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

My candidate for post of the year

[Welcome, C&L readers! And Merry Christmas! --lambert]

The House that Jack built. Go read immediately.

Best explanation of The Big Shit Storm I've seen yet. It certainly shows a way to express the interlocking chains of causality ....

No votes yet


vastleft's picture
Submitted by vastleft on

The point is that there are real policy disagreements between the "left" and "centrist" wings of the Democratic Party. These disagreements are not confined to a couple of lunatic blogs, as the Senate Democratic caucus itself regularly splits down the middle on important pieces of legislation. Further, these disagreements are not confined to narrow areas of policy, as the examples Matt and I have provided include Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, trade, telecommunications, judicial and cabinet appointments, civil liberties, LGBT rights, tort reform, bankruptcy protection, defense spending, plus both personal and corporate welfare. Finally, virtually none of the examples we have given can justifiably be classified as pragmatic incrementalism versus an "all or nothing" idealism. This is because virtually all of the examples we have given actually moved public policy to the right of where it stood before the passage of the law or appointment in question. As such, it wasn't slower progressivism versus faster progressivism: it was less progressivism versus not-less progressivism.

gqmartinez's picture
Submitted by gqmartinez on

Every time I see a link to Open Left, I remember this gem.

That one post goes beyond the health care debate and rings true to almost everything we see regarding Obama and democrats. From Melissa Ethridge embracing (or whatever you call it) Rick Warren to this comment today. Some people keep finding ways to justify away the problems. We all could do better by ourselves if we stop diving problems away.

amberglow's picture
Submitted by amberglow on

many bloggers started out actually assessing candidates, then gave up and/or hopped onboard, and now that it's over are back to assessing -- i find, at least.

amberglow's picture
Submitted by amberglow on

online-only, i believe -- so maybe it counts as a post? Very surprising -- in a good way, considering.

Cloud at Time --

... Obama has proved himself repeatedly to be a very tolerant, very rational-sounding sort of bigot. He is far too careful and measured a man to say anything about body parts fitting together or marriage being reserved for the nonpedophilic, but all the same, he opposes equality for gay people when it comes to the basic recognition of their relationships. He did throughout his campaign, one that featured appearances by Donnie McClurkin, a Christian entertainer who preaches that homosexuals can become heterosexuals.

Obama reminds me a little bit of Richard Russell Jr., the longtime Senator from Georgia who — as historian Robert Caro has noted — cultivated a reputation as a thoughtful, tolerant politician even as he defended inequality and segregation for decades. Obama gave a wonderfully Russellian defense of Warren on Thursday at a press conference. Americans, he said, need to "come together" even when they disagree on social issues. "That dialogue is part of what my campaign is all about," he said. Russell would often use the same tactic to deflect criticism of his civil rights record. It was a distraction, Russell said, from the important business of the day uniting all Americans. Obama also said today that he is a "fierce advocate for equality" for gays, which is — given his opposition to equal marriage rights — simply a lie. It recalls the time Russell said, "I'm as interested in the Negro people of my state as anyone in the Senate. I love them." ...