06/25/2008 12:15:58 PM EST

Focus netroots, focus.

posted by calturner

http://www.huffingtonpost.c om/2008/06/25/serenity-lost -obama-and-t_n_109098.html

 

<h1>Serenity Lost: Obama And The Netroots</h1>

Email Print
Google Technorati del.icio.us digg reddit Facebook

Look, netrooters and bloggers: you know better:

Obama has a mission to change the world yadda, yadda, yadda.

But first he needs to WIN!

Acting like you have no idea how an election works is dishonest and weak sauce. Simmer down and try to pretend like you have an idea how reality works.

The general election means he needs to work the middle and bring in alot of independents and maybe a Republican or two--its crucial.

All of the people who are already on board, need to chill out UNTIL he gets into office and the Democrats get a veto-proof majority, then you hammer him with the progressive issues while he is in office.

Its selfish to pretend that he owes you something that he doesnt have yet. 

People are treating him like Bush before he has a chance to prove himself. WTF?!

Hes not going to fight every single fight--theres no overall profit in that. He got this far, let him fight his fight and support the guy. Once he has the belt, then you scream at him.

He has already promised to rein in the Executive Branch and look into any wrongdoing that has occurred.

The alternative isnt going to do that--so calm down and support your team.

to quote "The Untouchables":

"I get nowhere unless the team wins!"

TEAM, bitches, this is a team effort. 

Support the team or STFU.

 

< Amy Winehouse | Cal Thomas: Terrorizer >
 Display:
Focus netroots, focus. | 28 comments (28 topical, 0 hidden)
yes (none / 0)
I agree completely. 

by schmoab on 06/25/2008 03:04:12 PM EST

I agree too (none / 0)
We GOT to win this one bitches.  Even if Obama is not perfect, which he is not. 

by desertpear on 06/25/2008 06:48:17 PM EST

You guys crack me up!!! (none / 0)
I don't think I could tell you how amusing I find postings like this to be! The Left, beginning to eat their own because their guy is starting to shift center on issues... You have had to know this was gonna happen. When one is as far left as Obama has been on so many issues, its almost natural and necessary to come back to the fold when you realize that your base is 1: off the reservation in terms of sanity (as the left is on many issues) and 2: not in the majority in terms of electoral college numbers. I agree that Obama will win the popular vote, but it depends on where those votes come from, and right now it aint lookin as cheery as in the beginning of this race. As for the idea that the netroots people are feeling unappreciated and unloved, I say that the netroots people love themselves WAY TOO MUCH in the first place, they can just get over themselves!! Thanks :)

by bobo1 on 06/25/2008 08:11:02 PM EST

bobo youre right--to a degree (none / 0)

The far left has been spoiled of late but people understand and thats why theres sensible people who can move from left to center and maybe a bit to the right here and there.

the phrase Political Terrorism comes to mind when talking about the hardcore base (left and right):

"deal with my particular issues or I may not vote for my side..."---its stupid and childish (Hillary fans Im looking in your general direction)

by calturner on 06/25/2008 08:51:29 PM EST

[ Parent ]
oh bobo (none / 0)

When will you get over this tired argument?  I am still just as enthusiastic about Obama myself and I'm sure many others are too.  I have a lot of respect for Obama and I don't presume to know as much as he does about politics and constitutional law.  I never had any illusion that he was a lefty liberal.  Anyone who does hasn't really paid attention to his stance on the issues. And it isn't simply the left that is supporting him, as the polls clearly show. 

Exactly what issues has Obama been on the far left on?  Certainly not the environment.  Not health care. 

And what makes you immune from a "netroots person" label?  After all, you do seem to pop up every time there is an Obama post here you can jump on.  Is it that you are paid by McCain's campaign to post here?

 

by desertpear on 06/25/2008 08:56:54 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Desert Pear - you're so funny... (none / 0)
John McCain, by accepting public financing, couldn't afford my exceptional services. I'm saying things that a lot of people beyond the blogosphere are thinking. Obama is a Lefty by default simply because most of the people here adore him. His stances are very leftist - "healthcare for all?" - no drilling for oil? - raising taxes on the rich? Gun Control? Really, how much further to the left could he be? Its only those of you "netroots" people who I lovingly call "Obamabots" who think he's a centrist - those of us not totally in love with the idea of him see him as the lefty he is. I just think its funny to see the Obamabots whine and complain about him moving to the right when most people see it as running away from the loony left! Thanks for your comments! :)

by bobo1 on 06/25/2008 09:40:46 PM EST

[ Parent ]
so (none / 0)

 

You will vote for McCain then?  I mean really, what is the choice?  Obama could be a serial killer and I'd still probably support him over McCain.  At this point, isn't the issue sort of moot since we can only choose between these two?

The whole drilling thing is a scam.  Obama wants to close the "Enron Loophole."  From what I have read, I would say his stance on drilling is pragmatic.

In the end, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, since you seem far more conservative than I.  I do see some of the fanaticism you speak of on DailyKos, but not on this forum.  I consider myself a pretty reasonable person willing to compromise on many issues.  Not capitulate, but compromise.   Find a common ground, you know? 

 


by desertpear on 06/25/2008 09:53:12 PM EST

[ Parent ]
There is another choice... (none / 0)
I choose not to vote for president this time around - neither of these candidates are worthy of something so valuable as my vote. Yeah, a lot of kids will vote for the first time yadda yadda - but I think a lot of people will be amazed to see the number of people who choose NOT to vote (of those who normally would) this time around - on both sides of the spectrum. I don't know if there are polls to measure that sort of thing, but many people I know on both sides simply choose not to vote because of their dissatisfaction. The "drilling thing" is not a sham - its the typical Liberal answer when it comes to oil - don't do anything to help, make the people suffer and maybe they'll come around to buy into this "global crisis" bullshit. Even if the technology came out tomorrow that would rid us of oil dependence - it would still take us 50 years to get off of it. We need to drill on our own turf - what would it hurt? Some Caribou? Some spotted owls? BFD!!! Thanks again for your comments!

by bobo1 on 06/25/2008 10:14:59 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Thats nice but, (none / 0)

Youre a scumbag traitor to this country.

Pick a side, not voting is childishness defined.

Dissent is America, Apathy is treasonous.

by calturner on 06/25/2008 10:53:49 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Im the scumbag? (none / 0)
Not voting is also my right as a citizen.

I have voted since before you were born most likely.

If there are candidates that are worthy of my vote, then I shall vote for them.

There arent any Presidential Candidates worthy of my vote this time around.

if you work or volunteer for Obama as you say you do, I suggest that maybe they give you some training as to how to sway independent or non koolaid drinking voters. Calling them scumbags and traitors is not gonna do the trick.

I guess dissent isnt acceptable to you.

Take a cue from your candidate - start running toward the center/right quick if you want any chance of persuading voters.&nbs p;

Thats the bottom line...

:)

by bobo1 on 06/26/2008 01:14:39 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Its your right not to vote (none / 0)
But its my right to say your opinion now means nothing, because you arent voting.

by calturner on 06/26/2008 04:00:33 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Bobo is a responsible non-voter (none / 0)
If Bobo doesn't want to vote, let him not vote.  We should be so lucky that all people as misinformed as he is police themselves and abstain from the process.  Few people have that admirable level of restraint, to say, "I don't know nearly enough about this election to participate in it.  In the interest of my fellow citizens, I better not vote."   Besides, would his opinion mean anything to you even if he WERE voting?

by OneHitKill on 06/26/2008 10:00:05 PM EST

[ Parent ]
good luck (none / 0)
Good luck waiting for your perfect candidate.  The drilling decision should be decided on science, not politics.  I hardly think $4/gallon gas is a crisis.  It's provided the best incentive in 30 years for Americans to stop buying wasteful SUVs and for research into REAL ALTERNATIVES to our dependency on oil.  If you are following the news, you would understand that this is actually happening RIGHT NOW.  Auto makers are scrambling to design small, fuel-efficient vehicles to their customers and are backing off of releasing gas guzzling models.  University research teams and entrepeneurs are DAILY coming up with great new ideas for alternative energy.  Your understanding of the scientific arguments against drilling is that of a third grader's (as evidenced by your focus on two charismatic species), and I don't have the time to educate a person who doesn't give a fuck about the planet that provides us with conditions suitable for life itself.  Now that I see that you don't even have the spine to vote, I doubt I will bother responding to your posts again.  We are just too different to find common ground I guess.  That's too bad. 

by desertpear on 06/26/2008 04:10:22 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Whew!!!!! (none / 0)

Luckily for us the McCain campaign is now openly and publicly rooting for the terrorists.  That should counterbalance the obvious fact that everyone except the TYT posters completely despises Barak Obama.

Speaking of, why aren't you incensed that McCain's campaign is now pro-terrorist?

Ken?

Anytroll? 

by ProfRich on 06/25/2008 10:38:46 PM EST

[ Parent ]
sure Bobo whatever you say (none / 0)

I volunteer for Obama but I made sure that they paid party officials knew I was irritated about FISA but still went out canvassing.

I feel free to criticize Obama every chance I get--because I support him!

I dont blindly follow anyone. 

The late comers on the Obama Train need to be reminded frequently--I was a Dodd man before he dropped out, and briefly with the Clintons, but I saw the writing on the wall and went Obama after my state of VA voted that way. Im a homer sometimes.

by calturner on 06/25/2008 10:51:32 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Yesterday (none / 0)
the LA Times released a poll with Obama winning by 15 points.

by ProfRich on 06/25/2008 09:14:38 PM EST

[ Parent ]
what they dont bother to tell you is... (none / 0)
That 40 percent polled were Liberals, 20 percent were Conservatives and McCain, despite his obvious creepiness, still won Independents by 8-10 percent. Professor, you should know better than to trust or quote anything by the LA Times, or what we Californian expats like to call "Pravda West"! Tisk Tisk sir!

by bobo1 on 06/25/2008 09:20:13 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Odd (none / 0)
Your hate for liberals is puzzling, because I swear I remember you being an Edwards supporter at the beginning of the race, and he was more to the left than Obama.

by Spencer on 06/25/2008 11:04:24 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Yes, Spence, but... (none / 0)
Edwards has never really tried to hide his populism/liberalism from the people. I think my correct words at the time were that I wanted Edwards over Obama, not inasmuch as I was a Liberal like Edwards. No one here could accuse me of ever being a Liberal. I could never accept that, as I tend to find Liberalism not to my immediate liking.

thanks again...

:)

by bobo1 on 06/26/2008 12:36:54 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Right... (none / 0)

How has Obama "tried to hide his Populism/liberalism from the people"?  And even if he did, how does that make those views more or less crazy/electable to you?  In other words, why would you vote for Edwards when you disagree with his views because they're too liberal?  And, based on that answer, why wouldn't you vote for Obama (since he's a touch more moderate than Edwards)?

And BTW, your exact words were something to the effect of "I was an Edwards Supporter Originally" (I looked it up even).

Also, this whole issue with people being angry about Obama's FISA vote sure does make your whole "everyone thinks Obama is Jesus and they'll swallow whatever lies he throws up" thing really look like the bullshit it is.

by Spencer on 06/26/2008 01:06:05 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Whoops (none / 0)
I guess it's not really FISA.  I meant telecom immunity.

by Spencer on 06/26/2008 01:09:20 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Logic short circuit (none / 0)

Bobo is famous for these but this one is widespread.  I had this conversation two nights ago with a conservative friend.

Con: Obama is ultra-liberal.  He's to the left of Che Guevera.

Reasonable Human Being: I don't get that impression.  His policies on (insert reasonable left of center policy list Obama has voiced) suggest he is not particularly liberal.

Con: Right, you believe that? Can't you see he is lying to us?  Can't you see his a sleeper agent for the communist revolution?

RHB: Not based on anything he has ever said or done, no.

Con: Because all of that is a lie! An artificial construct to disguise his insane communism like a Trojan Horse!

RHB: What makes you think this?  What evidence do you have of this?

Con: Kool-Aid drinker!!!!!

Its reminiscient of the whole faith vs. science argument.  In that the religious people just say every piece of scientific evidence they don't like was put their by Satan and is a test of our faith (like all those dinosaur bones). 

by ProfRich on 06/26/2008 02:35:16 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Hey (none / 0)

Dinosaurs were on Noah's Ark.

Get it right. 

by z1p101 on 06/26/2008 02:47:19 AM EST

[ Parent ]
professor... (none / 0)
All one has to do is examine Obama's limited voting record to see where he butters his bread politically (aside from his recent capitulation on the FISA thing)... Even someone like me who hates dealing with evidence and fact can accomplish this...

The real way to tell what kind of politician he is and what he'll possibly do comes not from an intense examination of him and his record (which supports the notion that he is at least a liberal, perhaps not a pinko marxist, although i wonder). It comes from an old addage of days past -

"Birds of a Feather Flock Together"

Look at who supports him. Do you want me to list all the clubs, associations and notable figures who endorse him. Its Like a Liberal who's who list...

Look who he chooses to associate with - Do we really need to go over this again?

Look at the pattern he seems to be developing:

1. He says he'll support public financing - then rejects it outright because of political expediency.

2. He would "Never Disavow" the Trinity Church or its Pastor - Then he quits the church when its politically expedient. Dumped em hard like a hot potato with bare hands - where's the love (or the loyalty)?

3. He vows to support a free Palestinian state and talks with Iran - Until he goes and visits AIPAC, where he sounds very conservative like - again, when its politically expedient.

4. He tells the media to leave his wife alone, shes not a reasonable target - and the campaign puts her out on The View and has a spread in US magazine and lightens her tone and rhetoric, willfully entering herself into the fray. The pundits say this reversal is done for political expedience...

5. He says he wants to clean up and change campaigns and their funding, but takes money from every major Lender/Broker bank in the country. Yeah - thats change we can all believe in! thats Political Expedience alright!

6. He pledges to Fillibuster Telecom immunity, but capitualtes for - say it with me - political expedience...

Do I need to continue Professor? Do you see a pattern developing here? Or will you dismiss it as speculation, or unsubstantiated hate. Or will you just label me a racist and be done with me? Thats what most "netrooters" like to do.

Shall we go into his very public stances on Gun rights (or lack thereof)? Health Care? Oil and Energy Policy? I could go on for a while!

Im not saying hes Joseph Stalin - Im saying that he is not a candidate of change. He is a politician and does not care who he throws under the bus to get his way elected. Is this the man you want to lead your revolution? Is this the man you vow will "Change" our system?


And for those of you who continue the old line "Well, hes better than the alternative, or he's a step in the right direction." I say hogwash - he the same as all the rest, a liar and a panderer and a man driven by pure ambition - it takes real Cajones to run for the highest office after 1 year in the Senate. I wonder where his sense of such entitlement comes from... We'll have that discussion later, Im sure!

Thanks again!

:)


by bobo1 on 06/26/2008 03:13:45 AM EST

[ Parent ]
bobo (none / 0)

This weekend rent and watch the movie Training Day. There is this part when Denzel Washington tells Ethan Hawke that you can't change anything from the outside. You have to be on the inside to change anything and no one trusts you unless you have a little dirt on you.

I don't buy that Obama is the second coming any more than you do. He is a politician and they are ambitious by nature. However, I do believe he does want to make changes and as you so often have poined out it is going to be difficult for him to get into the inside because of his completion so he needs to take advantage of everything he can.

Anyway, he has got to be better than the retard we have now or the Republican flip flopping crypt keeper who wants the job next. All we can do is go up from here.

That is the way the world works and I know you know that so stop feigning all this surprise and disgust because I know you are full of shit.

Oh yea, you have not earned the right to call me Zippy yet. 

by z1p101 on 06/26/2008 03:47:22 AM EST

[ Parent ]
What a long winded dodge. (none / 0)
Everything on your list shows that Obama is a politician.  Newsflash!  They don't show him to be the liberal extremist that you claimed previously, so which one is it?

And what's John Edwards' stance on gun rights again?  Health care?  Energy policy?  Edwards also had no record, and pandered at every opportunity, yet he was acceptable to you.  I really wonder why.  Enlighten me.

by Spencer on 06/26/2008 03:49:12 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Bobo vs. Bobo (none / 0)

So...

You hate Obama because he is secretly very liberal and not openly liberal like John Edwards who you like but you don't like liberal ideas and Obama is secretly liberal because he claims to support public financing and doesn't, is endorsed by liberal groups who have chosen him over the only other real choice McCain, he secretly holds a conservative pro-Isreali position, his wife was on the View to rebutt GOP attacks on her, he takes money from the banking industry, he supports Telecom immunity but he does favor gun control, fixing health care and renewable energy.

Yeah, you really proved he was a secret liberal there bobo.

Tell the truth, you forgot which side you were arguing about three sentences into this post and accidentally attacked your own argument, didn't you?

But on the plus side, everyone understand my logic short circuit post now? 

by ProfRich on 06/26/2008 11:13:10 AM EST

[ Parent ]
What is Liberalism to you? (none / 0)

Which of these positions do you not agree with?

<h2>Some positions associated with liberalism in the United States</h2>
  • individual freedom
  • unalienable human and natural rights
  • freedom of speech and the press
  • separation of church and state
  • equality of opportunity for all regardless of race, age, religion, income, sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity
  • freedom of information; the right to know what the government is doing
  • the rule of law; the equal protection of the law
  • higher concern for the environment and worker rights than market forces
  • the value to society of working people
  • social security, universal health care, and the provision of support to poor workers & families
  • progressive taxation
  • reluctance to use military force in a rash and hasty manner
  • woman's right to choose to have an abortion
  • proclivity toward supporting "home" issues versus foreign
  • proclivity toward supporting federal power versus state power
  • proclivity toward supporting public education versus private
  • right of citizens to have legally recognized marriages/unions regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity

 

by desertpear on 06/26/2008 04:24:06 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Focus netroots, focus. | 28 comments (28 topical, 0 hidden)
 Display: