If you have "no place to go," come here!

Deep Thoughts On The First Internet Preznit

chicago dyke's picture

When is President Obama going to employ is Massive Army of Internet Based supporters to rally Congress for support for his stimulus bill? If it's "so hard" to pass truly liberal policies in the package, resist Republican whining for the inclusion of their failed crap, and discipline the naughty Blue Dogs...well, isn't that what the Screaming O-Hoarde is for?

Put another way: Rethugs used to do, and still do, the same thing for their bills all the time. Winger radio routinely gets their screaming minority to become involved in "phone actions" and suchlike, on everything from Janet's titties to immigration reform. And they get legislative results by doing so. Or, last year, when the original giveaway TARP proposals came out, I was told that the calls were 1200-1 against it, which resulted in at least some window-dressing in the final bill and scared a lot of progressives and heartened a lot of Republicans to continued opposition to more giveaways. So I don't want to hear about people being 'lazy' and 'nonparticipatory,' and anyway, I have read to my fill, plenty of celebratory "new techology in politics" crowing all during the primaries and thru the election and beyond.

So...what is the Administration doing with that much-celebrated "List" right now? Anything? Last time I checked, Congresscritters and Blue Dogs didn't read nor manage "" or ""

No votes yet


DCblogger's picture
Submitted by DCblogger on

I can't dismiss the feeling that Obama doesn't intend to do anything for ordinary people and is creating conditions where he can blame GOP intransigence

I mean I don't get it

but I have never gotten Obama

Submitted by jawbone on

priority, not an involved and active manager of its fate (and his and ours, btw, but in slightly different ways--he will stay employed for the next four years; many of us won't).

Someone at Talk Left commented that he was surprised Obama hadn't used "Mad Ave" techniques to gin up support for his stimulus bill. And that it seemed more like it was Congressional Dems' bill.

Yet the article at ProPublica about Obama's Stimulus bill indicated Larry Summers has been the admin's point man with Congressional Dems, calling shots, getting more money for highways than mass transit bcz he believed highway money gets into the economy faster.

Why this laid back style? This almost hands off impression he seems to want to create? Plausible deniability?

DC, I don t get him either.

Oh, Spencer Ackerman notes that Holder made private assurances that he would not bring charges against CIA personnel or Bush appointees over torture. From Eli Lake at WashTimes:

President Obama's choice to run the Justice Department has assured senior Republican senators that he won't prosecute intelligence officers or political appointees who were involved in the Bush administration's policy of "enhanced interrogations."

Sen. Christopher "Kit" Bond, a Republican from Missouri and the vice chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, said in an interview with The Washington Times that he will support Eric H. Holder Jr.'s nomination for Attorney General because Mr. Holder assured him privately that Mr. Obama's Justice Department will not prosecute former Bush officials involved in the interrogations program.

Mr. Holder's promise apparently was key to moving his nomination forward. Today, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 17-2 to favorably recommend Holder for the post. He is likely to be confirmed by the Senate soon.

Sen. Bond also said that Mr. Holder told him in a private meeting Tuesday that he will not strip the telecommunications companies that cooperated with the National Security Agency after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks of retroactive legal immunity from civil lawsuits--removing another potential sticking point among GOP senators. (My emphasis)

Consider the source, of course, and the newspaper. But...dayuuummmm!

TreeHugger's picture
Submitted by TreeHugger on

Why am I suspicious the only thing the O-hoarde may be mobilized for is to oppose something too progressive (i.e., liberal, which will be the term used to bring on a case of centrist vapors).

Your posts have been on fire of late.

More, please!

chicago dyke's picture
Submitted by chicago dyke on

i was told, by african-americans who mean a lot to me, my life, in a personal and non-blogging way, to "take it easy" until after the inauguration. i said i would, and i did. it was actually a good thing, creatively speaking, for me to take a break from Heavy Rotation Blogging.

but the Happy Day has come and gone, King's grave warmed for a little while, there was music and dancing and great fashion on a great new First Lady that i enjoyed and loved like many.

that was yesterday. this is today. tomorrow looms, just like it did when Chimpy was in charge. so: back to work.

thank you pie. i'm glad to have you here. you've been missed, elsewhere, as i'm sure you know and others have told you.

gqmartinez's picture
Submitted by gqmartinez on

I've found my comments (online and real life) have been more "bitchier" of late. I never stopped with Obama critiques--after the nature of the primary, I couldn't--but part of me wanted to really believe. Actually seeing much of the cowardice, er compromise that was predicted probably precipitated the new acidic tone. That or the unemployment.

Dykester's picture
Submitted by Dykester on

in a lot of homes. I've been telling all the Obots in my life that I hope we realize their hopes and not my fears. But it gets harder each day. We're bombing in Pakistan. We're gutting funds poor women need for economic recovery. We're funding new roads and highways instead of mass transit projects. We're talking health insurers instead of UHC. Sad; makes me shake my head.

I am an optimist, but it's hard to smile when I'm told this is the best we can do. Really? I thought we could do better . . . .