First time in years that I've agreed with Mo D. rather than thinking of her as a more or less talented kid in a high school creative writing class who has her job because she's easy on the eyes for the creepy old editors and publishers at the NYT.

Well done.

If you turn your back on your ideals as the perfect being the enemy of the good in the name of compromise above all else, then you've lost your true north and are sailing without a compass. The President should always remember that.

Have a nice Sunday.
#2 | Posted by nullifidian

You don't think this article was posted for you in particular, nulli?

Have a nice Sunday.

I would much rather flame rtards than my fellow travelers. :)
#4 | Posted by nullifidian at 2009-10-18 12:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

Check your compass.

:P

"It all has me wondering if it's all "compromise" or if his "true north" is something other than "compromise," if you know what I mean.

I suspect his compass may be locked on leftist-socialism and he's right on course for the "transformation" he promised in the campaign."

Okay, you and I must be on other sides of the looking glass, because from my view, the last time he even pretended to nod left was during the primary season. He campaigned in the general to the right of his primary agenda, and he's been governing to the right of even that since inauguration.

The left has been more or less abandoned, apart from a little lipservice here and there, for a while now, to the point that we've been labeled "whiners" for having the audacity to even bring it up.

You don't even see how his focus has been working with the republican party. He's been dissing his(?) "base" in an effort to be cooperative minded with the right. If the GOP wasn't solely interested in getting the power back, they'd be able to see it too, and they'd thank him for it.

Bait's not working

#7 | Posted by nullifidian at 2009-10-18 12:49 PM | Reply | Flag: Spoken like a true Obama supporter

:-O

J/K

promises promises.

I think we can all agree on that. Don't see anything particularly controversial about this. Good article, Hagbard.
#21 | Posted by nullifidian

Bastard.

That's all I've ever been saying all along. Even if you aren't going to do what the idealists suggest, you can't stop listening to them. You can't make them feel like they aren't getting your ear. You must remember that they, in their own way, are giving voice to the ideals to which you give lipservice to in order to amass critical threshold of support but then which you try to reduce attention to so you can deal with republicans. Republicans who aren't going to truly compromise with anyone to the left of Arlen Specter.

So to call the left of the party "whiners" is to give your own party members less respect than you're willing to give to the other side of the aisle. That is a dangerous way to go, and deeply offensive to the yellow dogs, who think that the President seems ready to fight his political battles on two fronts.

Wow. Do you Hollywood lobbyists have some email alert program?
#20 | Posted by nullifidian

Isn't that what RSS is for?

"Bastard."
lol
#24 | Posted by nullifidian

*pulls the hook out of the water and examines it.

Damn, hook is clean again.

That crafty little Obamafish.

Hagbard could attach a "Don't blame me, I voted for Nader" sig file.

#25 | Posted by nullifidian

Slacked for 24 hours and missed the chance to see Nader speak tonight at 92nd Street Y on Universal Single Payer.

That signature would read: "Don't blame me, I voted for Nader... Again.... and Again."

"Yeah. And that accomplished what, other than getting George Bush elected twice?"

We're not starting that conversation again. A dozen more egregious crimes were committed... than a man standing up for what he, and millions of others believed was right and deciding to run for President.

"And if you got your wish, Nader would've received double or triple the votes and then Johnny Bomb Bomb and the crazy bitch would be in the Whitehouse today picking Supreme Court justices."

My wish was that Democrats have an energized and active base that worked toward their ideals, at the very least. That was the whole point all along. Nader ran on the ideals of the Democratic party in a plea not to forget them. The majority of the country agreed with every item on his platform, when the proponent of said planck was unidentified, in greater percentages than the differences between the GOP/DNC on their platforms.

Steal this Candidate was Nader's whole point.

"People in the real world have to live their day-to-day lives under actually existing governments. Most of them don't follow politics. Supreme Court rulings sometimes really actually have an impact on people's liberties."

Definitely 95% of the problem. If more people followed politics on the regular, even just the people who vote at least every four years, the government would be better. Who knows what the makeup of the government would look like under those conditions. Democrat... Republican... it wouldn't really matter.

"Any Democrat would've looked like a wimp agreeing to Nader's terms."

I disagree.