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

At least one mistake was made

vastleft's picture

From a very popular post at Donk L'Orange:

Make no mistake, [deeply disappointed voter] Ms. Hart isn't about to go and vote Republican. She remains, and I join her in this, a strong supporter of the President

If your and your family's and your nation's way of life is rapidly going downhill, and you're continuing to strongly support those that blithely preside over the circumstances, someone's making a mistake.

No votes yet


chicago dyke's picture
Submitted by chicago dyke on

how has being "supportive of the President" helped you, Little Person? be specific. as in: Preznit Obama got me (this) job. Preznit Obama and Speaker Pelosi helped me keep this mortgage. Harry Reid personally got me into college. etc.

anyone? ever? it seems so missing in the pro-blue dog sillyness just now. sorry. i don't have a trust fund, and i'm not looking to land a choice lobbying job in DC. i care about these people, why again?

vastleft's picture
Submitted by vastleft on

D voters get to assert their superiority over racist, redneck trailer trash.

R voters get to assert their superiority over unpatriotic, snobby sissies.

With such meaningful rewards to be had, no wonder no one worries much about policy.

ms_xeno's picture
Submitted by ms_xeno on

Cheap and quick, but fails to give volume and so doesn't nourish for long, right?


But, yeah. Goes a long way towards explaining why so many locals here fawned and drooled and prostrated themselves before Obama. They wanted a brand that would prove their innate superiority. Anyone who tried to point out their chosen brand's record of shoddy construction was --natch-- a racist Right winger. So it's kind of like an endless loop of superiority that feeds on itself. Which is why I stopped engaging most "progressives" in dialogue. No matter what you say, they look good and you look bad. Such a waste of time.

Submitted by Elliott Lake on

they can't admit they were wrong, and fooled. The anwer would puncture their happy bubble of superiority and ponies and unicorns. And you and I and others they were happy to look down on would be right.

I belong to an artisan trade group, and the members are mostly lefty... and the clinging to Obama is breathtakingly blind. That confused me in the face of the evidence, until I realized the same folks also have other issues with childish behavior. As long as they have their new blackberries and hybrid cars and are being Authentic and Eco-minded and Progressive, the world is fine. And they do NOT want to look behind the curtain at the Glorious Oz.

Submitted by libbyliberal on

Nader said both parties were soul-less, saturated with big money corruption. He wasn't wrong. Oligarch capture of America apparently has been going on for some time. Or since forever to a continuing serious extent. But it is now really off the charts. Too big to hide, you would think!!! And having Bush and Cheney at the helm, it fed our denial on the left (too many of us, any way) that the Dems if THEY WERE AT THE HELM WOULD AND COULD STOP THE MADNESS to a great extent, any way (see BDBlue's blog). HAHHHHH!!!!!

When Kevin McCarthy died recently I thought of his stunning classic Invasion of Body Snatchers. The pod people. The awesome climax especially when his soul-mate lover falls asleep and turns pod person. Et tu, honey? Of course, in the movie she is physically ambushed by sleep into pod-dumb. IRL America, what is the excuse especially for those with time and access and education to truth? Why not go there? The full monty? Is ego that ferocious?

If the internet plug gets pulled it will be devastating for those of us in the counterculture spouting truth to power, being horrified and inspired by a devastating, abusive reality engineered by the US establishment reported ONLY in the alternate media universe. But it is not being heeded, all the truth pouring out on the web, alternate media, international alternate media, by the veal penned progressives. Why do they choose to stay there in the pen? Identification with the faux-"winners" in the bubble cultures of denial and shameless political and media framing? Cherry-picking politically and/or emotionally convenient moral issues. Pity for Obama from the desperate and righteous on the left?

Amnesty International and the Red Cross, etc., are adversaries of Obama's America. WTF??? War-feeding for Iran is one of many US games right now. Charlie Rose was playing it the other night. War games of arrested adolescent patriarchs with other people's lives, sanity, survival.

Considering the progressive pod people and I love the word "opologists", well done, lambert, we have the "pod i-podders". Tech-savvy, but ego-invested in their points of view is it or is it no capacity for empathy and altruism or is it learned hopelessness or the Obama bullshit of "incrementalism"? What it is????

When FDL public option establishment was so disdainful of single payer people I couldn't figure it out then. I still can't.

Don't get me started on the torture minimization. That makes me crazy. As well as the insane and illegal wars spreading not ending. Kill now, spin later. "collateral damage" ... objectified language of institutional murder. US supports fascism in other countries. Fascism is a friend to oligarchs. Fascism, the ultimate F-word, is within our shores now. I guess we need to keep saying it. Ackowledge it. Another round of stages of grief.

The old saw about comforting the disturbed and disturbing the comfortable comes to mind right now.

Submitted by lambert on

... that the Greens were right to run Nader, though, does it? IIRC, and Greens correct me if I am wrong, Nader wasn't exactly into party building.

ms_xeno's picture
Submitted by ms_xeno on


In any case, Nader could never have done the Green Party more harm than Democrats have, no matter what he said or did.

Submitted by libbyliberal on

... a healthy degree of social bonding. That is what I meant. He could have used more of that pre-cronyism bonding capacity. There is a danger of social bonding hitting the cronyism tipping point. I honestly think that is what happened to Ted Kennedy. He slid into cronyism trying to negotiate for incremental progress. It worked for him to a degree maybe for a while, but then it was exploited. Nader is iconoclastic and reformer and not close to say Clinton in the warm fuzzy social bonding and codependency in wanting approval and earning it it would seem. An ego for sure, but not a people pleasing need.

okanogen's picture
Submitted by okanogen on

Sure, Al Gore was a Washington Consensus Politician, but if Nader hadn't done his best to make sure to hurt Gore more than Bush, to a "pataphysical certitude" we wouldn't have INVADED FUCKING IRAQ! With all of the poisonous fruit that has fallen from that poisonous tree. And that is at the very least.

Plus, what the fuck has Nader done since then to build a progressive movement to the left of the Democrats?

Answer: he has done (and the Naderites have done) fuck all.

Like the Democrats, and like "The Public Option", Ralph Nader worship is a roach motel for progressive/liberal energies.

So no, nobody owes Nader and/or Naderites an apology for anything. They should still be apologizing for how they screwed up in 2000.

Bottom line: Ralph Nader is a politician, and like my signature says.....

lizpolaris's picture
Submitted by lizpolaris on

or I would have had to, in a less coherent way than you have done.

Submitted by JuliaWilliams on

Nader never really was a politician, he was, first and foremost a righteous defender of citizens vs the corporations, and fought many a good fight in DC, just like all those good D's like.....oh, OK. His party did lack cohesiveness and was designed to be decentralized (something I can quibble with at this stage), again, because he really wasn't a pol. Using the term "Naderite" has been utilized by many of the "veal pen" blogs, so determined to sell the Dem point of view, and in point of fact was used against me personally just because I supported Single Payer vs the PO pony. So, what does "Naderite" mean? Some one who supports SP? Someone who voted for Nader? Or McKinney? Someone who saw through the "kabuki" of the legacy parties back in 2000? And blaming Nader for Gore's loss ranks up there with blaming the instructor for an "E", when the student didn't study. An excuse for a loss due to one of the worst campaigns I've ever seen run. And then, to concede to a corrupt, machine State politics, rather than fight? If Nader hadn't run, Gore would have had to invent him to have the excuse of losing. And if you think that weak-willed, triangulating D specimen wouldn't have jumped at war, well, then, picking Lieberman should have been your first clue. As for what have the Greens done lately, they are the strongest of the progresive parties extant in the US today, and they're making great inroads this election cycle (see Jill Stein). And what have the legacy parties done for you lately? And BTW I don't "worship" Nader, I do respect him, a hell of alot more than any recent politician.

okanogen's picture
Submitted by okanogen on

If you think that Al Gore would have either been able to or inclined to fabricate evidence of weapons of mass destruction, and then brow-beat the United Nations and Congress with it in order to get them to authorize an invasion of Iraq, you must also be receiving transmissions from another planet. Regardless of whether Obama is continuing their legacy, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were a new breed of criminal politician, and Al Gore wasn't part of that breed. They surrounded themselves with people who made it a point of pride to lie i.e., "we make our own reality". The difference between them and Al Gore, was not only significant, it was meaningful.

With Gore, maybe he would have done other bad things, that isn't knowable, but the Iraq war never would have happened and any honest observer from the far left to far right would admit that. Plus, (though we can't be sure.....) we wouldn't have had a war against stem-cell research, or against climate change science.

Al Gore ran a bad campaign. Wow, news flash. But the whole, "if Nader hadn't existed, Gore would have had to invent him" trope is pure bullshit. First, if Nader's campaign was so inconsequential, it certainly shoots your "It was an important effort" argument right between the eyes. I mean which is it? Completely ineffectual, or entirely relevant? Second, Nader squared off directly against Gore, not Bush, whenever he would cry about corporatism in politics, he would talk about Gore only.

Your defense of the Green party is also weak. "Making great inroads this election cycle"? Really? Care to prove that? Sorry, the Greens shit the bed when they hooked up with that phony, narcissistic self-promoter. They've been wandering in the wilderness for the last ten years after that major screw-up. Plus, (just to show you what a non-politician he is) after the party rejected him in 2004, he went ahead and ran as an independant, splitting their vote, then did the same thing again in 2008.

As for who is a "naderite", that would be someone who voted for Ralph Nader in 2000 and still thinks it was a great move! I wouldn't want single payer activism co-opted with "naderism". It's a lot more important than hero-worship, and yeah, my brother worked in Washington for Common Cause, worked with RN, and finally left when he realized all it was was a personality cult for RN, they hardly did anything "progressive", just prop up the guys ego.

So respect Ralph Nader? Why? I suppose I would spit on him if he was on fire, but that's the kind of guy I am.

Submitted by libbyliberal on

I think Nader disrespect is often about "killing the messenger".

By not supporting public option we were doing Nader behavior! Am I wrong?

Nader would not do cronyism. And we know what a slippery slope that is. CRONYISM, GUYS! GROUP THINK. DEM KOOL-AID DRINKING. This guy said no to the koolaid and got seriously punished. And like energizer bunny he kept on going and telling truth to power.

Nader would have cleaned up Dodge. Nader was so despised by the pol and media elite I can't help loving him for that alone! (hey, I am an expansive person, and a feeler, don't crucify me for using the word "love" ... I don't know what the personality of Nader is like close up and personal, he sure exasperated people who have been committed to him... the residue of love/hate is clearly alarming ... but he is a hero of mine and I don't deny it and a role model and there are few enuf of those in this world. Do you think he would have gone for a ride in Obama's plane and changed HIS mind?). I know that Nader would have swept everyone off the stage in a presidential debate so they kept him away. All those tight rope walking sons of bitches and Nader would have blown them away with common sense and truth. The media hates him for that. What to do with someone speaking truth???? Industrial strength, thoughtful, sharp, truth. Dear GOD!!! Pull the plug. Go to commercial!

Nader is an enemy of AIPAC in AIPAC's eyes I am sure ... and was probably doomed by that alone from winning ... and he probably could have helped the Israel Palestine quagmire because of that.

"Naderite" has been aimed at me and I got it at FDL more than here -- to my face ... clearly my quote tells a lot, eh? It saddens me the Nader hostility. He called out the bipartisan swamp of corruption!!!! He had the right to run. And he was an iconoclast. Maybe he helped Gore become a better man? Who knows.

Nader ... not perfect. Not the messiah though he went through being heralded as one years ago. Every leader reveals feet of clay. But there are differences!

For him to watch so much of the consumer protectionism he fought for get undone post Reagan must have been a real test of sanity. I'd be bitter.

What we go through banging our heads against the wall of denial why can't we recognize Nader has been doing that for years. Our incremental consciousness raising. He saw the corporation as psychopath and he worked hard and with the law against the corporations.

He has published wonderful columns. He still inspires some of us!

My support for a third party (evolving party) candidate is being denounced the way Nader's running was denounced. But he was saying what we are trying to say, lesser of two evils is NOT GOOD ENOUGH.

You know for half a sec I prayed Obama would consult John Edwards who wrote a great blueprint for America, did his homework, on his blog and he would consult smartypants and righteous Nader for their ideas on getting this country back on the rails until I saw that was not the Dems goals. Get an honest anti-crony away from us. What a fool I was. Ego Obama ... no way was he going to do that. His neck won't let him turn to the left.

I missed coming back to this thread. Haven't finished it but I am probably pissing people off.

You know, I would have said that Bush was the Caligula and poster child for evil ... but Obama now with assassination, torture continuing, drones, war, surveillance, cover ups, secrecy... HELLO!!! ...., leaving the constitution in Bush's waste basket. With the lobbying going on we did not begin, some of us, to realize was soooooo rampant, I think the health care fiasco showed us that profound state of corrupt affairs ... and the massive military security industrial complex. Were the Dems going to be the good guys? Did Nader not have the right to run if he felt he was the best man? I don't think it was ego with him. yeah, I can't say that W and Darth weren't evil. But they cheated at the voting booths. Would Gore have gone against the status quo pol/corp/military machines?????

Maybe Gore should have let Nader run?

So different strokes, folks!

I always thought of Nader as a kind of benign and leftist kind of Howard Roark ... his own iconoclastic person who expected morality and strength from citizens. I don't agree with Rand politics and the Fountainhead had that damn romantic rape, but Roark stood against cronyism and contamination in my eyes decades ago when I read it.

Too bad the creepoid, lock step Repubs think they are all sturdy Howard Roarks. Fantasy time. And when I read Rand I was too romantic to apply it to economics. So snark away if you want. Rand may have been talking government and that is useful to the Reaganites and Greenspans, but morally in my eyes Roark was against amoral bullshit cronyism. I think that Toohey guy in the book is a dead ringer for Karl Rove, too!

So now I can earn disdain for liking The Fountainhead in my younger days, too.

:) So be it.

Give me righteous iconoclasm against cotton candied hopium any day.

Aside from Feingold, who else are the mensches?

okanogen's picture
Submitted by okanogen on

As the dead of Iraq would surely agree, if they could only speak.

ms_xeno's picture
Submitted by ms_xeno on

...from the war to their ingrown toenails.

I don't.

Since both parties considered it their inalienable right to beat the tar out of Iraqis, because our once-trained seal Sadaam was no longer politically useful to us.

Nobody held a gun to the heads of Democrats and forced them to rubber-stamp Bush II's foreign policies. They did so because it's what they wanted, not because Nader put them in some kind of hypnotic trance, for pity's sake.

okanogen's picture
Submitted by okanogen on

still, even now, despite all the evidence that he is/was a joke, and his candidacy in 2000 (and how he did the Green party dirty in 2004 and again in 2006) is excusable because, (wait for it), Al Gore and George W. Bush were so nearly exactly the same as there to be no difference!

Hero worship is a helluva drug!

Ingrown toenails my ass.