So last May 2011 the blog Daily Kos conducted a poll of their readers asking whether they wanted my cartoons added to the then-new Daily Kos comics line-up, which includes a bunch of like-minded altie/leftie comix, the likes of which I typically run with.
Here was the poll:
“I’d like to see Ted Rall added to the DK4 comics lineup”
Results:
Yes
83% 420 votes
No
16% 86 votes
Total 506 votes
They’re still adding comics. Not me. Apparently I’m too critical of Obama. DK owner Markos tweeted today about my being blackballed: “Feeling entitled much?”
It’s not about me, Markos. It’s about your readers.
What is this, a Florida election?
27 Comments.
Markos is a douche, like most fake democrats he just exploits idiotic democrats for money.
I’m sure my ‘toon would be a big hit over there.
http://americanextremists.thecomicseries.com/
Ted,
I never mentioned this, but since you’re blogging about it ….
I bought one of your custom cartoons on eBay, which I like very much. I emailed Tom Tomorrow (aka Dan Perkins) and asked him if he would be interested in running it on DailyKos. He sent me a one line reply: “We don’t accept unsolicited cartoons”. Actually, he also said I could start my own page on dKos and post it myself, outside the comics section. I laughed and told him thanks, but no thanks.
I was pretty stunned by his response. All you hear Tom Tomorrow do is bitch and moan about getting his work published, constantly talking about how hard it is for him – and other cartoonist – to get their work publish. All of a sudden he’s the comics editor on dKos and what does he say when offered a cartoon by one of the best known cartoonist out there? “We don’t accept unsolicited cartoons”. What an ass. Never been to his site since. I can’t stand hypocrisy. As if publishing comics on dKos is a matter of utmost integrity, and publishing a one-off would be in bad taste or something.
Eh, what do you expect from kos. His site has no credibility since the polling data scandal. If you publish 18 months of fraudulent poll data, you can’t be trusted to be competent with much of anything.
“So, last May 2011, one of the thousands of readers at Daily Kos (who had no connection with the site’s leadership), conducted his own poll, in a diary that was neither rescued, rec listed, nor front paged (meaning only a fraction of the site’s actual traffic saw it), asking whether the tiny minority of folks who read the diary would like to see my comics added to the then-new Daily Kos comics line-up.”
Fixed that for you, Ted. And I agree with Markos- thinking that that non-representative sample like that actually means you should automatically be on Daily Kos is textbook entitlement thinking.
I actually wouldn’t mind them running a real, representative poll, though. Given that Daily Kos is about electing Democrats, and a substantial portion of your comics are not only non-helpful, but actually harmful to the very reason for the sites existence, I’m pretty sure you’d lose.
Ted,
The DKers are a particularly unsettling bunch. Obama is their God, and those who commit heresy are not permitted. Period. Even today’s attempt by the New York Times to whitewash the unemployment picture isn’t going to work much longer. I think this time the handlers let everything get a little too bad for people, and now, less than a year before elections, suddenly Obama’s testicles drop? Uh-uh. Probably not going to work this time.
Ask anyone who performs stand up or theater. Timing is absolutely crucial. You flub it once, and you can see the audience snap out of the spell.
Right now, the Republicans look like a Keystone Kops film, but they’ll have the candidate sorted out soon enough (prob. Romney, but it’s still possible some darkhorse like Paul could get the nod if for no other reason than being ignored for so long that all the others will self-destruct, leaving him the only one left).
Obama’s going to have to really do something spectacular to get the election. The only thing I can think of would be to start rounding up the Wall Street Felons. And even that will take to long to get to trial to be any good. I suppose another terrorist attack would work to keep him in the White House, but it would have to be something more than taking out a couple towers this time.
alex_the_tired
First, there are plenty of Obama bashers on DK. Trust me, I’ve countered their points so many times it’s gotten beyond tiresome.
Second, would you care to make a wager? Because as much as it seems youd like to make your constant prediction of an Obama loss a self-fulfilling prophecy, the election is Obama’s to lose. And he’s just not going to lose it to Mitt. Or Newt. Or Ron. And most especially not to Rick.
Whimsical,
1. The problem with raising complaints about Obama on DK is that no one is swayed. It’s a star chamber with the usual dictatorial overtones of “This is not the point of this site. Stop making these statements here.”
2. I like the idea of a wager. However, I think we should keep it highbrow (and cheap)! Say a $25 donation to the charity of the winner’s choice? (If I actually have a job before the election, we can revisit the idea of raising it to some really outrageous figure, like a $50 donation).
Whimsical: I enjoy reading your comments on this site. I don’t agree with them, but you sound like a thoughtful person who cares about the world around you. I am curious to know if you’ve read any Howard Zinn, and how you think people like Bill Clinton and Barack Obama fit into his portrait of history? If we could be simpletons and break this down into a baseball game, do you think BC and BO would be more likely to be on the team with the likes of “Eugene Debs, Margaret Sanger, and MLK Jr”, or “Lee Iaccoca, Michael Bloomberg, and Ed Koch”? Where would they feel more at home, and why?
hey Ted … makes us come here… all good.
Hey, Markos, are you reading this right now?
Rule Number One:
Whenever you are in the print/online magazine business, you always, always give your readership what they want. Consider what happened to the now defunct New York Press, which consistently refused to listen to their readership, after constant complaints. The readership abandoned them, and now the NYP is no longer a competitor to the Village Voice. DON’T think this can’t happen to the Daily Kos. Especially if you ignore 83% of your readership to satisfy 16% (who would probably just skip Ted’s cartoon if they don’t like it. After all, it’s only one cartoon).
Case in point. I used to come to Daily Kos back in the day. But since you started shilling for the Democrats, I stopped coming. You seem to want to continue the downward spiral.
Susan,
I 83% agree.
It’s Markos’ site, but only sorta. Once it became one of the biggest liberal blogs, it belonged to the readers. At that point it’s mission was/should have been liberalism.
But it’s not. Now DK is just for Democrats. And Democrats aren’t liberal.
We’ll see what happens, but I think sites like that will become less relevant over time. Ideology matters; parties not so much.
Is it possible that the cartoons that are published at DK got more that 83% of the vote?
Back in the day when GWB was emperor, I used to haunt DK to find like-minded folks and it was all good. Now that Obummer has ascended to the throne, when you try to mention that he has no clothes (as in LIED about lots of things he was gonna do) , you are O-U-T spells “out” cast there. I don’t even try anymore.
One last thing about Obama, DK, and my bet with Whimsical:
That’s actually three things.
1&2. Obama/DK: Right now, there’s a diary on DK (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/02/06/1062156/-Not-voting-for-Obama-Youre-responsible,-then-?via=siderec) that says, in part, that unless you vote for the Dem candidate, “you will be directly responsible for the Democrats loss and the Republican taking of the Executive Branch.”
Okay. Let me put it right out there. GOOD! Why? Because people are simply not waking up to the many atrocities being committed by both the Dems and the Republicans. One of the OWSers who has gotten a lot of coverage is a guy named Jesse LaGreca. He seems like a pretty good guy. But the other day (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/31/1059954/-Dear-Oakland-Mayor-Quan,-you-do-not-need-to-call-me,-here-is-MY-response-to-YOUR-demands?via=search) he made a pretty idiotic statement that went like this:
1. I denounce all violence.
2. The police don’t have the right to use tear gas on peaceful protesters.
3. If they do, I will stand against them.
How will you stand against them? Signs? Doing the “shame-shame” gesture with your fingers? Lining up to be processed into the system when the cops come to arrest you? Cops are beating in people’s heads, and even when they are caught on videotape, up goes the Blue Wall of Silence, and the cop walks. How many videos of fat cops smirking with delight as they beat bound victims with batons does it take? 100? A thousand? If the police line up arrestees and start shooting them in the back of the head will that be sufficient to wake people up?
The cop who maced those four women got desk duty closer to where he lives. He should have been thrown in jail without bail until trial. All OWS did was get him a shorter commute. Way. To. Go. (Cue sarcastic applause.)
I say vote Republican. Within two years, they will have the entire country in flames (if not literally, then figuratively at least). And just like the AAers say, until you hit rock bottom, you can’t get sober.
As to 3. I think that Whimsical should clarify my understanding of our friendly wager. I hold that Obama will lose the White House, and the Democrats will be the minority party in both houses. Whimsical seems pretty confident that I’m wrong about this. So, Whim, let’s put some numbers to it. What do you think the election results will be? How many Democrats will be in the White House, the Senate, and the House of Representatives? Or should we just do a straight-up majority/minority on each one, with me having to be right on all three?
@alex_the_tired
Well, at the moment, the only thing I’m confident enough to bet on is that Obama both can and will beat, Newt, Mitt, Ron and Rick. If the Republicans get a clue, and a brokered convention gets them a different candidate, all bets are off.
As it stands right now, I believe the Republicans have an excellent chance of taking the Senate (80%) and a pretty decent chance of keeping the House (65%)- due mainly to gerrymanders (Thanks, liberals who depressed turnout in 2010! But I digress..) and attempts at voter suppression.
But here’s the thing- a couple of months ago, I would’ve rated the chances of taking the Senate at 100%, and keeping the House at 90%. And the more Republicans open their mouth and prove they can’t govern, the more those numbers continue to go down. They haven’t seen the wisdom of shutting up yet, and there are still 10 months to go.
Tl;dr- I’m open to expanding the bet to Congress, but you’re going to have to offer me a spread. And yes, $25 to the charity of the winner’s choice sounds fine.
“Because people are simply not waking up to the many atrocities being committed by both the Dems and the Republicans.”
False equivalence much? Yes, technically someone who jaywalks and someone who pulls a Hannibal Lecter are both criminals, but to merely mention the criminality without providing the necessary clarification is disingenuous at best, deliberately deceptive at worst.
“I say vote Republican. Within two years, they will have the entire country in flames (if not literally, then figuratively at least). And just like the AAers say, until you hit rock bottom, you can’t get sober.”
This saddens me, I had you pegged, as far, far too smart to try the ridiculous “We had to destroy the village in order to save it” argument; with the accompanying assumption of “oh we can just turn around and rebuild right away.”
If we are suicidally stupid enough to put Republicans in power in 2012, the country will be in flames by 2014, and it will STAY in flames; most likely until my children’s children’s children’s children’s children get a chance to rebuild to where we are now.
Or, we could take the sane option, and improve things a little more every go around, to where their lives are better than what we have now; albeit not to the extent that fantasist liberals like Ted would like.
100 years of hell just to get back to where we are now, or 100 years of fighting to end up with things a little better? I know what I’m picking.
@aabrown1971
I haven’t read Zinn; I don’t care much for non-fiction, so I can’t help you there. As to your baseball analogy, I would not put MLK jr on the same team with Sanger and Debs.
Sanger and Debs are people like Ted, people who would replace the system. Iaccoca, Bloomberg, and Koch are people who understood how to use the system to get what they want.
Id actually, put BC, BO, and MLK Jr. on a team with me- people who understand how to use the system to get what they want, but that it’s going to take time (generational time) and a ton of fight to get there.
It’s not their fault that those following them failed to grasp that point, and abandoned the fight when it had barely begun, merely because it hadn’t already been won.
@susan
You, like Ted, conveniently ignore that that poll did not reach 100% of DK readership. 83% of the people who saw that poll liked ted, but Id say well under half of DK readership actually saw the poll. It proves nothing.
Okay, we’ll table the bet for right now. When the nominee is, um, nomed, we can declare officially.
And not to go too far off on a screed, but the Dems are committing atrocities. Gitmo is still open. That’s one. The bankers are going to get away with wiping out the economy. That’s two. Bush and Cheney are still free. That’s three (four). These aren’t partisan issues. These things matter. And if the president can’t get these things done in three years, he’s not going to get them done in the next five.
And before you say it, yes, I know, Bush left Obama a mess. But Obama isn’t sitting there with a whisk broom having to clean everything up himself. It’s called delegating. Example: Pick up phone, get Attorney General on the phone: “I need a case for deporting Bush and Cheney to one of the 55 countries that want them to answer for war crimes. Get it done.”
Pick up phone, get the cabinet in the Oval Office. “I want a plan on my desk in 48 hours for providing universal health care. Who do I tax, what military programs do I defund? I want answers or you can all find work elsewhere. Get going. If we have to, we’ll simply steal Canada’s playbook, correct the spelling, and use that as the first model, but I want everyone in this country will access to genuine health care within six months. Period.”
That’s how you run something. You actively cause things to happen. You tell your subordinates what they are expected to do and if they can’t do it, you fire them. Power accretes to power. Cheney, the puppetmaster of that cocaine-pickled halfwit understood this perfectly. Cheney shot an 80-year-old man in the face and got him to apologize for getting in the way. That’s how you wield power. You don’t line up Mary Meek and Mild and ask people if they wouldn’t mind discussing things for a few months. You only reach across the aisle to take something. You take health care for everyone. And when the other side complains, you stand there and give it to them with both barrels: “Why do you want children to die?”
I’d rather have people suffer (and that means me, too, I’m not expecting to escape this; my survival depends on keeping a job, and those will disappear like shrimp at an all-you-can-eat buffet when the Reps make the hat trick) for a few years then to continue limping along like fools for decades while one fake Democrat after another (because we can’t elect anything other than a moderate, we have to “compromise”) fumbles around while the thieves and goons sit back and laugh at us all toiling in the muck to eke out a living.
Quote:
“False equivalence much? Yes, technically someone who jaywalks and someone who pulls a Hannibal Lecter are both criminals, but to merely mention the criminality without providing the necessary clarification is disingenuous at best, deliberately deceptive at worst.”
You should do standup comedy, Whimsical. You’d be a hit.
Seriously, though, if it ever turns up that you are actually a Democrat-paid troll, I would have far more respect for you than if you were commenting on these sites for free. Because nobody should shill for the Democrats the way you’ve been doing (and at multiple websites) and not get paid for it.
So if you aren’t currently getting paid, do yourself a big favor and save all the posts you’ve ever made on any website, present them to the Democratic party, and persuade them to pay you for any future posts. Anything less and you are a doormat.
Seconded, patrol002. Markos is a D-party dickhead, a smarmy liberal bung-tonguer happy to knife anyone for a pat on the head.
DKos uses Matt Wuerker, but not Ted Rall? That’s it. I’m signing on there, just to give them some shit.
Markos Moulitsas is the king of the douche-bags. All hail king douche-bag. He’s been reduced to appearing on olbermann’s universally un-watched show on CurrentTV (right above the soap-opera-channel… no seriously). Daily Beast is doing about as well as Newsweek these days. Tina Brown to the rescue!
As for the elections… There is no denying that the GOP field is exceptionally un-impressive…. Here’s a question… has anyone ever met someone who DIDN’T vote for Obama in ’08 (But still voted), but plans to vote for him in 2012? I’ve not…. and I’ve done a fair bit of looking. I’ve met several who DID in ’08 who shant be doing so again. Food for thought.
By Daily beast i clearly meant daily kos…. So many “Daily”-titled political websites.
To expand on the issue of who to vote for in 2012, how unimpressive the Republicans are, etc., I think a look at the presidents since the two-term limit kicked in is in order:
Here’s the 10 post-Truman presidents who have completed their terms: Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush One, Clinton, Bush Two.
Of the 10 former presidents, five were elected twice: Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan, Clinton, Bush Two.
Only one, Eisenhower, made it through without a “black swan” event. Sure, he had the CIA coups, the nuclear tests, all that stamp collecting, but the thing people say when they’re asked about Eisenhower is “International Highway System.” Hardly black swan.
Nixon won re-election but had to resign when Watergate blew up in his face. Reagan was shot (but not killed) in his first term. The political capital one can make from surviving an assassination cannot be underestimated (IF you actually get shot, not just threatened, like Ford). Clinton was impeached after his second election. The scandal not only distracted and derailed Clinton’s policy agenda, it certainly had post-Clinton repercussions for the Democrats, but that’s beyond the scope of this discussion. Bush Two had just returned a few weeks earlier from a six-week vacation when the single biggest terrorist attack in American history unfolded in his first term. Wars make it pretty easy for an incumbent to win re-election. And at that point, far too many people weren’t aware of what a snafu the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were turning into.
Now let’s look at the rest: Kennedy was killed in his first term. Johnson’s one full-term was certainly in no small part due to the memory of the young, dead Kennedy. Ford was a stop-gap, and he torpedoed any chance he had of being elected by pardoning Nixon. Only Carter and Bush One ran for a second term and lost. Carter lost re-election thanks to the Hostage Crisis. Bush One lost re-election
because of the economy.
It’s a stunningly simple set of conditions. Second terms are disasters. The only hope you’ve got if you win a second term is to survive a shooting or start a massive war. So we should be hearing about the invasion of Iran in, what, late September? Mid-September, say around the 15th, with the smell of 9/11 still in everyone’s patriotic nostrils?
DailyKos is just another tool of the Democratic Party. These so-called liberal media are as big or bigger impediment to truth and progress than Fox News, racists, or whatever bogeyman of the week they are criticizing. Another commenter mentioned doucheman Tom Tomorrow. No suprise Tomorrow wouldn’t accept the cartoon. I’ve noticed a lot of his cartoons I see in the local alternative weekly (another feckless lefty entity) go easy on criticizing Democratic sacred cows.
@alex_the_tired
“And not to go too far off on a screed, but the Dems are committing atrocities. Gitmo is still open. That’s one.”
Again with the false equivalence. That’s maybe 1% the fault of the Democrats.
“The bankers are going to get away with wiping out the economy. That’s two. Bush and Cheney are still free. That’s three (four). These aren’t partisan issues. These things matter. And if the president can’t get these things done in three years, he’s not going to get them done in the next five.”
These are also things that NO ONE could’ve gotten done or could get done, not in the next f years, or fifty, or five hundred. The world doesn’t work that way. I don’t care who you put into the office the rest of your list simply was never going to happen. Its just not possible, and it makes as much sense to ruin the world because of that as it would to ruin the world because Obama couldn’t fill the skies with flying unicorns that fart rainbows and shit money.
Wait, the unicorn thing is actually MORE likely to be accomplished then the rest of your list.
“Example: Pick up phone, get Attorney General on the phone: “I need a case for deporting Bush and Cheney to one of the 55 countries that want them to answer for war crimes. Get it done.” Pick up phone, get the cabinet in the Oval Office. “I want a plan on my desk in 48 hours for providing universal health care. Who do I tax, what military programs do I defund? I want answers or you can all find work elsewhere. Get going. If we have to, we’ll simply steal Canada’s playbook, correct the spelling, and use that as the first model, but I want everyone in this country will access to genuine health care within six months. Period.””
Wow. Not only does the system NOT work that way (and deliberately so), frankly, I’m not sure I’d want to live in a system that does work that way. Dictatorships have a certain appeal I grant you, but only if one gets to be the dictator.
“I’d rather have people suffer (and that means me, too, I’m not expecting to escape this; my survival depends on keeping a job, and those will disappear like shrimp at an all-you-can-eat buffet when the Reps make the hat trick) for a few years then to continue limping along like fools for decades”
And I’d rather make slow but steady incremental progress than have people suffer for generations- which is what will happen if we are suicidally stupid enough to put the Republicans back in power, directly or indirectly. Bank on it.
And I am even less inclined to let people suffer for those whose expectations of what was and is achievable were never remotely realistic in the first place.
“Of the 10 former presidents, five were elected twice: Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan, Clinton, Bush Two.”
False. Even if you accept that Bush Two won the SECOND election ( I do not- there is more than enough evidence of shenanigans to justify a full investigation, and I have no doubt a full investigation would reveal enough cheating to nullify the outcome), it is fact that he did not get elected the first time- the SC stopped a full and proper recount from being done and handed Bush the prize.
Bush won a lawsuit and then possibly got elected. We’ll never know. These things matter.
@jtg24
No, I’ve never met anyone who didn’t vote for Obama in ’08 and plans to in ’12. I have however, met a fair amount of people who voted AGAINST Obama, who are planning to sit out in ’12.
And of course, I know a ton of people who voted for Obama in ’08 and have absolutely no problem doing so in ’12; either because they grasp that not doing so would be deadly, or because their expectations were never unreasonable in the first place.
Luckily for the world, folks like Ted are a decided minority.
Whimsical.
To claim that Gitmo’s still being open is “maybe 1% the fault of the Democrats” and a “false equivalence” is offensive. Gitmo isn’t closed because the President doesn’t want to spend the political capital, and the Democrats don’t want to appear as though they think the Constitution means what it says.
When you’re arrested, you’re entitled to a trial. Either these prisoners did something, and should be tried and (if found guilty) sentenced, or these are people who are being warehoused by timid politicians. There is nothing to discuss about this. It is simply wrong, morally, politically, legally, to do such a thing.
I guarantee that if they were your friends or family, Whimsical, you’d be shrieking from the rooftops about this. I don’t know anyone at Gitmo; the only reason I’m so furious about it is because I know that these sorts of things never shrink away on their own. Today it’s a few dozen prisoners. Do you think it won’t be done again if it isn’t stopped now?
As to your notion that the bankers getting away with wiping out the economy and Bush and Cheney getting away with all their shenanigans are things that investigation and prosecution of “NO ONE could’ve gotten done or could get done, not in the next five years, or fifty, or five hundred.”
Then why are you pushing so strongly to defend Obama? If he’s useless, what does it matter? It’s like listening to the protests of a battered wife. Two teeth missing, a black eye, possible concussion, and she’ll plead with the police, “It was my fault. He didn’t mean it. I should have been more careful. I fell down the stairs. Yeah, that’s it.”
Obama is a disaster. Bush was a disaster, too. Granted, of an entirely different magnitude, but Obama is simply fumbling around like an idiot.
If universal health care, where the cost is fairly distributed and paid for by defunding war programs is a dictatorship, then sign me up. I remember when the liberals used to have bumper stickers that said it would be a great day when the schools got all the money they needed and the military had to hold a bake sale. Apparently, now, that sort of thing is dictatorshipthink or something.
The reality is that, politically, everything that’s ever come about that’s turned out to be an advancement of the human condition or a decreasing of human suffering — school lunch programs, civil rights, women being allowed to vote, social security, etc. — is always decried by opponents as being a sure-fire guarantee for wiping out the entire country or destroying America’s fine work ethic. It never does, but that doesn’t stop the complaints. So I dispute your argument that none of these things — putting Bush on trial, closing Gitmo, etc. — can ever happen. They could happen. But the effort would require a dynamic, intelligent leader with passion and a thirst for social justice. Martin Luther King comes to mind. And Obama, most assuredly, is not MLK. A middle manager at a hedge fund? Yes. He’s very polished, polite, suave. I’m sure that he would be able to explain to any investor, no matter how small, how deeply he regrets that the investor’s portfolio just took a 40% hit, and I bet he’d really sound like he did care, but does he live these things in his heart? I think only to the extent that they can realize a profit for him in the next quarter. Take off the rose-colored glasses. If he had a “(R)” after his name instead of “(D)” I doubt, highly, that you would be so free in your praise.
And before I forget, Eisenhower didn’t do the “International” highway system, like I wrote earlier. It was just “national.”
@alex_the_tired
“To claim that Gitmo’s still being open is “maybe 1% the fault of the Democrats” and a “false equivalence” is offensive. Gitmo isn’t closed because the President doesn’t want to spend the political capital, and the Democrats don’t want to appear as though they think the Constitution means what it says”
Funny, claiming that the President didn’t want to spend the political capital and the Democrats don’t want to defend the Constitution when the President did everything in his power to close Gitmo and was blocked by a small minority of Democrats and EVERY last stinking Republican is what offends me.
Words matter. Assigning blame in the correct proportion matters.
“When you’re arrested, you’re entitled to a trial. Either these prisoners did something, and should be tried and (if found guilty) sentenced, or these are people who are being warehoused by timid politicians. There is nothing to discuss about this. It is simply wrong, morally, politically, legally, to do such a thing.”
Morally, absolutely. Legally and politically, given those at Gitmo are not US citizens, you’re on much shakier ground. And I’m not willing to drive the world over a cliff for the betterment of my own sense of moral superiority.
“I guarantee that if they were your friends or family, Whimsical, you’d be shrieking from the rooftops about this. I don’t know anyone at Gitmo; the only reason I’m so furious about it is because I know that these sorts of things never shrink away on their own. Today it’s a few dozen prisoners. Do you think it won’t be done again if it isn’t stopped now? ”
Of course I would, but as I said above, my friends and family are US citizens. And yes, it’ll be done again if it isn’t stopped now, which makes it all the more important to correctly identify who is responsible, and who needs stopping. And to claim that both sides need stopping equally is ridiculous.
“Then why are you pushing so strongly to defend Obama? If he’s useless, what does it matter? It’s like listening to the protests of a battered wife. Two teeth missing, a black eye, possible concussion, and she’ll plead with the police, “It was my fault. He didn’t mean it. I should have been more careful. I fell down the stairs. Yeah, that’s it.””
Why am I pushing Obama so hard? Because of people like you, and Ted- I don’t agree with your analogy, but lets run with it-. Yeah, Obama’s the spouse that will beat us up. Guess what- the other choice- the one you and Ted are advocating for directly or indirectly- will beat us TO DEATH. Thanks, but no thanks.
“If universal health care, where the cost is fairly distributed and paid for by defunding war programs is a dictatorship, then sign me up.”
Saying do this right now the way I want or else? Damn straight that’s a dictatorship. And dictatorships are fine as long as you get what you want-until you start getting what you don’t want.
Universal healthcare is achievable the regular Democratic way, – I’m sorry you don’t have the patience for that and would rather take undemocratic shortcuts. Id rather do it right, and do it Democratically, even if it means I personally don’t get to see the benefits.
“Take off the rose-colored glasses. If he had a “(R)” after his name instead of “(D)” I doubt, highly, that you would be so free in your praise.”
Saying Obama’s re-election is a necessity for the survival of the world is “praise” now? And here I thought it was just stating facts.
Look, while I think your expectations are unreasonable, and thus have led you to be far harder on Obama than he actually deserves, I’d hardly call what I’ve done praising the man.
He’s a so-so President. He’s just orders of magnitude better than the alternative right now.
I think Whimsical is right, the poll was a non-binding poll by a single poster and has no relevance. But the way Ted has treated the Daily Kos, it’s no surprise that they wouldn’t want him on there anyways.