popular two-term Governor of New Mexico free of Paul’s disturbing history and associations, he seemed to me well-suited to force these debates to be had. But alas, Paul decided to run again, and Johnson — for reasons still very unclear — was forcibly excluded from media debates and rendered a non-person. Since then, Paul’s handling of the very legitimate questions surrounding those rancid newsletters has been disappointing in the extreme, and that has only served to obscure these vital debates and severely dilute the discourse-enhancing benefits of his candidacy.

 

He spends the rest of the article saying the President Obama is just as bad if not worse overall than Paul, and far worse than Paul on the specific issues that matter to him.  He then proceeds to attack President Obama supporters as evil hypocrites who “don’t want to hear” his “truths”, accusing them of being stuck in Bush-era binary worldviews, but then weasels out of endorsing Paul with constant whining about how nobody but Glenn Greenwald is smart enough to understand his carefully nuanced argument that he’s not endorsing Paul, he just wants someone like Paul to win over the hated, evil Obama.  (Apparently that other person is Gary Johnson.)

The projection is apparent in the first hundred words when you realize that it’s Greenwald who has adopted the binary worldview, completely choosing to ignore the circumstances and nuance of realpolitik and the other two branches of government to say “You know, if it wasn’t for the bigotry, the racism, the utter disregard for the federal government and the supposition that states should have the right to discriminate freely, Ron Paul isn’t such a bad guy.  Unlike Obama.”  Silly, I know.  But that one issue is enough for Greenwald to search for an alternative to the President…any alternative.

Replace Ron Paul with Hillary Clinton, and “civil liberties” with “women’s issues” and you get Taylor Marsh’s end of year screed where she declares her vote is now open.

It’s now even considered an extreme position to think women’s individual freedoms are important. On Obama’s conservative Plan B decision, you get replies like “it’s smart politically” or his fans argue from the right using parental rights over individual female freedoms.

Then there’s the reality that most women have more dire issues on their mind, because reproductive health choices are considered by most to be a given. For sexually active young females, poor women and those in rural areas, however, these issues are attached to one another. However, their stories don’t equal the same coverage as the majority of reports about women today.

Women often share the breadwinner role, so their focus is on who is protecting their bottom line.

Recently on MSNBC when they asked voters in Iowa about their choices, a woman said, “I need to take care of my paycheck, that’s why I’m supporting Romney.”

Why should women automatically bet that Pres. Obama will help their bottom line more than Mitt Romney?

Is it enough that the 111th Congress passed the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which Pres. Obama signed? Women of all political persuasions need to expect all 21st century politicians to support economic equality. We should also demand that when it’s found out we aren’t being treated equally we have recourse, which is what Ledbetter is all about. Would any other Democratic president not have signed the Ledbetter Act? To laud something so simple as financial equality for the same job done reveals women are expecting way too little from politicians that depend on our support to politically survive.

And she, too, falls into the “no real difference” between the parties, as well as pushing for Ron Paul.  They all “hate women” equally, to the point that feminists should strongly consider Mitt Romney for President, and that the “only argument” Obama supporters have is that the Republicans will be worse on the issue.  In a sane world where Marsh sees Republicans doing everything they can to rid the country of abortion altogether, that argument would be enough.

Instead, we get a long, morose piece on how the Democrats are no longer worth supporting, and that a feminist is all but washing her hands of voting in 2012, and doesn’t really care if the Republicans win in 2012 or not.

And I shake my head, because these arguments are so terrible that I have to conclude that neither Greenwald nor Marsh actually believe them.  At the very least, they maintain their “integrity” by convincing us to not vote at all, and will spend 2012 doing so.  And that’s the real danger, here.

Who needs Republicans disenfranchising people at the state level when Greenwald and Marsh will do it for free?

[UPDATE] Maha, Tom Hilton, and Scott Lemieux all decimate this nonsense as well with some excellent work, and Bob Cesca reminds us that Ron Paul’s “anti-war history” and his “principled stance against targeted assassinations” is bullshit, mainly because he did vote for the AUMF for Afghanistan in 2001 and then sponsored a bill that would have given the country the ability to issue letters of marque and reprisal against terrorists, both of which are completely ignored by Greenwald and Marsh.  In other words, Ron Paul is about as anti-war as I am a Norwegian midwife who collects Faberge’ eggs.

Share/Bookmark
news

49 Responses to The End-Of-Year Emopants Blowout!

  1. Taylor Marsh is a hack who started the bullshit “Obama played ’99 Problems’ at his Iowa victory party” rumor, AND she voted for Reagan. Isn’t it funny how so many of these fervent more-progressive-than-thou, Dems-suck types (Arianna, Ed Schultz, Marsh, Cenk, Markos Moulitsas) were starry-eyed Reaganites?

  2. Lady, Obama’s record on civil liberties, foreign intervention, and spending is as bad as George W. Bush’s. You’re blind if you don’t want to acknowledge that.

    • Riiiight.

      See, the phrase “civil liberties” doesn’t just mean “for Anwar al-Awlaki.” I signed the papers to create the first chapter of the ACLU in Alabama when I was 15 years old, BTW, so understand that this is coming from someone who fights the RW outrage every goddamn day.

      To me, “civil liberties” include the right to vote. The president has been fighting all these new voter ID laws. To me, “civil liberties” include legislation like the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, the Fair Sentencing Act, the overturn of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, or the president’s appointments to the National Labor Relations Board and the US Commission on Civil Rights.

      But sure, if we change the meaning of the term “civil liberties” to mean “protecting Anwar al-Awalaki from the consequences of his own actions” then SURE! the president’s record on civil liberties is worse.

      And I know what you mean by “foreign intervention.” Again, this is coming from someone who protested Reagan’s invasion of Grenada when he was in 5th grade. To me, “foreign intervention” is Iraq. To you, “foreign intervention” is Libya. We agree that Iraqis should be safe from marauding neocons with daddy issues, but we disagree whether Libyans are capable of wanting their own freedom bad enough to fight and kill and die for it. I say they are victims of Gadaffi’s aggression, you say they are victims of American aggression.

      But “spending”? Really? You’ll have to clarify what you mean by that. Are you channeling deficit fearmongery, or complaining that he’s been too miserly with public spending? Because it can only be one and not both.

    • Jim, you are extremely stupid. You are so stupid, you cannot read a byline. You are so stupid, you wander in with bullshit theories that Obama is as bad as Bush on civil liberties (really, where did you see that free speech zone?), foreign intervention (iknowright, we are so totally occupying libya right now), and spending (because his reduction of the Federal government payrolls totally have increased spending), as if just about any ABLC reader would not be able to see what a tremendous steaming pile of horshit you just dropped in the comments. You are an embarrassment to the internet gods of trollery, may 4chan have mercy on your soul.

    • Yeah, yeah Al Gore is the same as Bush.

    • Jim: According to you.

    • We’ve ended torture, and we did NOT I repeat did NOT allow indefinite detention. I can show you the actual document if you want. Plus I can add the signing statement against the certain provisions in the bill, like prohibiting funding for closing Gitmo (something Sanders and Kucinich out of all people voted against.)

    • None of this matters to Jim. We can all agree that we need stronger protections on our civil liberties. Because Jim has a roof over his head, a nice job, food in his belly, and is a male, he doesn’t need to worry about a holistic view of any leader. He can afford to be a one issue voter. Some of us realize life is complex, and if our neighbor is hurting, it affects us too. That is why we look at the whole package. Women’s rights, labor rights, minority rights, gay rights, etc. You cannot persuade guys like Jim because they do not have the capacity for empathy to their neighbor.

      • Bingo. The cocoon of privilege and indifference that blinds the comfortable to the plight of others can sometimes be more oppressive than hatred, racism, prejudice and fear.

        • Take, for example, the desire for so many well-heeled “progressives” with public platforms that the Obama administration prioritize perp-walking the Bush administration and “banksters” so they could have their very own vicarious foam-rubber-finger-#1 Fuck-yeah Mission Accomplished moment.

          Never mind that the economy was bleeding jobs at an astounding rate. Never mind that NO administration has ever gone after the past administration for what they did in the name of national security. Never mind that, thanks to deregulation (brought on in part by their tough-talkin’ dick-swingin’ Pretend Progressive Hero Bill Clinton repealing Glass-Steagall) that it wasn’t at all clear or easy to determine WHAT, if any, laws had been broken in the clusterfuck leading to the 2008 freefall. Or that arresting people without clear proof of legal (versus moral) wrongdoing goes against the very notions of habeas corpus that they’re screaming about now in their NDAA fits.

          No, by gum, the people of privilege in LeftieLand, just like Eric Cantor says, want what they want when they want it, dammit! And their right to a Righteougasm of Justice!! trumped the need to actually HELP people. Matt Damon MUST be avenged!

          It was the same thing with their myopic focus on “public option” (as opposed to the decades-long positioning of “universal” healthcare as the goal), because they thought it would “punish” the corporate healthcare industry because corporate boo hiss! Of course many of these well-heeled pundits are dependent on the ads and largesse of corporations to keep their own asses afloat — last time I checked, Olbermann and Greenwald and Moore and Uygur weren’t exactly volunteering their time and “talents” out of the goodness of their hearts. Never mind that the PPACA had plenty of provisions to help sick and poor people and laid the groundwork for even more help down the road. No public option? KILL THE BILL! GIVE ME MY RIGHTEOUSGASM OR GIVE ME DEATH!!

          I honestly hope that President Obama is re-elected in such a landslide that it will shut these dumb do-nothing, know-nothing, hypocritical assholes up once and for all. But of course, if they’re not bloviating and grandstanding, then they might cease to exist.

          A girl can dream, anyway.

          • The absurdity of the professional left, firebaggers and emoprogs never ceases to amaze and enrage me. You captured it perfectly, Kerry.

          • Like Flava Flav is the personified stereotype of all black men who otherwise are trying to live right and do right, you got these fuckers as the personified stereotype of all lefties, these whining, bitchass all or nothing, but refuse to see the long game or do any of the work type of fuckers.

            They have all the disgusting traits of the right, just not the will to do the hard work to get there, unless you count blogging from free wi-fi hots spots hard work

          • You are right. Electing a Mitt Romney won’t affect the PL – privileged left – because they have well-paying gigs, health insurance, and a ready audience for their bile spewing. No matter who wins, they will always take the opposite side. Opposition is what drives their site views and makes them money.

    • And of course, to add a cherry of “I didn’t read this but you’re wrong anyways because Glenn is God” stupid, Jim does not actually realize who the fuck wrote this post.

  3. Here’s what I said about this “don’t vote” or “there’s no difference” crap:

    One of the things to remember when you see some of the “Professional Left” advocate this way: They’re not going to get hurt by it. No, seriously, they’re not. If they’re not in the 1%, they’re damn close. Michael Moore, Keith Olbermann, Arianna Huffington, Glenn Greenwald, Jane Hamsher, et.al., will still have a nice comfortable lifestyle, in fact, will make more money if the Republicans win. It’s to their benefit if it happens. You might want think about that the next time one of them tells you to “send a message” and not vote.

    • That “don’t vote; send a message” and “no difference” crap really IS worrisome, because it’s most successful with young voters. They’re the most vulnerable to accepting that bullshit because they’re usually more naive about politics and more receptive to calls for “standing up for ideals.” And that’s what angers me the most — I feel a bit of sympathy for the young folks (I remember being young and naive myself) — but the fact that this bullshit is being promoted by older cynics who have no moral excuses for encouraging it makes me see red.

    • How can you say Republicans vote against their own interest when they try and steer emotional liberals to do the same in a poutfest?

      Then when those liberals are all jacked up, how does it not occur to them that the ones who guided them there are living large off cashing in on their poutrage?

      Its not even comical, its fucking dumb

  4. GiGi complains about Oligarchs and economic royalty. The irony/idiocy is that Paul would completely unfettered see Oligarchs.

  5. And to think, this isnt even full retard for these folks.

    Its gonna get worse as we get closer to November.

    GG will defend a guy who favors sexual harassment, anti-gay rights and civil rights and make rape jokes on Twitter himself, and this Marsh character, just because he supports, he’s supporting his HHS Sec’y decision, its not his, he’s just got her back on not giving girls under 17 access to Plan B, which cost like $50 a pill, he’s suddenly hates women, then at the same time never get called on for dismissing his reasoning as a father by “who made you daddy of America?”

    And anyone who compares Obama record to Bush and say its the same, are being intellectually dishonest, and you got people who will not research on their own and buy this at face value.

    2012 is gonna be fucking great, prepare for full retard

  6. thank you for telling it like it is about GiGi

  7. Been watching the Greenwald-related drama over at Edroso’s place, and I finally realized why GG drives me up the wall. It’s not his beliefs so much as the way he presents them, with tons of sanctimony and a complete lack of good faith. Greenwald is 100% incapable of having an honest disagreement with anyone, as he defaults to assuming the absolute worst about the other party. The proof is right there in the linked article. Per Greenwald, anyone “honest” person who supports the President must concede the following:

    Yes, I’m willing to continue to have Muslim children slaughtered by covert drones and cluster bombs, and America’s minorities imprisoned by the hundreds of thousands for no good reason, and the CIA able to run rampant with no checks or transparency, and privacy eroded further by the unchecked Surveillance State, and American citizens targeted by the President for assassination with no due process…

    There’s really no way to have a chat with someone who believes that this is what you believe. Also, while his juvenile theatrics have definitely gotten worse over the years, he’s always behaved like this. We just overlooked it during the Bush years.

  8. It’s no more stupid than the crap they’ve been peddling to their idiot regurgitators all year long. They’re workin’ the sucker dollar like orly taitz types work the birthers. Poor ignorant dumbshites wallowing around in the sewage of history.

  9. LaCoincidental (Cappadonna)

    As others have stated, all of these Emo Prog pundits make their money telling their naive and deluded audience how evil government is. A practical moderate like Obama, getting things done, eats in their ratings. Much more beneficial to practice political discourse.eqivalent of scorched earth and promote another BS campaign from Ron Paul or Ralph Nader. A more successful Obama means these guys may need real jobs soon. A jackass like Romney in the White House means they get to play dress up as the loyal opposition for four more years.

  10. Dear ABL~

    THANK YOU!!
    THANK YOU for continuing to expose the Poutragers every time they open their nasty, lying, filthy mouths!!
    I am so sick of these people, they influence older people as well as the young. I’ve been constantly fighting them on FB. With you posts, I’ve had some success.
    Keep up the Great Work!!

  11. Taylor Marsh is not a feminist and Glenn Greenwald is not a civil libertarian. They are two privileged White people who will prosper no matter what happens in the fall of 2012. Marsh and Greenwald are two charlatans who have an extraordinarily lucrative hustle as self-appointed public intellectuals that tell gullible progressives what to think. The fact that neither writer has ever been or is now a genuine progressive lends a strange credibility to the shit they say.

    Marsh has had a hard on for Obama ever since he displaced her idol, Hillary Clinton, from her rightful place as Our Overlord and Savior. Marsh’s “feminism” is not about the solidarity of all women against misogyny. That would make sense. No, her “feminism” is about, in bell hooks’ words, “gaining entrance into the capitalist patriarchal power structure and …assum[ing] the imperialist, sexist, racist positions of destruction men hold with a platform that allows them to act as if the attainment of their personal aspirations and their lust for power is for the common good of all women.” It is not.

    Greenwald has been apolitical for most of his adult life and suddenly became radicalized during the second Bush Administration. He was not radicalized after Bush stole the presidency with the aid of the Supreme Court. He was not radicalized by the commencement of Bush’s pre-emptive war with Iraq. He was not radicalized years ago after realizing the oppressive heterosexism of American society. He was not radicalized years ago after realizing the appalling racism of American society. I do not know what it was. It must have been something he ate, because he has been on a tear against Barack Obama ever since. Greenwald’s advocacyfor a racist like Ron Paul who would repeal the Twentieth Century reveals the utter fraudulence of his so called principles.

    Nobody who has a shred left-wing of ideological coherence would be telling people that Barack Obama does not measure up to their supposed progressive principles or that it does not matter if he is defeated for re-election by a reactionary cipher like Mitt Romney. It is all about the bottom line for these two and their ability to cash in on their opinions in every venue possible while Rome burns down around them. It damn sure is not about those of us that would be cannibalized by the forces their capitalist indifference empowers.

  12. Pat In Massachusetts

    I love how everyone just blows over the shredding of the Constitution started by Bush and continued, with gusto I might add, by a DEMOCRATIC President and a BIPARTISAN Congress.

    Also,I find killing teenagers with drones to “protect my freedom” a tad distasteful.

    Obama has and will have a big problem with THE LIBERALS.

    Get used to it.

    Free Bradley Manning.

    • Did you have fun with that? And do you need tissues or something?

    • Unless you’re the 80% that want him re-elected, I dont think so.

      And you would support a guy who gave away secrets to a foreign operative, assaulted a female corpsman, and try and get out of his predicament by using “being gay made me do it” defense?

    • Hey everyone, Mitt Romney just said he would veto the Dream Act! Another thing none of us have to worry about. Free Bradley Manning, send the immigrant kids back to a country they have never seen. Yee haa!

    • That Guy With The Ponytail

      Free Bradley Manning.

      You forgot this part:

      “With coupon and a purchase, please!”

  13. I just learned what PL means, and it is exactly right! Part of being progressive means you realize that if part of your body is hurting, it affects your whole body. The PL does not get this. I have not been affected by the recession one iota. In fact I am doing better now than I was 3 years ago. I could sit back and enjoy it, except it hurts me when I see my neighbor foreclosed on, my school closed down because of NCLB, and my refugee students go without jackets.

    So yeah, some things Obama has done have SUCKED in my opinion. However, total package, non-vacuum dwellers, people who live in a world that is shades of grey realize he has been pretty damn good.

    • And thats all we’ve been saying, but you got these single issue people who decry if its not all perfect, its all crap

  14. These are all directly attributable policy positions

    Ron Paul-key to ending racism is getting rid of Civil Rights Act. The Civil Rights Act caused racism.
    Newt-Key to ending poverty is getting rid of child labor laws. Put poor kids to work.
    Mittens-Veto Dream Act. They can trim my hedge, but not go to college.
    Santorum-Annul legal married same sex couples in all states.
    Newt-In just a few years we will hav to have equal rings laws for men!

    PL, EMO Progs, GiGi, “fuck ‘em all. I ain’t a kid, minority, woman, or poor. Vote Obama out, or just don’t vote!”

  15. I’m not sure I understood any of that.

    The President has continued a losing and devastating counter-insurgency campaign in Afghanistan against an enemy that doesn’t pose an existential threat to global security. Against the strong advice of Biden, Eickenberry and many civilian experts?

    He is keeping Guantanamo Bay open even though he promised to close it, and denying civilian trials for the suspects arrested even though many of them are innocent of any wrongdoing and were labelled “unlawful” combatants.

    He is continuing a devastating a drone campaign in the likes of Somalia and Yemen, where more civilians than actual “terror suspects” die.

    He is fighting a secret war with Iran, which includes assassination of scientists, kidnappings, munitions are being blown up and sanctions are imposed that devastate the people, not the government.

    And now this piece of filth legislation?

    Why should I have to vote for him if I strongly disagree with many of his bizarre policies?

    And why is it that you won’t call him out on it? Is it because he’s black?

    • So, you’re the new one they sent in to rehash the same stuff that was refuted before?

      Gitmo, yeah, he promised, but a 90-6 vote blocked funding for him to do so, he’s only 1/3 of the government, its basic civics, please learn it.

      What secret war with Iran?

      Where is the proof they are doing such operations?

      Where is the proof for any of this you sited?

      And the drone strikes are taking out Al Qaeda targets, and unfortunately there is collateral damage, with any war time operation, to believe so is childish

    • Here is the point Junaid. I hope you listen with an open mind. All of those things you listed are terrible. We get that. We want to push a good president to be a better president. You want to trade a good president for a disaster because there are some things you do not like.

      Would you rather push an Obama to be better, or a Mitt to be even somewhat human?

      Secondly, and this is the most important. For a large segment of our society, the arguments you have are luxuries of a privileged class. It’s to worry about war if your belly is empty, you have no job, or roof over your head.

      If you really want to end these evil wars, I suggest you pick the President who at least has some compassion for the least among us. When everyone is waiting in a food line under a Paul presidency, who is going to protest our evil wars?

      When kids are working two jobs under a Newt presidency, are they going to have time for your civil discourse?

      Our point is that your a so myopic in your quest you forget e big picture. The civil right movement occurred, in part, because the middle class was finally secure enough to have time and resources to fit it. Who the fuck is going to fight for your cause when we are all working poor.

      • Alec, the problem I have with too many in the pundit and pundit-wannabe category is that they honestly believe constantly tearing down Obama is “keeping him honest,” while failing to recognize that CONGRESS has been the biggest impediment to greater progressive gains. For all that there are those on the left who sneer about Obama supporters being “cultists” and having “Messiah complexes,” their own top-down hierarchical fixation on the president as the sole all-powerful enforcer (or heinous obstructive force to progressive aims) shows woeful ignorance of how things actually work.

        In addition, of course, to your own well-argued points that it’s easier to pick and choose a la carte from a menu of progressive aims and decide which ones are the REAL issues when you’re not trying to figure out where your next check is coming from.

        And on many key points, where Obama was able to either act without the help of Congress or had enough votes to get things through, some significant progress was made. Not enough — never enough. Alinsky would tell you that. And Obama DID tell us “We won’t get there in one year, or even one term.” Yet those of us who heard him clearly and understood the “WE” part (not “I’ll do my best and you all just bitch from the sidelines”) are somehow the idiot cultists. Funny, that.

        Ask the people whose jobs were saved at GM if Obama is the same as Bush or Romney.

        Ask the people whose kids can now get health insurance rather than being denied because of pre-existing conditions if there is “no difference” between the Dems and the GOP.

        Ask the environmentalists who just cheered the Obama EPA’s passage of tough standards for mercury emissions – the greatest achievement for cleaner air in decades — if there is “no difference” between Obama and Bush.

        Ask the gay and lesbian servicemen-and-women who can now serve openly without fear of official reprisal if that would have happened under a President McCain or a President Romney.

        Ask the families of servicemen-and-women who just returned from Iraq if they think McCain would have done that.

        So sure, if you’re upset about drone strikes and the slow pace of progress, that’s fine. But tell me what you plan to DO about it, other than bitch. Walk a precinct, work a phone-bank for a pacifist candidate. Hell, work on a third party if you want (though absent proportional voting, at the national level you need to realize that they only function as spoilers). Work on campaign finance reform. Any of it. All of it. But don’t kid yourself that sneering “HA HA OBAMA SUXXOR!” somehow makes you an agent of progressive change.

        • And as I’ve said before, I’d take Glenn Greenwald’s distress over the drone strikes more seriously if he’d ever demonstrated any concern over the state-sanctioned murders of poor kids in Brazil – the country where he actually enjoys his incredibly privileged existence.

        • You notice all of these Emo Prog, anti-establishment types seem to embrace outlandish characters created the comic book writer Alan Moore. The Occupiers and Anonymous embrace Alan Moore’s “V for Vendetta” lunatic protagonist as their symbol. And now, many of these folks have jumped the shark and want progressives and moderates to dump Obama and start supporting a guy who’s political philosophy resembles the neurotic, violent superhero Rorschach from the Watchman than a sitting US Congressman with 20+ years of experience.

          And again, note that all of these are fantasy characters who were written as parodies by a cartoonist nearly 25 years ago who hasn’t shaved or cut his hair is almost 30 years and claims to be a warlock and worship a socket puppet. (Nothing but love for Alan Moore, he’s quite possibly the greatest comic book writer ever. I’ve read both works and enjoyed both movies, Alan Moore is a great writer).

          So Emo Progs like GiGi and his minions would reject Obama, not for another real political POV, but for outlandish cartoon characters who, if they really existed, would be locked up in an asylum, if simply arrested and/or executed. Or in the case of Ron Paul, would a do nothing Congressman with few real accomplishments and is considered a joke by his own party.

          Yeah, right.

  16. Are you serious? You’re telling me that because you don’t follow the news, that it probably doesn’t happen? What the hell are you smoking?

    We’re fighting a failing counter-insurgency campaign. That has been agreed by almost everyone except the idiots on this blog and the Obama administration.

    Here is an actual expert that can explain it to you, without having to read lots of words:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwU8eavPInw

    Here is just one article explaining the secret war with Iran:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/06/sunday-review/the-secret-war-with-iran.html?pagewanted=all

    And again, it’s not that they’re just “collateral damage”. We’re fighting wars against people that have no links to al-Qaeda, create instability in the region, increase anti-American resentment and help recruitment for local militancy.

    You really should do your research. Do you happen to have a community college nearby your house?

    • Frankly all your greenwaldy linking and faux piety makes the point for us I don’t know where you got your degree, but if being a pompous ass was your major, then consider your parents’ money well spent.

      You do know that under Ron Paul, your pious concerns for the world would mean dick to him?

    • So, your choices are:

      Paul, who’s isolationism would include vetoing any aid to Tsunami victims in Asia, and vetoing all foreign aid for AIDs victims in Africa. domestically Paul policies would decimate the working class, middle class, and the working poor. But what the fuck do you care, you aren’t working poor or living in Asia.

      Newt, Romney, Santorum, Perry: These guys would not wage a covert war against Iran. They would wage an overt one you retard. Is that what you want? Another freaking war?

      Or, you could support Obama, warts and all, knowing he is at least halfway sane and reasonable. You can continue to push him and influence him. You want to bitch about war, go ahead and get one of these knuckleheads elected.

      Push a reasonable president further in the right direction. Or you could just be a whiny little pric, oblivious to how your end-game would affect millions.

      do you really not give a shit about all the people a Paul presidency would destroy, both domestically and internationally?

  17. Oh, and think of this:

    the number one reason we even give a shit about the middle east is a) Oil and b) resource conflict caused by scarcity caused by climate change

    Obama is the ONLY one doing a damn thing about either of those two things. You want to end conflict? One big step is addressing climate and dependence on oil.

    Of course, you cannot think outside your Limwald vacuum. Shit is interconnected. Your stance has its own dire consequences.

  18. Here’s what i wrote on taylor’s blog:

    Let’s list the lies:

    1.

    Indefinite military detention without trial is now the policy ofthe Obama administration, which is something Mitt Romney would also do.

    No, it’s not. In fact he stated very clearly that it is not their policy in his signing statement. Furthermore it was NOT the administration that put that in there but the Republicans. that’s what happens when people listen to idiots such as you. They don’t vote and they get crappy legislation such as this. But Barack Obama was given the choice 1. Sign legislation that would likely be found unconstitutional anyways and that he would not enforce or 2. Veto it and run the risk of interrupting or losing millions of jobs in this economy. But in any case calling this the administrations policy when it is a Republican bill and saying it is now the policy of the administration is a lie.

    2. Candidate Obama was against the Iraq war, but he had no trouble bombing Libya without congressional oversight or approval, even though it was not of strategic interest to the U.S. or a clear and present danger. We’ve supposedly gotten out of Iraq, but there is a 104 acre embassy,
    the biggest on planet earth, with support and logistics to match.

    Next to Osama Bin Laden, Kadaffi killed more Americans in terrorist attacks than any other. My ass he was no danger. And also it’s a lie that there was no strategic interest, remember they have oil. Also there was a compelling humanitarian reason to be there as Kadaffi was getting ready to massacre scores of civilians. This is why we had the support of the French, British and the Arab League. Lastly the embassy was built under George W. Bush, not Obama. But you’re just having a sad because your statements regarding his “disastrous Libyan policy” has been proven wrong. And you say foreign policy is your stron suit? I’d say lying is your strong suit.

    3. Pres. Obama has also chosen to short-change women again and again on our freedoms, starting in the health care bill, then by executive order that empowered conservatives of both parties, and finally by making the decision on Plan B that would have come from Mitt Romney, too.

    I love the Hannityesque way you list a whole bunch of shit knowing that the average reader will just accept it all. The health care bill has already insured 1.25 young woman who would not have health insurance without it. The health care bill mandates that insurance company must cover birth control with no copays and the dread signing statement you’re talking about merely stated that the Hyde amendment is the law of the land and that this bill does not change that. The bill didn’t and it is. But at
    least it gives you a chance to keep your lying hate on. While I’m not sure how I feel about plan B, the fact is that 1. People 17 and up can get it without a prescription and 2. Kids under 17 won’t, in all but very rare cases, use it anyway. The very naivety that kept them from using birth control in the first
    place generally keeps them from taking the pill. What we need is better sex education, something we won’t have if you lying emoprogs continue to flog the bullshit proposition that “both parties are the same” you lying hack.

    4. As a recovering partisan these days and after watching Pres. Obama’s compromising conservatism, I no longer feel the urgencyto support a political party who has threatened dire consequences if I don’t
    vote for them.

    Oh bullshit, you’re not “recovering” you’ve been spreading lies about Obama for three years now (four if you count the campaign). The notion that you just had a revelation is just a laughable lie.

    5. What’s ironic to me is that supporting women’s individual freedoms is really a conservative idea. Conservatives trumpet “don’t tread on me,” freedom, and keeping government out of their lives, so if consistency existed thisshould also apply to a woman’s rights as an individual. The notion that the government should be able to tell any person what he or she can do with their
    own body is an anti-conservatism and anti-libertarian notion

    It’s NOT a fucking conservative idea and it hasn’t been one for almost 40 years now. Whether it should be or not is irrelevant, the fact is that 1. Obama has increased access to birth control FAR more than he’s limited it and 2. ANY republican would be FAR worse than he is . Putting out this screed suggesting that a Republican wouldn’t be so bad is just a lie. Especially when the SC hangs in the balance.

    6. Obama’s constant chant on reforming entitlements, including changing COLA on Social Security, would hit women the hardest, because in older age we are more likely to depend
    on it, a subject I’ve written on before,

    Lying ass fear mongering. What changing COLA to CPI does is ensure that
    NO ONE elderly person will be at the poverty line. In fact, if the Fiscal Commission plan were adopted wholesale (which would raise the bottom threshold from replacing 90% of the first 9,000
    of income to replacing 90% of the first $15,000 in income), the basic benefit for people with an average lifetime wage of $15,000 (in 2010 dollars) would increase by nearly $3,500. http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/07/omg-cola-cut-duck-everybody.html. So Taylor, why do you hate poor women so much?

    7 On “reforming” entitlements, Pres.Obama comes down the same place as Republicans, though he’s the moderateconservative, so we can expect entitlement “reform” to happen regardless of who is in the White House.

    Which Republican wanted to increase S-chip the way Obama has done? Which Republican wanted a new GI Bill? Which republican would of passed the ACA which already has caused a discount of 50% for senior (most of which are women) and provided free wellness visits and has already closed half of the donut hole. In fact, liar, he’s already increased entitlements more than any President has in 40 years.

    8. Pres. Obama proved his economic timidity in the 2010 midterms, when you didn’t hear
    anything close to the speech he gave in Kansas, which didn’t come until he began campaigning for his own reelection.

    Here’s what he had to say in September 2009:

    But here’s the problem. Even before this last financial crisis, the economy had problems. Just last week, a Census report came out showing that in 2008, before the downturn, family income fell to its lowest point in over a decade, and more families slid into poverty. Folks at the top 1 percent did pretty good. Everybody else saw their wages and income flat. That’s unacceptable. And I refuse to let America go back to the culture of irresponsibility and greed that made it possible — (applause) — back to an economy with soaring CEO salaries and shrinking middle class incomes; back to the days when banks made reckless decisions that hurt Wall Street and Main Street alike. (Applause.) We’re not going to go back to those days. It would be bad for unions, bad for the middle class, and bad for the United States of America. We’re not turning back. We’re moving forward.

    Not that I expect you to research when lying is so much easier.

    9 Obama then followed that up by caving and extending the Bush tax cuts. Obama and the
    Democratic midterm shellacking is what delivered state houses in record numbers to the right, which led to an assault on unions, the middle class, as well as women’s individual freedoms. At a time when we all needed an economic champion what we got was a total Democratic collapse.

    First off the “cave” came after the Democratic “shellacking” which was brought about bypeople like you shilling for the “no difference” idea. He “caved” so that 160 million poor andmiddle class could get a tax cut, he “caved” so that millions of people, likemyself would be able to get unemployment, he caved so that people such as myself would get credits for schooling. But make no mistake, if we had retained the house and Senate or better yet ADDED to our majorities the “cave” would never of been necessary. See unlike this lying ass essay reality shows that elections matter.

    10. This includes on economics, where Democrats, with Pres. Obama leading, never made
    the progressive Democratic economic case, whether it’s for tax increases on Social Security taxed income, higher taxes on multi-millionaires, all of which would have required a barnstorming campaign to pigeon hole recalcitrant Republicans, then shame them into submission.

    That’s such a HUGE lie it’s almost laughable. Really? are you kidding? He hasn’t made the case
    for a tax on millionaires? Not only has he MADE the case repeatedly in the last few months, he even ADDED a tax on millionaires to the health care bill. Really, read a fucking newspaper.
    I’m not even gonna bother getting quotes of him pounding the magicalbully pulpit for a tax on millionaires. Cause really if you’re this fucking stupid that you don’t know, that it
    just means you don’t want to know.

    11. The two political parties have been under siege for some time, because Americans
    just don’t trust Republicans or Democrats anymore. Barack Obama was the last chance for political parties, specifically the Democratic brand, with George W.Bush having already given rise to rebellion inside the GOP, which is seen best through Ron Paul and the Tea Party

    Really, homophobic. Anti-choice known bigot Ron Paul you’re implying is as good a choice as Barack Obama? The president that has provided free birth control to women, free mamagrams, has increased access to doctors for women and is also our first Black President you’re implying is no better than that old racist? Maybe it hasn’t occured to you that the polls are correct, that MOST Democrats like Obama. And THAT’S the reason that the primary idea won’t work and will never work. That YOU’RE the one out of touch. Jane Hamsher’s phrase “dumb mother fucker” comes to mind. Really, you should get another job, political analysis is not your forte.

  19. Sorry for the lack of readibility. I didn’t know how to do quotes on this blog and didn’t have time to put them around everything. the 1 through 11 are all lying Taylor Marsh quotes.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

language