yo

1

Hi Jane!

See Todd Gitlins “Twilight of Common Dreams,Why America Is Wracked by Culture Wars ” for a relevant discussion of this issue.

maybe yes
maybe no

Amen Jane.

Had Speaker Pelosi begun pushing accountability in earnest the party would be seen as a party of action.

Same old story. When you take a stand, even if people don’t like it they respect you for taking one.

This war or race and gender between Democrats has grave potential to rend the party asunder.

-G

Review of Gitlin:

Then I read this. It seems that Californians were debating over textbooks for social studies and history. The author, and others, anticipated that the “right” would be most vocal in their comments on proposed textbooks. “Why isn’t there more about St. Joe McCarthy? Why so much about those satanic hippies in the 1960s?” We’ve all heard the diatribes. Well, it turned out the the left was more vocal. Becoming parodies of themselves, “progressives” all over were claiming the texts didn’t include enough references to black, homosexual, working class women (to partake of a comic phrase of many years ago). The concept of which I learned–and which has continually amused me since–is IDENTITY POLITICS!

Indeed, it’s a symptom of what went wrong with the direction the 60s were taking us: we’re all victims now. And if not, we’re oppressors.

Ultimately, it’s led to post-modernism, the “academic left” and other schools of contemporary comedy, and other travesties on which volumes have been written.

Do you want to understand what identity politics means? Or why the left is its own worst enemy? Read this fine volume.

And read other Gitlin too. He’s grown up. That’s more than I can say of some of his contemporaries of approaching 40 years ago.

I watch the TV these days and I see that the image of the Democratic party is quickly morphing from the party of economic justice or the party that will get us out of Iraq into the party that wants to return to the identity politics wars of the 70s. Because the Democrats have largely sat back and been content to watch the Republicans self-destruct rather than step out in a leadership position on issues that could have positively defined them, they’re vulnerable to being cast thusly. It’s a big turn-off to most Americans that shrewd GOP political operatives and cooperative media have been quick to seize upon.

Talking about race and gender is important. Finding a way to do so responsibly, with appropriate context — and not simply as a way to tear each other down — is equally important. A failure to do so may find us looking at a resurgent GOP this fall no matter who the Democratic nominee is.

And at that point, we all lose.

My bold.

Yep. I warned everyone about this third rail of identity politics about six weeks ago–and the perils of a zero-sum game (one loses, the other wins) and on how a nonzero-sum outcome migth be desirable…Now it seemsthere’sarrace to the bottom…

DUGG

Yes you did, Biodun.

Agreed… and my personal take was that KO went over the top
in his “special comment” on Hillary…
KO didn’t look too happy/comfortable when he interviewed Obama on Friday night…

Let me be clear on this. I don’t support Obama based upon the fact that he’s a person of color. I do not, not, support Senator Clinton ground in the basis of her not being a man. Is there a way I can be more luminescent on this statement?

I’ve got no nostalgia for disco music. That part of the 70’s was so discouraging.

Simply put. Senator Obama trumps Senator Clinton.

I’ve spent most of the morning reading everything I could find related to the Bear Stearns debacle, and I come away from it all wondering whether this time next week it’ll be “Hillary-Schmillary” and “Obama-Schmama”– i.e., that we’ll all be shell-shocked over the total meltdown of the U.S. financial system. There is some bad shit goin’ on right now.

KO’s comments about Hillary were right on time.

I can see where any African-American who was fire hosed during a peaceful march might carry a grudge.

Lord, I dislike disco.

You don’t think it is limited to Bear Stearns? Please Explain.

There are reasons to be discouraged with Senator Clinton. Starting with Iraq and the DLC.

Myself and lots of other American Democrats who are white had no problem voting for Barack. The ones who are having a hard time with this reality are the racists of our country. See? Hillary, Ferraro, Glenn Beck, Ass Limbo (Rush), are the ones who just can’t understand what Michelle Obama meant when she said for the first time in her ADULT life she’s proud of her country!

I don’t even think it had to happen to a person for it to produce a grudge, just knowing it happened was enough.

If you’d like to be “more luminescent,” please enlighten us as to what this has to do with this particular post.

“…the language and the memories and the baggage of those times.”

Baggage. Baggage? That’s not being very generous, Barack.

I don’t know about this.

I think we in this country are faced with the very real possibility of an economic depression.

I wonder what this will do to the oil market?

LONDON (AFP) — Anglo-Dutch oil giant Shell is to cut its reserve figures for 2007, taking about 1.3 billion barrels off its books or the equivalent of nearly one year’s production, The Observer said Sunday.

The weekly newspaper said the company would announce the writedown of at least 200 million barrels off the estimates for its operations in Nigeria while another 1.1 billion barrels would be lost from Russia.

-G

Jeebus, I won’t put Ferraro and Hill in the same sentence with
Beck and Rush..

Gulp.

I just want to make an observation. As they age, some of the senior citizens that I know exibit more of the biases(and in some cases, outright bigotry)that they were instilled with when they were young. What this portends for future voting patterns, I don’t know.

Obama’s easy sophistication with these issues is part of what sets him apart, puts him light years from virtually all Republicans and I suspect just a little bit ahead of the Clintons, as evidenced for example by Bill Clinton being unable to see how different Obama’s campaign is from the earlier campaign of Jesse Jackson. Unless of course Bill does understand but was choosing to speak to those who do not. I am not trying to be a heavy candidate partisan here — the difference is small, I think. We just have to all keep cool and not let the media whip this into a battle royal between race and gender which it is not (for most people). It is a close contest between two very competent candidates.

I agree with that sentiment Raven …. her campaign needs stop this kind of behavior. Of course much is perpetrated and extolled by the MSM just to make news and please their owners!

And perhaps if the Democrats had been less willing to sit back and watch the Republicans implode, we might be less inclined to get sucked into identity politics in the first place.

I think Patricia Williams had a great piece on this issue in the most recent Nation.

House of Cards

as a christian who’s presently unchurched – pastor wright’s radical theology is ok with me…. perhaps he could’ve framed it better but he’s not far off the mark imho

They’re all on the anti-Obama bandwagon. In terms of political stances…I would hope Hillary & Ferraro were nothing like the right wingers. Eeeek.

Reading thought the last book salon “Why we’re liberals” reminds my of the same sort of idea with root in a different time. To some extent I see “Liberal” as a facet of identity politcs.

The take home for me is message of inclusion as opposed to diversion or division.

During the last Fed short-term bank money auction, they auctioned FOUR times the funds they’d anticipated, at rates higher than the then-prevailing inter-bank short-term commercial rates. Conclusion? Everyone knows they all have closets full of bad paper skeletons, and no one trusts anyone else’s books and doesn’t want to get caught in the lurch.

I’m not in a panic state yet, but I am very anxious regarding how quickly this crap could corkscrew into the ground.

Well said.

Oh goody. A possible debate. Can you perhaps be more specific?

United Church of Christ on Rev. Wright

I just want to say that Rev. Wright isn’t the only outspoken black minister out there, if Democratic candidates want to be introduced to black congregations by the local minister, they need to handle this one with kid gloves.

Hi, folks, I am doing an FDL Book Salon chat a5 5 pm, come and join us, re: Iraq and the media…Over at E&P, we were among the first to promote FDL coverage of Plame etc. years ago……Greg Mitchell

Lets do it. Lets bounce.

Absolutely, I was impressed with how he has handled the situation.
His pastor is his friend and mentor and he didn’t throw him under
the bus…

I am impressed with every encounter with Obama. He seems (is) thoughtful and is unafraid to show it. It may not make for a great bumper sticker, but he is showing an understanding and sophistication i have never seen in a politician.
His world view is not black and white. He is painting with a much more varied palatte.

I think the choice between Obama or Clinton and Geraldine’s statements has everything to do with this post.

Political conversations occur in a context. As Jane points out, the possibility of having a productive discussion on some issues, particularly matters of race and gender, is partially contingent on the context in which such a conversation occurs.

With breathtaking consistency online, advocates of one candidate or another use the trappings of a conversation about race and gender to make what is really an argument about candidate advocacy. As kiddo perfectly demonstrates in this thread and all threads, there’s this ineradicable capacity to filter any discussion into the merits of one candidate or another. That prevents any actual conversation about things related to justice for women or people of color.

What’s more, all of this is occuring in a wider media and cultural context, so while candidate partisans are hurling accusations at each other, they are helping Republicans and the Republican controlled media rebrand the new, emergent, 21st Century liberalism into the tired old liberalism of the 1970’s, a brand of liberalism that failed and was rejected by the culture.

As a rad progressive, I love to debate moderate progressives.

As long as it serves HRC and her surrogates to play the race/gender identity card she will do it, damn the consequences to the Democratic party. Remember, at her core she’s still the “Goldwater Girl” who switched for perhaps reasons of “good”, but now with the benefit of hindsight, perhaps it looks more like a wee bit of self-serving opportunism. You all do remember how much Goldwater lost the ‘64 election by, don’t you?

As long as HRC plays a “win at any cost” strategery we all lose. Her sense of entitlement to the Oval Office could cost us the election, and perhaps off-year control of Congress as well, because while she’s the Mistress of Identity Politics, the republicans are the masters of playing the wurlitzer and moving the emotions of Joe Six-Pack and entire family to vote against their own self-interests.

Short answer: Jane you brilliant lady, you’re 100% correctamundo, the Democrats might lose by winning. And that’s the saddest thing of all.

I am one of the reviled old white guys. When the race got down to Clinton and Obama, I saw little difference in their policies, respected them both, and believed that neither would push their candidacies to a point which would split the party and lose the election. When it came time to vote in the Texas Primary, I chose to vote for Obama because he had great momentum, undeniable speaking and motivational skills, and might possibly expand the party. I still thought Clinton was a good candidate. When Clinton herself made statements that she and McCain were qualified to be president, but Obama was not, I felt she crossed a line. It seemed to me that any desparate chance at her own victory had become more important than the party or the country. I’ve become increasingly discouraged with the raising of race and gender as issues. However, I think Obama has dealt with them exceptionally well; perhaps reminiscent of Jackie Robinson’s persisence in just beating the crap out of the opposition on the diamond.

Well said, and the Mets look unbeatable this year..

…men of fierce intelligence coming up in the ’60s he has a lot of the language and the memories and the baggage of those times.

“fierce” intelligence. Excuse me, but is that a euphemism for violence or hatred or both? “Fierce” is some poor choice of adjective to use with intelligence. And yet, Obama being the rhetorician that he is, I can’t conceive of that being accidental.
.

It is my impression from observing that most of the initial race based issues get raised by the Clinton campaign and are then responded to by the Obama campaign.

*Bill Shaheen and the drug dealer comment.

*Mark Penn piling on with the same sentiments.

*Bob Johnson piling on further with the same sentiments.

*Bill Clinton and his “Jesse Jackson won S.C.” line.

*Geraldine Ferraro and her mumbo jumbo.

When Obama’s people respond that these tactics hew close to the race-baiting baiting line the Clinton people respond with “he’s playing the race card” canard.

That’s how I see it.

-G

No one is ever unbeatable. I’m very cautious. It’s a long season.

yeah provided the 2 carlos’ can stay healthy… pedro pitched well today ;o)

To me, “fierce intelligence” reflects a person who is not willing to deny the evidence of his own experiences or compromise with his perception of truth, and is always seeking to gain a more catholic (universal) version of truth.

“Talking about race and gender is important. Finding a way to do so responsibly, with appropriate context — and not simply as a way to tear each other down — is equally important. A failure to do so may find us looking at a resurgent GOP this fall no matter who the Democratic nominee is.”

Good point.

Let’s take, for example, a practice of labeling all criticism of HRC, regardless of source or substance, as “misogyny.”

Which category does that come under, Ms. Hamsher?

I referred to Ferraro’s comments as mumbo-jumbo because they were many and convoluted.

-G

“As long as HRC plays a “win at any cost” strategery we all lose. Her sense of entitlement to the Oval Office could cost us the election, and perhaps off-year control of Congress as well..”
__________

Here’s what I recently wrote the HRC campaign:

I previously wrote regarding my displeasure with your campaign tactics (of which I kept a copy). Now, the Geraldine Ferraro antics have pushed me over the side. The utter gall of this brazen, pompous woman, wagging her finger as she warned Barack Obama in pushback to be careful about further antagonizing her (in the wake of her smarmy, racist remarks), as HE would need HER for fundraising should he become the nominee — that has gotta exemplify the phrase “clinically deluded chutzpah.” We need look no further than the relative fundraising track records of both campaigns.

Here is what is starting to fully clarify for me. The Clinton campaign will do whatever it takes to garner the nomination, inclusive of every irrelevant lowball smear tactic that presents as opportune, and all the way up to actually stealing it via superdelegate machinations at the convention as a last resort.

Of course, it’s all for The Greater Good, and, if elected, a President Hillary would then shed for good the employment of all such slimy practices and govern in full transparency from the High Road thereafter.

Right.

You people leave no choice. I now must not only NOT support Hillary, I must use whatever political energy I have to actively oppose her candidacy. For starters, you can expect to see the contents of these messages out on the blogs. Yeah, I know; I’m just one Small Nobody. Just like Obama (were it not for his skin color).

Call me an idealist, but I don’t think race and gender should figure into any political discussion. But these sorts of situations perhaps, some may say, does give the Republicans extra ammunition.

Obama’s personal spirit is so astoundingly developed over that of Clinton and McCain, it makes you wonder whether they grew up on the same planet. His calm, intelligent, compassionate response to all the hysteria merely confirms what I felt when I first sat down and listened to the man.

I think this will ultimately prove to be a HUGE PLUS, as more and more people realize that what we need in this times is exactly that kind of emotional maturity.

For too long in this country we have not talked about race and color. Now that the need is there, we really don’t know how. We must fine a way because so much depends on it. Someone made the comment that some older people are stuck with the thinking of when they grew up and that’s true, but I have met so many older people who are amazingly progressive – they have the long-sight to know the things that can happen. IMO

And because I thought the last part was particularly important:

Why don’t we try “he is/she is” for a change? Both Democratic candidates represent diversely layered demographics–ones that describe our future. Clinton is a strong, determined, immensely resilient woman; Obama is a culturally amalgamous, quietly brilliant, elegantly intellectual man. They are both tremendously well educated, making all of us the lucky beneficiaries of affirmative action policies that have reconfigured the playing field to include the two of them.

Now we need to direct our attention where it belongs. As President, McCain would do away with what’s left of affirmative action, Roe and habeas corpus. He has been schooled for war and more war. He is committed to and implicated in almost all the domestic and economic lunacies of the Bush Administration. It would be tragic if he strolled in for a touchdown while the rest of us were playing card games in the end zone.

This isn’t a plea for unity. It’s a plea for sanity in this discussion:

Patricia Willians in the most recent Nation

Obama is cool, collective, and honest when a situation arises that he needs to tackle. Hillary always comes across as cocky to me. No different than how Bush reacts to being questioned about something he or someone in his Regime did.

I much prefer to have Obama near the red phone at 3am.

That expresses my feeling and hope very well.

Ms. Hamsher, I am waiting.

Yeah, I love Pedro, When I took my grandson to the Fens, a few years back, he was really gracious to the kiddos… and man can he hit those corners…

John McCain has forgiven the North Vietnamese. Isn’t it time for Rev. Wright & Co. to let go of the distant past just a bit?

If Hillary had been the one wielding a fire hose, he might have a point.

Meanwhile Barack (and especially Michelle) seem to have inherited some of the chip on the Reverend’s shoulder, despite the fact that they spent their youth on scholarship at Harvard Law School.

If Obama was a typical politician, he would have responded in kind by coming out with a barrage of attacks on Clinton. This is how the game has been played for decades now. But while he has defended himself by making some mild attacks, for the most part he has used these incidents in a remarkable way. He turns it around and uses the opportunity to discuss the underlying issues. His comments yesterday I thought were very good:

I just want to say to everybody here that as somebody who was born into a diverse family, as somebody who has little pieces of America all in me, I will not allow us to lose this moment, where we cannot forget about our past and not ignore the very real forces of racial inequality and gender inequality and the other things that divide us. I don’t want us to forget them. We have to acknowledge them and lift them up and when people say things like my former pastor said, you know, you have to speak out forcefully against them. But what you also have to do is remember what Bobby Kennedy said. That it is within our power to join together to truly make a United States of America.

http://thepage.time.com/obamas…..town-hall/

Agree with you GregB! Exactly how it goes down.

oh he was hot today – i cant wait for season to open… this is the last year at shea – i hope to get out to park 1 last time before its done

Jane Hamsher. Not only is kiddo unhappy. So am I.

Lahoma

Oh man, but Bush is demented… you hurt my feelings when you put
Hill in the same category as Bushie…

But to give the impression that all of their black friends, cousins, uncles, aunts or what have you have had the same opportunities is not being truthful on your part.

A rich uncle can say at some point in his life, “My cousin Jack wasn’t so lucky. He was poorer than a church mouse and lived most of his life in his home because he could not afford to enjoy life”.

Michelle Obama has made it perfectly clear that she and Barack have been lucky, but that’s not to say that all blacks has. She points this out over and over. Did you miss it?

Meanwhile Barack (and especially Michelle) seem to have inherited some of the chip on the Reverend’s shoulder

That’s a slur. First of all, Michelle’s comment was about the election process, about which we’ve all complained. And you didn’t even bother to give an Obama example in this slur, which is telling.

The premise of your accusation is false, but it does demonstrate once again how people can’t hear discussions about race or gender in the current environment from anything but their own candidate centric context.

So, blogger writes about how the terms used to attack a given candidate echo the terms used to instantiate societal injustice, be it around race or gender. Blogger does not ever say that all people who criticize X canidate are (racist/misogynist). But a reader who encodes the blogger’s writing only in binary terms (favorable, unfavorable to my candidate) will not stop to think enough about the complexities of language and how it’s used to sustain injustice to sort it all out.

Once the primaries especially distilled themselves down to two candiates, lots of readers only view all content in similarly binary terms, and conversations about race and gender require the ability and the willingness to suspend reaction, parse ambiguities and the subjectivies of perspectives, deal in grays and engage history and language from an entorely different perspective.

Your comments shows how, literally, a blogger who tries to write from the later perspective may be read, but is not heard, by a reader who comes from the former perspective, and then the reader may frequently claim the badge of misunderstood victimhood while hurling allegations of bad faith at the blogger.

That’s the cycle of absurdity we’ve been in for weeks now, if not months.

They both thought Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and could harm America in the form of a mushroom cloud, didn’t they? They have some similarities, but 100% similar? Nope.

We don’t exist to make you happy. Seems you both find 10,000 reasons a day to be unhappy, and we’re not responsible for your emotional wellbeing.

Your collective singular talent seems to be to attempt to make others as unhappy as you are yourselves, at least around here.

With breathtaking consistency online, advocates of one candidate or another use the trappings of a conversation about race and gender to make what is really an argument about candidate advocacy. As kiddo perfectly demonstrates in this thread and all threads, there this ineradicable capacity to filter any discussion into the merits of one candidate or another. That prevents any actual conversation about things related to justice for women or people of color.

But can you lay this solely at the feet of the so called advocates? It seems that much of this comes from the tone set by the campaigns themselves (first black vs first woman). The accusations of sexism and racism from both campaigns and the presense of both in the campaigns make it very difficult to have an actual conversation.

McCain forgiven the Vietnamese? Uh, as much as I get into trouble here for defending McCain’s service, I’m not sure he has much call to forgive “the Vietnamese”. Maybe the guards in the Hilton bit not the Vietnamese as a people.

Jane, I gotta side with kiddo and Lahoma, very respectfully.

I couldn’t disagree more.

-G

Me three

With breathtaking consistency online, advocates of one candidate or another use the trappings of a conversation about race and gender to make what is really an argument about candidate advocacy.
(snip)
[S]o while candidate partisans are hurling accusations at each other, they are helping Republicans and the Republican controlled media …

Amen. It’s exhausting and discouraging. As a non-aligned Democrat who is ready to give and work for the candidate left standing at the end of this miserable primary season, I’ve been bludgeoned so often and so hard by both sides that I’ve given up trying to have a reasonable discussion. Most of my favorite blogs are unreadable at this point and I’ve quit visiting them. Not that they’d notice.

Worse, while the shrill mudslinging goes on (and on and on and on) the Republicans are making hay, McCain’s doing his photo ops overseas while his lapdog press is feverishly gushing over his “foreign policy credentials.”

I can’t help being bitter about watching, all over again, this ugly spectacle. We’ve lost much of the ground we’ve gained because of it. I’m afraid I foresee another four years of Republican Executive because of it.

ok, ya’ll hash it out. I have 2 teams in tourney championship games right now.

I for one, disagree with your characterization of kiddo and lahoma. Now how is it we can have discussions if this is how we treat one another?

“The premise of your accusation is false[.]”

Really? Do you read other posts on this blog besides your own?

Anyone else who’s been around for a while want to weigh in on whether my “accusation” is false?

Yeah, I’m not seeing the “unhappiness” you speak of Lahoma & Kiddo having either. They seem to have the ability to reflect the mood of the nation in a sentence or two and for some of us….we like that. What has happened over the last eight years cannot be summed up with few words, so it’s nice when someone can for us.

1972 baby.

Let’s not forget who won that election.

Peace to all.

-G

I agree to this extent, and Jane has it in her post:

Because the Democrats have largely sat back and been content to watch the Republicans self-destruct rather than step out in a leadership position on issues that could have positively defined them, they’re vulnerable to being cast thusly.

Both Senators have refused to lead on issues using their respective platforms over legislation and policy, and within that context, at the very least, they’ve left the campaign environment to default to a debate about their personalities. Now we reap the consequences.

Oh Mr. Pach. You are so smart. Lord, God what would the world do without you? I’d love to debate you on any issue of your choice. And are you being trotted out to fight other folks’ battles?

We, the progressive blogosphere, were rightfully critical of John Kerry’s lack of appropriate counter attack on the AWOL from the National Guard Dubya. By the time Kerry’s handlers decided to counter it was too little, too late. I’m hoping that Obama has something cooking that will take Hillary out before she wrecks the place. She is not going to go quietly and she is intent on following Rove’s destructive advice. There was plenty of room on the left for either Hillary or Obama to run in order to differentiate them from each other and the rethug candidate. Hillary is encouraging Rove to set the parameters. Hillary as experienced centrist (good according to Rove) and Obama as an inexperienced liberal (the worst thing in the world according to Rove).

Lahoma and Kiddo often offer me 10,000 reasons a day to smile and chuckle.

Ad hominem attacks on regular folks while calling for civil discourse seems rather counter productive to me.

Good night and good luck.

-G

Lahoma and kiddo’s humanity shine luminescent all the time and rarely do they give me the heartburn this post has caused. I too am disgusted with the immaturity of the race and misogeny issues, but Lahoma and kiddo’s comments are the last ones I would accuse of that.

Call me naive, but I take her at her word that she beleived the
false rhetoric… (I could be wrong).
And I give Obama “high marks” for his vote…
In my opinion, the media have done a job on her…
I’m really not worried about either candidate. I will vote Democratic anywhichway…
If we can’t beat McCain, we don’t deserve to lead the country.

Fair enough. I’m sure their onion skin combativeness on behalf of their candidate, and attempts to turn any discussion into an all out fight about their candidate positions, makes other advocates of their position happy.

But this is not a universal experience, and many find it to be a self-indulgent crusade to irritate.

On a practical level, I can’t possibly imagine an approach more designed to alienate anyone who might be persuadable to favor their chosen candidate, but that’s just my point of view.

Simmer down Mr. Pach.

Centrists have always scared me, because their views are almost always “wet finger in the wind” kind of thinking, so it’s no wonder Rove is on Hillary’s side! She’s a naked mold he can work with to shape into what he wants, which is Hillary on the ballot so his party can tear her arms, legs, and head off once and for all.

I interepreted that particular quote much more broadly–that “the Democrats” in question weren’t just the two candidates, but the entire Congressional crowd. There has been a lack of leadership on the part of the candidates and the folks on Capitol Hill that has allowed the conversations about the candidates to move into identify politics.

And many political blogs are unreadable at this point, because no matter the topic, it devolves into what an unsuitable candidate one or the other is.

Tiger Woods might win 3 straight tournaments? That shows you why Clinton’s strategy just isn’t working and is dividing the country…or some such b.s.

you can be fiercely intelligent without hating or being violent. get real.

Good question.
The word “surrogate” comes to mind.

Later.

This is another example of the schoolyard tactics and allegation of bad faith.

Unsatisfied that he’s not gotten Jane’s attention to indulge him in his favorite recreation of turning everything into an attack, now he’s trying to bait me and is accusing me of not actually speaking for myself.

This is (attempted) manipulative behavior, and it’s anything but respectful, the very definition of trollishness. We’ve allowed it to continue so far in the spirit of keeping the conversation open to all points of view.

okay but in the larger sense, that is also not necessarily possible because of how these things are seen differently (generationally) with the example of both Wright and Ferraro. I don’t think any of us believe that these are isolated feelings/viewpoints within our own party, rather a microcosm that is now being played out in front of the whole nation.

amen

Yeah, that is why Obama is so concerned about Hillary Clinton’s tax returns and Bill Clinton’s library. His developed personal spirit.

Obama had a longterm relationship with a person who traffics in hateful statements. When Obama thought nobody was looking, he was either to weak or lacked the moral compass to disassociate himself from the Reverend. He began the process of cutting the ties when he decided to run for president.

I was not impressed with what Obama said at this late date.

It is the tone you speak with, OKK, more than the message. Are you challenging Jane to a duel? Come on, as you’ve mentioned many times, you’ll both vote for the democratic nominee. Let’s not devolve.

And as Pach says, Both Clinton and Obama are guilty for not getting out there on, for instance, telecom immunity. There is far more to do than campaign 7/24. I remember after the last debate being so happy about a Dream Team of the both of them…

Spend four minutes on AMERICAblog and get back to me. LOL! Kiddo & Lahoma are nothing compared to the garbage that goes on over there. They (K & L)have their views, but they certainly aren’t bashing us with palm trees to get us to see it their way and they certainly aren’t blocking or banning anyone here that isn’t pro-Obama or anti-Hillary either by emailing Jane or Christy every five seconds, because another commenter is asking way too many questions of their stances.

See?

I think you’re being very hard on Kiddo & Lahoma. If you love Hillary, that’s fine with us. K&L and don’t happen to, but they’ve made it perfectly clear that come November they’ll vote Democrat against the republican candidate. Case closed for them. ;-)

Oh dear. I’ve been a naughty little progressive. Again.

“I just want to say to everybody here that as somebody who was born into a diverse family, as somebody who has little pieces of America all in me, I will not allow us to lose this moment, where we cannot forget about our past and not ignore the very real forces of racial inequality and gender inequality and the other things that divide us. I don’t want us to forget them. We have to acknowledge them and lift them up and when people say things like my former pastor said, you know, you have to speak out forcefully against them. But what you also have to do is remember what Bobby Kennedy said. That it is within our power to join together to truly make a United States of America.”

I’m not sure how he did it, but he managed to be respectful and distancing at the same time. Critical and hopeful.

Not sure I can come round to his point of view – because I really do respect what Wright & Co. stand for, but have to admit that Obama did a good job with this – on a purely political level.

I disagree with the notion that Kerry did not fight back soon enough or strong enough. I know this is common wisdom now, but I reject it.

The press hates us and hates Democrats. Both Obama or Clinton will be relentlessly and unfairly attacked. While they do need to respond, they must keep the focus on the economy, health care and Iraq.

Is there any difference between comments of pastors Hagee and Wright or of McCain’s and Obama’s responses? Is pointing that out “identity politics” and therefor to be avoided?

Mr. Obama sounds so much like Chimpie/chumpie…can you imagine him answering that question?…well the guyzzzzz a Ranger ,so you can just STF/

Maybe you missed it but they have also said that they would be happy with either candidate (as opposed to McCain) and in fact said in the past that they would happily vote for Clinton.

I’m not sure how being dismissive is going to lead to any type of productive discussions

But you see? You’re making my point.

If I had to rate both candidates, for me, on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being my ideal and 0 being Joe Lieberman, then both would fall in about at a five. Some days four, some days three, and they see-saw for me.

But because I have not gone gaga for Barack, and I written critically about both of them, and have advocated that we focus at least a substantial portion of our energy outside of the primary fights, people say things like what you just said, suggesting I “love Hillary.” That’s because you won’t engage what I’ve written on its own terms, but only view it in terms of an advocacy of one candidate or another.

Was anyone else a little shocked by the fact that Ferraro more or less said that she got the Veep slot because she was a woman?

Than she can choose not to answer him (as she has and which is her perrogative) but your posts aren’t exactly sounding like they are too far removed from the playground. Sorry but I had hoped that this could be an adult discussion where we can voice our opinions and not be belittled for it.

Oh pach. I guess you have put me in my place. And so in the name of name calling… I am a troll. I could be rude mr. pach. But I won’t be.

Do you have evidence that Rev. Wright consistently talked in the fashion we’ve seen on the 3 videos on the msm lately? I bet there are many religious citizens of this country who do NOT believe in every opinion of their pastor, minister, rabbi, priest or whatever. Agree?

Why is it questioning the white man’s role throughout history considered anti-American? It’s a head scratcher to me.

Since I’ve criticized Hillary Clinton repeatedly and don’t consider myself a misogynist I would think the answer to that question would be obvious.

I’m less impressed with Hillary’s silence of over a week on Ferraro’s words. Do I hold it against her? I did but I have moved on and I am trying to move away from knee jerk reactions to things from either campaign

Crummy energy flying around on the Ides of March. Be careful, everybody.

Yeah,

I’ve been yelling about it for months but yer A-Listers, all too young to know what the 60s where really about, insisted on ID politics. We now see the results of that. They, A-Listers, have adopted the same stance that the leadership of the ‘New Left’ did in the late 60s. Top down, follow the party line, which many modeled off the Communist State structure which was the only Marxian example available.

Result: Nixon was able to split the Dem party into dirty fucking hippies, blacks (that’s not what AAs were called then but….), and welfare cheats. HIs election set the stage for 40 years of ‘conservative’ nutjob rule.

Today we see the exact same thing happening. And so does McSame. Guy is a shoein for President now as thanks to Barack, The Hill, Miss Nancy and ‘SellOut’ Reid the ‘Democrat’ Party is the party of racial division, ineptitude and sexism.

Very nice work and I’d be harsher still on the party ‘leadership’ if the so-called leadership, I can’t use names as I’ve been warned and numerous sites that to do so would result in my being banned, of the progressive blogosphere hadn’t so thoroughly screwed up here also. Instead of keeping their distance and treating the Dem candidates just like Republicans with lots of analysis and little time spent on ‘character’ , which anyone can tell you is something you will never know about a politician…see Spitzer, we have a cabal of fanboys who will brook no criticism of ‘their’ candidate.

We have a factionalized movement.

We have a very good chance of losing the GE.

We look pretty dumb to anyone who knows their political history.

We’ve undercut our efforts to elect ‘More and Better Democrats’ as how are we to trust the judgment of our ‘leaders’ on just who that is….

Given the snowballing disaster they are now the owners of.

Santana was right and so were you and I.

Oh thank you Loo Hoo. And as to a challenge? I will go toe-to-toe with anyone.

There’s nothing progressive about what you’re doing. We’ve had one house cleaning recently, and I’m not averse to another one.

I can’t wait to hear the general election debates. McCain hasn’t got a prayer.

Yeah, that is why Obama is so concerned about Hillary Clinton’s tax returns and Bill Clinton’s library. His developed personal spirit.

Those are defenses against the charges she is making. These kinds of defenses are necessary. And they’re effective because they show her hypocrisy.

Obama had a longterm relationship with a person who traffics in hateful statements.

And there are folks like you who wish to repeat slurs. “Traffics in hateful statements” is an outrageous attack on that pastor.

I bet I’m the only one on FDL who will not vote for either McCain or Hillary if they’re on the ballot in November.

*ducking from the tomatoes being thrown at me*

Kiddo & Lahoma said they would vote for Hillary if she is on the ballot, but for right now, they respect and like Barack Obama. See? They are far ahead of me at the moment! Much more mature I may add. ;-)

sounds like Karl has succeeded and getting us all divided. maybe we should have a zen meditation or yoga time out. everybody go to their rooms, right now!

I’m not entirely sure I’d put Ferraro and Wright on the same level, now that I think about it. She was a former Vice Presidential nominee and long-term Democratic politician. He’s just a local minister. Her comments deserve more scrutiny than his do, I think.

Me too. It couldn’t be well because of imperialism, colonialism etc.? People slay me wanting to re-write history. It is what it is and it isn’t nice

Why is it questioning the white man’s role throughout history considered anti-American? It’s a head scratcher to me.

It doesn’t require inflammatory hate speech to decry racism.

And I think you may be a bit credulous if you believe that the incidents that have been published are the only ones or that Obama was unaware of the kind of speech the Reverend used.

I hear you. It’s a delicate dance I have to play.

If I am silent when addressed, then I am accused of being aloof.

If I engage in the discussion and dissect arguments with a point of view, then because I write for the blog and am on the short list of site managers in the “About Us” page, then what I say tends to be interpreted in a way different than what some other commenter may say.

It took me a while to get used to the transition from commenter to writer for the blog. What I used to say among the commenters, the give and take of arguments, was interpreted differently once I became a site host. Same writing style, same attempt to dispute and engage ideas, but different context.

So for a long time, and still as a rule, I stay out of substantive discussions in the comments. Ironically, this again illustrates how conversations occur in a context, and writing as a site host creates a different context than writing as just another commenter, which is how I got started around here.

If I’ve been too open with my point of view today in a way that upsets anyone, I apologize.

It will be very entertaining to watch McCain in November (that is if he’s not thrown under the bus by the GOP)!

Obama raised 55 million, Hillary rasied 35 million and McCain raised 12 million aren’t we supposed to be happy?

At this point with emotions running high, your basically arguing with the universe

And I don’t understand why people think Obama should have left his church because of this. That’s HIS church – it doesn’t belong to the minister.

Crummy energy flying around on the Ides of March. Be careful, everybody.

Holy moly. I guess! The primary has gone on too long. We have been left with two ‘PC’ candidates, neither one rating very high on the perfection sale, and our political leadership is doing us the dirty. It is no wonder that folks are gettin’ pissy.

Group hug needed. Well that and a pint of Guinness

Oh, yes. I agree with you on the matter of the press. The Kerry camp knew tha the press was going to try their best to monkeyfist Kerry at every turn. Kerry was windsurfing instead of attacking Dubya on drunken AWOL TANG AND producing his Military records proudly and post-haste. After the stolen election, Kerry’s records were produced. There was nothing in them to be ashamed about. Indeed, Dubya’s records had been lost, redacted, driver license records lost, etc. All that material was available to use to hammer Dubya. Kerry was a gentleman. Too bad.

I’m guessing Hillary doesn’t want to show her tax returns because they make a lot of money, and she’s counting on votes from a lot of people who don’t make much. I can respect that, and just plain financial privacy. Where are the McCain medical reports he keeps promising? That is something people really need to see before casting a vote.

i’m always surprise to find bloggers who seem to despise their readers.

I bet I’m the only one on FDL who will not vote for either McCain or Hillary if they’re on the ballot in November.

No I am right with you. I will writ in my next door neighbour’s name ( and he mine) as we have done in many an electrion

What if Rev. Wright’s voice had been that of a whisper when he made those remarks? Would it have made a difference? I think so. Wright had the “Howard Dean Scream” when he made those remarks and some are panicking thinking he’s gone batshit crazy and will head to the park to demand all white people die in the name of the lord!

Remember when Jerry Falwell blamed the gays, the ACLU, and those who had abortions for 9/11 happening? How come he was able to contribute to George Bush’s campaign in 2004?

Oh that’s right. Double standards are for: republicans….white republicans.

So do it. I love the way you define progressive. Your progressive way or the highway. Listen. I was doing progressive stuff while you most likly were still in diapers.

I truly hate this campaign. If I could get around well enough, I think I would go on safari and come back around April, 2009. All the dust would have settled by then – maybe.

just read the comments…im a HUGE fan of Kiddo,and Lahoma!

Feel the Misogyny

This is just one of dozens Jane has written this year.

Please apologize promptly.

LOL I do that a lot. Just ignore me. I’m sure the Universe is also tired of hearing me. ;-)

Open is expected (at least for me) but when we start to attack one another for being open, we can’t and are not capable of having a discussion. That being said, I respect and can appreciate the opinions being voiced here even if I vehemently disagree and in the end, I always walk away with more knowledge.

I respectfully ask if we can start this discussion anew and if this is such a sore point or point of irritation than maybe sit it out and read the posts (I do it all the time)

seriously pach – you blame readers for misunderstanding what bloggers write. is it not possible that you have misunderstood what a commenter has written?

Talking about race and gender is important. Finding a way to do so responsibly, with appropriate context — and not simply as a way to tear each other down — is equally important. A failure to do so may find us looking at a resurgent GOP this fall no matter who the Democratic nominee is.

It’s a given that *anything* a Dem does/says is gonna be torn apart and/or distorted by the SCLM and anyone who has an “R” behind his/her name. I am quite literally terrified that the damage we are doing to ourselves has already brought that prophecy to fruition.

Thank you, Jane and Christy, for all you have done to try to tamp down the infighting here at the Lake.

There’s nothing progressive about what you’re doing. We’ve had one house cleaning recently, and I’m not averse to another one.

What does this mean?

Show the returns Hillary.

Let’s just ease the tension ok? I don’t want to lose you and Lahoma. I enjoy you two so much. Tensions are high because of the primary which has sadly divided the party (let’s be real here) but let’s remember that we are not each other’s enemy and that we are working for a common good.

see yall next week …PEACE

well said. thank you.

I do too and then mr wobbs points that out to me when I become frustrated that no one is listening LOL

OT.

McCain won’t be visiting his favorite old rug shop because the marketplace is now run by Sadrists and is unsafe for US personnel.

-G

“Criticized HRC repeatedly”?

Oh — like when you said she should have fired Mark Penn?

I’m having trouble coming up with too many other examples from you personally, though I acknowledge that you have allowed other posters on the blog to criticize some of the Clinton campaign tactics.

But something as egregious as Clinton’s comment about McCain being fit to be commander in chief while Obama is not — well, it just seems like that would have been something we’d have heard about from you directly — being, as you are, concerned above all that we don’t throw this thing to the Republicans.

There have, on the other hand, been numerous instances where you’ve accused everyone from John Edwards on down to dozens of your loyal readers of being “misogynists,” without any “reason” based analysis of what that word means or why you were justified in using it.

Kerry was windsurfing…

The Wurlitzer plays on. Not that the Hackworth is a wurlitzer player, but the Kerry windsurfing image was well-played by master accompanists and look! it’s still out there.

Kerry was and is a gentleman, and ran the wrong campaign against the wrong candidate at the wrong time in history. None of that means we need to have HRC doing the same thing now. Were it not for her overwhelming ego and sense of entitlement we could be fortifying our candidates (even if it were her) position for November to run against McVain who might be defeatable but it’s not going to be a walk in the park. Remember, the same folks running McVain got Preznit Horse Fluffer into office not once, but twice.

I grieve for the future if we can’t take back the White House. Despair will set in if we lose because HRC could not get over herself.

We’ve had one house cleaning recently, and I’m not averse to another one.

jane – what the heck is going on?

Selise, this is absurd. Not you, but the argument. See? There’s a difference. When I dispute, or desconstruct from my point of view, an argument, I’m not judging the person.

If I am to take it from your statement that you infer I’m being hostile, all I can say is I don’t feel that way. I feel more tired of having to repeatedly explain myself when accused of any number of nefarious things, but that comes with the territory of the front page.

You remember, I expect, when we were both just commenters together. I’ve put a great deal of my life and livelihood into this community since then, and it’s not because I don’t like the community. Quite the opposite.

But I’ll take this as a sign that I’m not being understood in the spirit I intend, and so I’ll go play with my puppies and leave the thread to everyone else. It’s a Sunday and I’ve been working on building up this community for about 70 hours this week. I will welcome the time to relax.

Although you’ve toned it down quite a bit recently, you’ve been a Hillary basher for as long as I can remember. Jane let you have tons of leeway on that.

Jane’s trying to create an environment where we can discuss issues.

You want to take issue with another commenter, that’s one thing. When you address Jane, you do it with the respect she’s EARNED. Apologize and send some money to FDL.

People let’s not get so close to the trees that we’re examing microscopic chips of bark.

The forest is – the GOP now has Wright video to play 24×7 in the general should BO get the nom. That lovely 10 min highlight may have been an anomoly over 30 years of inspirational sermons, but that’s beside the point. That’s what’s out there, and that’s what needs to be dealt with.

My question is – why the heck did not someone in BO’s campaign advise him to distance himself from Wright before the campaign began, instead of placing him within the campaign as an advisor?

This is just fodder for the GOP.

HRC may have high negs but at least hers are more or less known and presumably stable. This is what we mean by who’s been vetted, and who hasn’t.

what’s going on is the charade is finally crumbling. Her way or the highway indeed. Right on kiddo.

IMO, primary fatigue has set in and this may very well be the ‘pulse’ of the party right now. This primary needs to end quickly for the interest of the party. this is just getting uglier by the second

“It doesn’t require inflammatory hate speech to decry racism.”

It’s a church. He’s motivating his flock. People who don’t have to run for President can speak that way. I’m in a very small minority who applaud the Reverend.

I think we’re tough enough to absorb and learn from the tough talk Wright deals out in his Church. It’s not Obama’s style, which is fine, but Wright’s message deserves a hearing that goes deeper than the horror and shock we get from the MSM.

Although you’ve toned it down quite a bit recently, you’ve been a Hillary basher for as long as I can remember. Jane let you have tons of leeway on that.

I’m not begrudging you your opinion but some of us are trying to diffuse this situation, not add more fire. Please help to calm folks down.

What charade juste?

I plan on continuing to point out HRC’s shortcomings. Perhaps you could make known your preferred candidate for our next president. And the reasons why.

pach -no, i don’t see. i don’t know how else to understand this statement:

Your collective singular talent seems to be to attempt to make others as unhappy as you are yourselves, at least around here.

just does not come across as a point of view or an argument – it does, to me, seem hostile.

You remember, I expect, when we were both just commenters together

i do, i do! that’s why i don’t get what’s going on. it just doesn’t make any sense to me. call me stupid and ignorant if you like, i don’t care. but i wish someone would explain what the heck is going on.

The forest is – the GOP now has Wright video to play 24×7 in the general should BO get the nom.

And no matter which one ends up as the candidate we have “Straight Talk” McVain’s less-than-stellar performance as 20% of the Keating Five to hang around his neck, and it can be fairly pointed out that only being a member of the Senate “Good Old Boys” club let him escape the fate of “Duke” Cunningham a few years pre-Dukestir.

Crap will always be around, how the crap is parried is what counts.

I agree. And why is it that the Dems are the ones who always look like 4 year olds on the playground? The party leadership looks like it couldn’t organize anything. Not talking about Howard Dean. Some stern words are needed.

I think I’m arguing with the universe again. *sigh*

No, we try to maintain some sort of sense of “discussion” here, rather than open pie fighting so popular in other places. I’m fine with you disagreeing with me, as evidenced by the fact that you’re still here. What I’m not fine with is the off-topic ad hominum attacks that pepper every thread, regardless of topic.

As I’ve told you before, if I’ve got 10 people emailing me fed up with it and it’s them or you, you lose. I’ll warn you first though, which is what I’m doing here — once again.

OK, I’ve got to delurk to say that I regularly skip anything Kiddo has to say I find him so irritating. He will literally shape the whole discussion with his frequency….I’ve been reading for two years and there was a time when threads would have Kiddo about every third comment, or every other. I then delurked to say that it was like “Burma Shave ads along the information highway.” There used to be many an internal fight going on with Kiddo, and I don’t see those commenters here anymore. I love this site for all kinds of reasons (your major readership equals lurkers) but I had to deal with Kiddo by just skipping over him. Lahoma came much later and she does not do, in my mind, what Kiddo does. JMO

Oh Pach. You’re brilliant. And I defy anyone to attempt to convince me differently.

Fear. Out of fear to alienate one group, they say/do nothing and end alienating another group. We have all seen 8 years without diplomacy and a willingness for frank discussion, I just failed to see how deep it has permeated everything

Oh wow. There’s two of us on here. I’ve got your back. *putting tomato deflector suit on you too* LOL

I think it’s difficult for a large blog like FDL or other liberal/progressive blogs to voice their opinion on who they like for a candidate, because it comes back on them at some point. In the case of AMERICAblog, Aravosis was a Hillary supporter for a long time (even met with Hillary & Bill at a meeting set up by the Clintons along with other bloggers), but then he changed his tune and is now for Obama. He constantly lambastes Hillary now, but what happens if Hillary gets on the ballot? His readers and himself are going to look ridiculous I think.

I see Jane & Christy as being more open to both candidates, but will point out when each one makes a misstep in their campaign. This is what I’ve witnessed, though, I am a newbie here. I don’t have the long relationship that many do with these two great women. I’m not sure how I would feel if I was a longtime reader to find out that one of them soley supported one candidate and one only. It could leave some feeling “naked”.

This campaign season has been long and most of us are just nervous for the future. We want the right person in the White House and I think most would say their original choice is not in the race. We’re feeling naked! *pushing my skirt down* See?

Here’s some more kindling to throw on the fire, thanks

I value your opinion highly, but you’re lousy at playing dumb.

Alternative rodsign on the Information Highway

Focus
SCOTUS
Focus

Emails are important.

that’s the basis for excluding someone now-a-days?

and with such a great post on how we can rise above what divides us?

I’m just like you kiddo, I’ll vote for the Democratic nominee. The only candidate I sent money to was John Edwards.

LMAO I needed that laugh and your right, we feel vunerable, nervous, anxious, etc. But damn it is going to be the death of this party if folks can’t get their shit together, stop pissing on one another and understand that we can agree to disagree. But I also know that some will be intent on fanning the flames, so be it but I’m not going to help them.

We can’t control what other people say but we can control the way we REACT to it.

Oh my goodness. I’m crushed.

Oh wow. There’s two of us on here. I’ve got your back.

It is all to do with living in a snowy world. It is hard to get feisty when sitting around a wood stove with a cup of warm.

Absolutely, and thanks for the article. Also thanks, Jane, for highlighting this issue so constructively.

There’s another article there at the church site about Trinity Church.

You know, Scaife among others have had it in for the UCC for a long time. Somewhere in my list of bookmarks …

i wish someone would explain what the heck is going on.

We are handing the republics the White House?

Come right on in, boys, and while you’re here, feel free to finish turning the Supreme Court into your private fiefdom as well. :-(

No matter what happens with me here, you are right as rain.

Sometimes I feel like Marilyn Monroe standing over the grate above the subway below! LOL I truly do. We expose ourselves all the time on these blogs, don’t we? Wooo. It gets embarrassing sometimes especially when we’re wearing less than attractive underwear. LOL

I’ll leave on this timely note:

Obama and Clinton supporters tone down the rhetoric.

From Yahoo News.

-G

Peace to Jane, Christy, OK and Pach.

My old man told me maybe 35 years ago that I should never bring up politics or theology at the office. My old man knew these things, I’m sure, from experience. Anyway, that they’re such nettlesome topics even at a place which deals mostly with the same issues proves the point, I guess.

On topic, I think the party will come around for its eventual nominee. If McCain is selling the Bush brand, that ought to be poison enough. And the party elders will take the reins, because they have to. In the long run, it’s just not avoidable.

Want to call a truce. Or want to keep it going? Your choice.

selise, I have great respect for you, but kiddo was commenting at FDL long before you were.

You are not in your jammies?

After seven years of the Idiot King, it’s just so refreshing to read Obama’s thoughtful response.

We can’t control what other people say but we can control the way we REACT to it.

you are on a roll today.

To get through tha wintah, we gotta take care of one anothah! ;-)

No different from what it’s ever been, selise. We’ve banned trolls from the day we opened the doors.

If someone becomes disruptive to the discussion, we try and let them know what they’re doing wrong and encourage them not to. We give them warnings. If that doesn’t work, we give them vacations and then place them in moderation. We only start banning as an absolute last resort. As opposed to other sites, you can count the number of people we’ve banned in the past year on one hand.

(((nomolos & KayInMaine))) It’s how you feel and no one should belittle you or give you shit for it. If they disagree, they disagree and maybe even want to debate you on it but last I checked, debate isn’t possible when folks disrepect you.
I’m on the fence as to what I will do but at the moment, i’m working for my candidate of choice (who is actually my 3rd in line) to end this primary so we can get to smacking McCain around.

Perhaps I overreacted, but when someone writes a post or a comment, and someone else jumps in to announce, “I’m not happy!” with the insistent implication that somehow we all need to jump and stop what we’re doing to make this person “happy,” over and over, well then, that’s a dysfunctional setup coming from the person whose announcement carries with it the rather self-absorbed presumption that we all have to cater to his or her whims.

I mean, really, that’s the kind of thing developmentally appropriate to a two year old. Healthy adults who don’t like a post can point out their areas of disagreement, and move on. Or they can choose not to keep reading a site that leads them to feel, or announce that they feel, unhappy about it all the time. It’s a big Internet.

Look, I’m a psychologist. I can see when someone’s being disruptive, needlessly combative and self-indulgent, and I know how it destroys a group dynamic. The group becomes derailed by the issues of the most demanding, least empathetic, most self-absorbed person or persons, which is what’s happened – once again – in this thread. It’s a law of group dynamics that groups operate on a level of productivity consistent with behaviors undertaken by their most disruptive members.

And that’s what’s happening, right here, right now.

ayup!

I blinked.

Thank you for providing that valuable history.

or none at all, ooops

Well, now that you mentioned it…I’ve been in them all day. ;-)

I realize who you’re directing this at. ;0)

I’m channeling my dad today. He is a wise man who has lived through a lot (dictatorship in Brasil..lost many friends) and he has passed along many pearls of wisdom to his children (it has taken some time for some to sink in *g*)

not sure about this… but were you thinking i was advocating banning kiddo?

no way. i was arguing against that – think it would be very wrong and do not understand where that came from.

so sorry if i was not clear.

Kiddo as I have told you many, many, many times, I value your contribution here. I’ve also told you what the limits are, and you consistently feel compelled to test them. Please respect the agreements you and I have come to in the past and I sincerely hope you have a long and fruitful life here at FDL.

No, I understood your point perfectly.

just so you know – i’m finding your comments far more disruptive than anything kiddo has ever written. but i’m not advocating anything other than attempting to understand… because i think we’re all on the same side here.

sigh…or it could just be someone expressing their feelings (akin to being disappointed, pissed, insulted, etc.) and like it or not, none of us can tell someone what they are allowed to feel (feelings are just that, feelings–whether we agree or understand them).
So again, can we not tear each other down as you have read the results…we are split. Hmmm sounds familiar, huh?

“… I sincerely hope you have a long…life here at FDL.” We’ll see, Ms. Hamsher.

Let’s get back to bashing Hillary! Woohoo!

Just kidding…

LOL

chamomile tea, anyone?

LMAO. okay you of ugly undies

Thanks, no, but do you have any chocolate:)

ok, then it was me who was confused (and still is… but can i take a rain check on trying to understand? i’m already on confusion overload)

Those undies are horrid. ;-)

I was thinking something with a bit more…. kick.

;~P

The tone.

great idea -and wobblybits, you give me hope. at least one person is keeping their heads and making sense. thank you.

see you all later. i’m in need of some herbal tea. and maybe chocolate.

The message.

Lest we forget exactly who we should be fighting:

http://www.stamfordadvocate.co…..1296.story

On an altogether different note, I missed this yesterday via Crooks and Liars. Spitzer, according to Palast, was all that stood between the banks handling their own problems and the taxpayer bailing them out.

This week, Bernanke’s Fed, for the first time in its history, loaned a selected coterie of banks one-fifth of a trillion dollars to guarantee these banks’ mortgage-backed junk bonds. The deluge of public loot was an eye-popping windfall to the very banking predators who have brought two million families to the brink of foreclosure.

Up until Wednesday, there was one single, lonely politician who stood in the way of this creepy little assignation at the bankers’ bordello: Eliot Spitzer.

Does this mean if 10 of get negative emails we are banished? I guess I am going back to lurking which I have done faithfully since well nigh the beginning of this blog. Peace all!

I have Swiss chocolate (you can have ONE piece LOL)

There are larger gears turning here, having to do with how the progressive blogosphere deals with success. We’ve all been united in our opposition to Bush. Once he’s gone, I think it’s inevitable that the progressive blogosphere will fragment. Especially if a Dem wins the White House.

If anything can distract people here, it’s the common dislike of Lieberman. ;)

Umm I was trying to calm folks, but ummm I think we have Jack Daniels somewhere

Part of my respect for Jane comes her appreciation of what keeps a blog fresh. It’s an extremely complex context to maintain. That challenge is made exponentially greater by the variety of commenters who are always jumping in and out at different times.

I know Jane doesn’t want FDL to be like a convent. Sharp statements are fine, as long as they add CONTENT and are coherent and on topic.

The US is extremely retarded wrt to racism, sexism, and economic class. And it is becoming a dangerous retardation, since powerful interests are using it to manipulate public opinion to vote against the nation’s best interests.

So, for 70s, 80s, and 90s attitudes: I say throw them on the trash heap.

If some one like Obama can find a way to do that in an easy and comfortable way to most people. That especailly includes many whites who are subliminal but very stubborn bigots of the worst sort, though think they are very high and open minded.

I’m with Jane and Pach on this one…normally I stay out of stuff like this…

kiddo: your one-line zingers can be misinterpreted. Maybe if you elaborate every once in a while on you you really mean…

I hope you don’t mean that, I’ve enjoyed your posts as well. Please come back, I have chocolate, tea and Jack Daniels (probably shouldn’t be taken together, huh?)

I have no clue, but I doubt it. I’ve been the victim of this “come on, let’s fight it out” attitude several times myself. Seems to come out of nowhere.

…on what you really mean…

here, you get Nyquil

I think what we will need to do, no matter who is in the White House, is hold them to the same levels of accountability we’ve tried to hold BushCo and the Congress to.

Otherwise, we might just as well be automatons and act like Ditto heads.

Sigh, okay I give up. Many iof you seem to want to continue this, so have at it.

So Kay, what do you think about Lieberman?

Are we there yet? Geez, I feel like I did the other day when I forgot to order my coffee DECAF and was like the Road Runner all day.
Need to calm down.

wobblybits, you get an A for effort… :)

Well, if I can’t get “unite”, I’ll take “distract”. *g*

As someone who has been thinking a great deal about the topic of Jane’s post for a couple of days. I am once again reading at least the second thread this week where I really want to hear replies to the post and suggested actions..and poor kiddo needs all the attention.

This week, Kiddo derailed (for almost two solid hours) the Blue America fund raising post for a candidate in his own State! Kiddo constantly interrupts and takes subjects off topic in book salon or other live guest threads (and every other thread he visits). He almost never acknowledges a post topic or the hard work of the post authors. He almost never provides a link to an article or other source he refers to in his comments. And when asked to provide specifics once he expresses displeasure, he almost always fails to do so.

Is it coincidence or not that Kiddo now derails a healthy discussion about another candidate of his choice.. It’s almost like he is his own worst sabateur..reverse troll.

These are not polite or blog healthy means of discussion.

Blogs are at least 95% about we.. with kiddo it’s 100% about he.

And now I am as far away from having or reading a good discussion of Jane’s post topic as ever. How consistently rude of you Kiddo!

Thanks *g*
I rather take my agression out on a rethug or Lieberman or Carney, myself

“We’ve had one house cleaning recently, and I’m not averse to another one.”

“As I’ve told you before, if I’ve got 10 people emailing me fed up with it and it’s them or you, you lose.”

“We only start banning as an absolute last resort.”

Wow, there’s a coherent policy.

What does “disruptive to the discussion” mean, anyway? The only consistent definition I’ve been able to discern is “serious disagreement with Jane Hamsher.”

Either one will work today! :)

What bugs me about the race and sexism things is that through the years I have seen the most ugly BA displayed in the media by ignorant white blowhards.

I remember hearing throught the 80s and 90s these media talking heads saying that ‘we’ should do nothing for the ‘black community’ until ‘they’ got their act together. Think about the racism and immorality of that statement.

It would result in denying government assistance that whites normally expect to black school kids, hard working blacks, retired blacks, everybody, based on a few stereotypes, some of which are entirely false or blown up out of proportion.

If they had been talking about doing that to another country, it would have been collective punishment, and a war crime. Yet these same a**holes are still bloviating on TV. Making a mountain out of molehill regarding Reve White and completely ignoring Hagee and Parsley.

It is a rank and disgusting display.

I’ll take the Jack Daniels at this point!

Jesus K Christ.

I have never found Kiddo to be disruptive. And certainly not negative.

The old Pac and Jane one two punch feels like you both have made a decision to “deal” with Kiddo in a certain rather adult way. To me it feels misplaced unwarranted and over the top just like the last time this happened.

I’m not sure I dare say. LOL

Actually, if the guy fell down the stairs and smashed his nose and it stuck to the side of his face, I’d point and laugh. See? That’s what I think of Joe Lieberman.

(((wobblybits)))

Let’s all send Harry Reid a nasty e-mail. That will make us feel better.

I know I said I give up but…nevermind

LMAO your killing me today

I’m not in the threads frequently anymore. Whenever I am, your comments and links here and at emptywheel’s are a real joy to read. You add a tremendous amount.

I appreciate your concern for communication about banning a commenter. It’s laudable and consistent with your concern for others.

If Jane wanted to, she could shred kiddo like there’s no tomorrow. I’ve seen it happen. I’m glad she’s not, it’s not imho a good use of her almost limitless energy. I’m also glad, however, that she won’t tolerate a tone in a comment that carries less respect than she deserves from a long time commenter who knows better.

There are larger gears turning here, having to do with how the progressive blogosphere deals with success. We’ve all been united in our opposition to Bush. Once he’s gone, I think it’s inevitable that the progressive blogosphere will fragment. Especially if a Dem wins the White House.

The day after the November election I think would be a good time for anyone thinking about starting a progressive party. Neither Clinton nor Obama are very progressive or have done much outreach to progressives. They have read correctly that we have nowhere to go but with one of them because McCain or any other Republican would be infinitely worse. But once the election is done that no longer holds. A major problem with 3rd parties in recent times is that they only get energized around Presidential elections. Starting earlier would give us time to do our own outreach and development of a base independent of but willing to work with like minded Democrats and independents.

I think kiddo and are leaving.

Lahoma

((((Selise)))))

ES – kiddo may make for a convenient scapegoat, but i don’t think he’s the reason we didn’t get the conversation you wished for.

Ohh yeah…can we do that to Rahm too, he has been perpetually on my last nerve for a while now.

I meant ‘BS’ not ‘BA’ above. But if ‘BA’ stands for something outrageously bad, I will let it stand.

Kiddo and I are leaving. Good luck all you fine folks.

Lahoma

Ahh diplomacy ain’t easy.

Back O/T but I think that people have strong feelings about racism and sexism and their feelings are usually boiling right underneath the surface so it makes it difficult (not impossible) to have frank discussions especially since both have been used and abused during the campaigns

What was Ferraro’s motivation in saying what she did about Obama? I have read some tortured explanations that make no sense. I’ve watched the clips of her defending herself. None of them are convinvcing. You only say what she said about someone if you’re trying to diminish them.

((((kiddo))))) (((((Lahoma))))) wish you weren’t going but i’d be lying if I said I didn’t understand why.

Much love

Kiddo and I are leaving. Good luck all you fine folks

Not my blog but your comments are welcome as far as I am concerned as are pretty much everyone else’s with the exception of Liberty Lee maybe.

I don’t support starting a third party. I believe we can make great strides by getting more progressive Democrats into Congress. Congress writes the laws, not the President. I believe we can push Obama or Clinton more to the left with a progressive Congress.

i extremely mystified …perfection in tone,or spelling,or content of one comments seem to be a goal that is impossible,and relly not extremely interesting imo

Actually Obama’s response (which Jane has included in her post above) succintly explains it.

envy?

Please may i have all of those, as I have the Influenza from Hell here as several other people here have already had.
I can only think that a teaspoon of Jack Daniels taken every hour will at least help pass the time (or make me conk out, might be better).
Hugs Wobblybits, I love your comments. ;)

Spot on. I think just by the primary alone, they have been pushed left of where they were.

You want to learn how to use the italics or the blockquote function.

FDL has never had a policy, that I know of. Most of us figure it out.

We need to hang together. Maybe you missed the terrific Book Salon yesterday about what it means to be a “liberal.”

Rule one is support fellow progressives. If you know of a better more available progressive leader/blogger than Jane Hamsher, please by all means link to it. I’ll be happy to check them out.

oh ride the fine horsies ,and remember that they are much more noble animals than we humans

i don’t think this is very funny……….except the part where people are missing the point.

about discourse, debate, sharing viewpoints and opinions……..

but the part of liking almost everyone who is involved in this, is why i can say-that i want to throw iced water on all of you. and ask WHAT ARE YOU THINKING?????????? what the hell? stop it!

some of it is true!

bamming and bashing and provoking has been prevalent here since i came back online after knee surgery……

pile-ons have become a regular form of entertainment here, and anyone sayin’ it isn’t-well, i’ll wonder why you don’t see it……..maybe cuz you’re one of them?

all cuz everybody wants to be a winner, win at all costs, can get ugly, is ugly.

i also find it amusing that one of the ’girls’ talkin’ ”be nice” makes a habit of not doing it…….then is nice as pie after she does it. and y’all lap it up.

i thought we were all ’friends’………..how come you’re treatin’ each other like that?

ok, slammmmmmmm meeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

=================

and jane says-” As opposed to other sites, you can count the number of people we’ve banned in the past year on one hand.”

who? i’ve wondered where a few people have been, they outta here?

wobbly …i loves you teh muchly also

Absolutely. you can even have more than ONE piece (I freely share what I have but chocolate is still a challenge for me)

Sorry to hear that your not feeling well but when I was sick (with same flu) and mr was sick, we would make chamomile tea with lemon and a shot of cachaca (brasilian rum) and it helped immensely to pass the time and conk us out (but Jack will do the trick).

Jane,

Instead of just a statement from Obama on this ‘racism’ issue you should also have a recent statement from Hillary so we can see, in a more balanced way, where the two stand right now.

I’m still seeing a lot of Obama supporters in this discussion thread throwing around some nasty attacks and they don’t seem to get that we really have to end this and get to important issues. Obama is supposed to be a Uniter, so where is his call to his supporters to shut up about it and just talk about other issues?

Frankly, I’d rather listen to John Edwards.

If you are referring to me, link where I did the pile on. I admit that I have had heated exchanges with people but I don’t do bullying, it serves no point

tee hee

te amo tambem *g*

I think she posted the comment from Obama because of how he summed this situation up.

If Hillary has made a statement regarding this, please link, I’m sure we would all like to read it

Talking about race and gender is important. Finding a way to do so responsibly, with appropriate context — and not simply as a way to tear each other down — is equally important.

maybe we have to learn to talk about a lot of things – not only race and gender – without tearing each other down.

agreed. at the moment it feels like an open festering wound

I don’t support starting a third party. I believe we can make great strides by getting more progressive Democrats into Congress. Congress writes the laws, not the President. I believe we can push Obama or Clinton more to the left with a progressive Congress.

The problem with this view can be seen in what happened after the November 2006 elections. Democrats went into the majority but the policies continued to be those of the Republicans. I say if we elect more progressive Democrats fine but it is unlikely to change the prevailing policies very much. In so far as Clinton and Obama have been pushed to the left this time around it has been because they were challenged (by the likes of John Edwards) not agreed with.

In this house, we have a locally made Jack Daniels ice cream – vanilla base with dark chocolate swirls, nuts, and that unmistakable flavor of Jack. I often have it with the late night thread!!
Karen

to me too.

In so far as Clinton and Obama have been pushed to the left this time around …

and i have a hard time believing that their small moves to the left for campaign purposes will translated into any kind of policy differences once elected.

that said, i’m not in favor of a new party – unless we can figure out how to prevent it from being co-opted too.

The fundamental issue imho, is getting corporate money out of the national elections. I don’t know if we can do that, but if we can’t, I don’t see much hope for the liberal agenda with or without a third party.

I’m certainly open to arguments, but I don’t see a third party as helping achieve that goal. I think Jane, Howie, and Glen already have formed a liberal caucus within the Democratic party. Again, I’m open to arguments, but that seems the most realistic way to go.

Given the politicization of the DOJ and the Federal Elections Board, I think the Vichy Dems would just annihilate a third party in January 2009. If we stay “technically inside” the Democratic party, we avoid getting steamrolled.

Thank you Lahoma for your thoughtful comment.

Honest question.

Could you list the numbers of the comments where those “nasty” Obama comments came from.

I mentioned once before. It reminds me of Solieri’s feelings about Mozart in Amadeus? Why did this man come along at this time and why does he have such gifts that the rest of us work for and can’t attain?

ditto.

in its entirety

Indeed.

And it’s too bad about this post, which was an excellent one. I thought Obama’s response by putting both people’s comments in the same context was very, very skillfully done.

That will always be the problem, don’t you think?

Congress is a large body that like any organization has significant inertia. I don’t believe that it is really any suprise that they have been slow to catch up with the American people. Part of the disadvantage progressive blogaspheria has is it’s newness. Sure there was Dean and Lamont, but there are real effects to races even when they come up short of the goal. Lieberman lost his superdelegate status because Lamont beat him in the primary. Anyone notice the voting record on FISA/PAA of the three newest Democratic Represenatives? As to starting a new party, I think there are several minor party possibilities already out there. The deck is stacked against the minor parties and a good two thirds of the voting public is invested in our current system. My personal prediction is the the Democratic is headed for a split 10-15 years from now after the GOP finishes imploding. I’ld like for the progressive wing of the Democratic Party to come away from that with the grassroots activism and organizing that is the best of the party.

It took a wrong turn and never got back on the right road. As it is, it is an open wound tht is likely to resurface

I just got back from the digital e.r. and had my wound sewn up.

I feel crappy and somehow blindsided. Don’t know why exactly.

Seconded.

for me it’s a bit of disappointment as for why, it is a couple of things

a) it felt like a gang public flogging or humilation ( at least it ended up there) and instead of gettng back to the gist of the post, it ended up being a pissing contest

b) this primary has worn all of us down and sadly showing how divided we are at the moment

I think we can defend ourselves/others without tearing down other people, your point/argument gets lost in the midst of it

I really wanted to talk about this post because I think it is so important and that we must get over this now or we will never be free of it. Too much riding on this election to get lost in the tangled mess of it.

I agree and this conversation needs to take place or it will be the detriment of the party.

well said…..

Maybe Jane would be willling to repost the topic and we can have a frank and open discussion. It is sorely needed

Well I am not advocating a progressive party, mostly just pointing out that after the election would be the best time to think about one and signaling early on that neither Clinton nor Obama is likely to pursue a progressive agenda, which to my mind means that we are going to see a lot of ducking of serious issues, bandaids for others, and half assed solutions to the rest.

Please email me at mary at dahothouse dot com.

will do

i.e. – rethug light unfortunately…..

OfT Bear Stearns Racing Toward Selling Itself to JPMorgan

As far as the subject of the post, it was supposed to be about having productive discussions of race and gender issues instead of using them to “tear each other down.”

I raised an issue about how the rampant accusations of “misogyny” that have been hurled forth from this blog for months now — without any substantive discussion as to their merits in any given instance — relate to that topic.

So far, the only responses have been denial and a demand that I “apologize.” Ain’t gonna happen.

Kool-aid comes in all kinds of flavors, folks.

you got mail

OfT Bear Stearns Racing Toward Selling Itself to JPMorgan

Boy color me all surprised. I never saw that one coming *g* Does this mean that JPMorgan will end up lending money to itself, you know the money that the Fed said it could not lend directly to BS?

agreed. and i don’t any answers, so maybe i’m out of line to object to yours.

Hugh, I’m with you on this. The earlier we start the better a new realistic party can come about. I think we should give it a couple of months though to see what is going to happen, meaning, if there is a Democratic president along with a Democratically controlled House & Senate (with a good amount in the Senate especially) and we find they’re still going down the same road the republicans have taken our country, then that would be the time to act. And act fast!

Contrary to popular belief that a party cannot form quickly. I think it can. The Internet is a powerful force. ;-)

You have raised a valid issue and I would be interested in reading some responses. While I can’t give specifics, I will say that yes I do believe that there has been instances of misogyny and instances where people have screamed misogyny where I personally have not seen it. I believe that both are the same side of the coin and one is not worse than the other so to frame arguments as such is to get into a pie fight but I also believe that is more acceptable in our society to be sexist than to be racist.

There has been quite a bit of Misogyny here and other places. I define that as personal attacks rather than discussing political policy. I think people just don’t realize sometimes that what they are saying is a little over the top. You will notice, I am sure, that there have been no racial attacks, thank god.

from your lips …

A third party would possibly reunite all of us, too. I think there are many democrats in Congress who have had their fill of the democratic party too. We have the infrastructure now, and we need to be heard. My thinking too.

Hugh, will you be at Netroots Nation?

we have the beginnings of a communication infrastructure. i don’t think we have anything approaching an on the ground infrastructure.

Hugh, will you be at Netroots Nation?

I don’t think so but I will try to look into it.

Agreed. But we do have Blue America, and as more people become disgusted with the democratic party (assuming they continue on this path) the more who will be excited about a third, more progressive party. The democrats, of which I am one, had a great week with the telecom immunity stonewall. Waxman, Leahy, Feingold, Dodd and so many others are great patriots. Maybe they’re just waiting for a democratic president to get the actual work done. I’m an eternal optimist, but Hugh makes a good point.

I’m not yet ready to give up on the Dems. I will do everything I can to make it possible for them to have spines and if they don’t, then we will see. We need a lot more progressives to start our own party, but not to start our own movement – which I think we have already done.

i don’t object to a third party in and of itself…. i just don’t know how it could be kept from being corrupted by the same institutional forces that affect everything else.

They all get co-opted eventually.
What we need is one where that’s put off as long as possible – and I think that means being open to new ideas and new people, even if they make us uncomfortable sometimes.
It also means being willing to throw out people who keep trying to go corporate on us, even if they think they’d be good leaders. Maybe even especially if they think they’d be good leaders.

Comee November, I’ll vote for the candidate with a ‘D’ after their name, even if I have to get a gas mask to do it. But I won’t be happy if they play the ‘centrist’ game and keep moving closer to the Rs, and I will change parties if that’s the only way I can have my vote count for real.

I know what you mean. Maybe a new party would have to begin with a set of principles, which if violated, would be the end of that candidate’s membership in the party.

This thread isn’t the first time Democrats have fought against each other:

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5809#comments

Dkos could be on the fritz after this years election because his readers are so divided. Oh boy. Interesting that BradBlog is weighing in on this and suggesting readers of Dkos to stop going to bring the hit count down. Less hits means less money for Markos.

Wow! The “fighting” never ends, huh? Oh boy.

Brings up the usual question, who decides? That’s the problem with almost any organization.

i just don’t think we know how to build progressive institutions. how can we think an institution will be progressive and democratic when we rely on anti-progressive and anti-democratic means? i don’t even think we have a clue how to even approach this question.

if i could point to even one model institution that was organized according to progressive, democratic principles, i’d be more hopeful. we have a lot of work to do, but that doesn’t mean it can’t be done, or that we aren’t the ones to do it.

Blogs are owned. There in lies the problem. No democracy. In the end the owner is the decider.

I nominate this thread as “passive-agressive blowout of the year”.

i don’t think that has to be a problem – so long as having a blog is not a high barrier and so long as the blogs (and their owners) themselves operate somewhat transparently and don’t function as gatekeepers. i know that’s not what we have right now… but this isn’t a complaint, because i don’t think the answers are easy to find.

Nice title. LOL

yah, more like an open source model.

Projects can fork or merge and run the gamut from anarchy to authoritarian. Talk about a mashup!

I love open source. I want an open source life.

tw3k – you. are. a. fucking. genius.

exactly, now can you please tell me how to port that model on to political organizing?

LOL you have mail.

Join a commune :)

Now if I could tell you that _then_ I’d be a. fucking. genius. ;)

Arguing is good. It’s reasonable to have arguments when important matters are at stake and people have different opinions about them. What I think the “passive aggressive” people are pointing out is that when you start labeling something, rather than discussing why it’s bad, that’s when things become unproductive. There’s far too much of that here, I think.

The article Juste was referring to that Jane wrote about John Edwards “misogyny” was a case in point – she never bothered to explain why she felt this was actually misogynistic, as opposed to something that just might have sounded that way if you were expecting to be offended. I wrote about this at the time, and asked Jane for a reaction via e-mail. She never responded, like everyone I asked for a response save Taylor Marsh.

I’m not looking for this blog to make me happy, despite what Pachacutec seems to be accusing folks with my opinions of doing. I’m just asking for reason instead of name-calling and an expectation that we’re all going to bob our heads and move on to the next thread. If you can’t do that, OK. I’m a big boy; I can find other places.

In fact, this discussion is reminding me of all the reasons I have been staying away.

Sadly I agree.

LOL.

I am going to take a walk with Ron and Wally. You guys straighten this out while I am gone.

I’m a great fan of yours, but on this one, I think you’re missing it. It’s a “feel” that you and I don’t get, because we’re guys.

I am very confident that Jane is a strong Edwards supporter, over Barack and Hillary. She can’t, however, come right out and say that. The layer of sexism, which is what women in America feel and have to deal with everyday is what Jane tapped into in the Edwards post. I thought her point was, whether someone cries isn’t a really good predictor of how they’ll react under pressure. When a man, Edwards, makes that statement in reference to a woman, Hillary, it brings with it some baggage. That’s just the way it is.

Some people in this country, of a certain ethnicity, get very nervous when other people, of a different ethnicity, bring up nooses, or use certain words. Gender and ethnicity attach themselves to the language in certain situations. That’s historically a fact we have to live with. As liberals, it’s something we have to learn. I didn’t say “agree,” just learn.

Jane is trying to hold this place together. She’s trying to keep it hospitable to progressives of both genders and the few people here who aren’t 100% European American. In addition, she’s trying to keep it open to people who support Barack, Hillary, and Edwards.

FWIW, I know Jane has taken serious heat from feminists who think she is too weak on language and other sexist stuff she has let go.

Some people in this country, of a certain ethnicity, get very nervous when other people, of a different ethnicity, bring up nooses, or use certain words. Gender and ethnicity attach themselves to the language in certain situations. That’s historically a fact we have to live with. As liberals, it’s something we have to learn. I didn’t say “agree,” just learn.

huh? Do you mean blacks get nervous when they hear whites bring up nooses? If that is what your saying, I have never seen a black person become ‘nervous’ but rahter ‘insulted’ or ‘offended’ or even ‘okay’ depending on the situation and/or context in which said word was used.

Guess you never heard of Tiger Woods.

i indeed have heard of Tiger but you said one group gets nervous, I’ve never seen nervous, I’ve seen outraged, pissed, angry, sad, etc. but ‘nervous’ is what the people felt back in the day when the country turned an eye to the lynchings that were taking place across the country.

And if I remember correctly, he stated that he didn’t take offense to the comment as he knew who the woman who said it

Yo Boo — dunno if it’s because you’re a guy or not, but you’re right — you DON’T get it. You haven’t gotten it once this afternoon.

If you think Jane is a “strong Edwards supporter,” I recommend you go back and read the posts about Edwards that appeared on this blog before he dropped out of the race. Don’t miss the one where Jane told Elizabeth Edwards to STFU because she didn’t tow the Hamsher line about the “Betrayus” ad. Or the one where Jane said Edwards was “too 2004.” And “too angry.” And that he needed a media consultant. And that Mike Huckabee was a better populist.

And, Boo? If Jane has “taken heat from feminists” — it’s not because she has been “too weak on language and other sexist stuff she has let go.” You can trust me on that.

Since I know you won’t, however — let’s see a few examples of the “heat” you have in mind.

My point was that neither Jane nor any of the other folks I mentioned made the connection between what was said and what the question was that was asked, nor any of the context in which the conversation occurred. The only feeling required to understand that point is the feeling that one ought to understand a situation before flinging labels like “a patronizing, sexist jerk” around. Jane was guilty of that, at least judging by what she wrote, which was a single line pointing to the same ABC News blog article that didn’t explain any of that.

heh — “in moderation,” am I? Guess my definition of “disruptive” up above was pretty damn accurate, wasn’t it?

Well, at least we have some common ground. There is a plurality of positions on these issues.

That’s why I wrote “some” people.

Yep, you’re right Tiger forgave Kelly Tilghman, from South Carolina, btw, for saying that young golfers should go out and lynch him.

Tiger never even mentioned “Jena,” in his published comments about her statement. That omission made a lot of liberals very angry with him. I have an opinion, but I’m not volunteering it here.

I agree with you that the descendants of the slaves don’t have to worry about lynch mobs hanging them from trees, as they used to. Thank God/science for great heroes such as Ida B. Wells.

Metaphorically, however, the descendants of the slaves are routinely pulled over in traffic stops solely, because of their ethnicity. It’s one of many forms of economic lynching.

all forms of institutionalized racism whether it be social economical or otherwise.

As for the Jena 6, i think the more appropriate description would be ‘vexed’ as opposed to ‘nervous’. As for driving while black or brown, that makes folks nervous because well minorities don’t exactly have the best history with the police.

I apologize.

Jane is Dick Cheney’s illegitimate child. She’s a neocon cutout sent here to seduce us back to Republicanism.

With all the clear writers out there, with wide appeal to all progressives, I don’t how I got stuck at FDL.

Please oh enlightened one, tell me where I should go to attain the keen wisdom and diplomatic skills that you have already acquired.

all forms of institutionalized racism whether it be social economical or otherwise.

Not sure what you mean here?

As for the Jena 6, i think the more appropriate description would be ‘vexed’ as opposed to ‘nervous’.

I thought the Jena 6 were “pissed-off,” did I miss something?

As for driving while black or brown, that makes folks nervous because well minorities don’t exactly have the best history with the police.

Bless you.

Why is that you think “minorities” (does this include the Chinese?) are incarcerated disproportionate to their percentage of the general population?

Institutionalized racism (what you called economic lynching)

Jena 6 – your first post, you used the word ‘nervous’ and as with Tiger, this word didn’t fit with the Jena 6 either.

Why is that you think “minorities” (does this include the Chinese?) are incarcerated disproportionate to their percentage of the general population?

Unequal sentencing/ racism. Many minorities (I think I mentioned black and brown, so hispanic and black) are in prison on drug related charges and as admitted by the legal system rock cocaine is sentenced differently than powdered cocaine which is more expensive than the rock variety.

Not sure what the bless you comment was about.

Institutionalized racism (what you called economic lynching)

Jena 6 – your first post, you used the word ‘nervous’ and as with Tiger, this word didn’t fit with the Jena 6 either.

Why is that you think “minorities” (does this include the Chinese?) are incarcerated disproportionate to their percentage of the general population?

Unequal sentencing/ racism. Many minorities (I think I mentioned black and brown, so hispanic and black) are in prison on drug related charges and as admitted by the legal system rock cocaine is sentenced differently than powdered cocaine which is more expensive than the rock variety. We can also look to socio-economic factors. Do you have an alternate theory?

Not sure what the bless you comment was about.

Not sure what the bless you comment was about.

SARCASM.

on the contrary — I’m waiting for you to tell me where that particular feminist “heat” you mentioned is to be found.

And as for “Jane is Dick Cheney’s illegitimate child. She’s a neocon cutout sent here to seduce us back to Republicanism” — that’s not a response to anything I said. It’s a little pissy temper tantrum of a response, though fortunately not a “disruptive” one.

Keep up the Jane worship, little Boo…….you’ll do fine.

don’t see how sarcasm fits in with that but okay taken as you described

Unequal sentencing/ racism. Many minorities (I think I mentioned black and brown, so hispanic and black) are in prison on drug related charges and as admitted by the legal system rock cocaine is sentenced differently than powdered cocaine which is more expensive than the rock variety.

White supremacy was legal in the U.S. until the Civil Rights legislation of the ’60’s. Access to education, credit, the vote, habeas corpus, the law, housing, jobs, was all denied to them, because of their ethnicity. If you want to know why the descendants of the slaves are disproportionately represented in prison, I think that’s a darn good place to start.

The other starting point is “the debt.” The descendants of the slaves were never compensated for the labor of their ancestors. It’s tough to build when you don’t have capital. Some of them managed. See the Colfax Massacre and Tulsa 1921 as examples of the violent destruction of their middle class since the Civil War. Bet, your U.S. History course left those out.

Not my best moment.

You asked an honest question and I appreciate that.

The other starting point is “the debt.” The descendants of the slaves were never compensated for the labor of their ancestors. It’s tough to build when you don’t have capital. Some of them managed. See the Colfax Massacre and Tulsa 1921 as examples of the violent destruction of their middle class since the Civil War. Bet, your U.S. History course left those out

Not really, your assuming quite a bit about me to make such a comment. I’m not sure why your being hostile as this is a discussion, or?

I’m aware of Jim Crow laws that came into play with the passing of the 13th amendment. That was institutionalized racism that the Jim crow laws legitimized (separate schools, drinking fountains, bathrooms, voter laws,etc.)
The debt isssue is another point (I totally agree) and once freed, they had no money and were basically put back into slavery via share cropping.

Thanks and i meant it in the spirit given not at all an attack or such.

I appreciate the discussion

I don’t think you deserve it, but in past threads, angry feminists have gotten pissed off at Jane and Christy for letting certain words be used.

All liberals don’t agree about everything. I’m sorry we’ve diluted your ideal of liberal orthodoxy.

The fact that you can’t point me towards anyone better, however, just kind of confirms my suspicions, that you’re just a Rovian troll, better educated than most.

Much appreciated.

African American/Blacks are not going to ask for repayment of the debt or anything like that. IMHO, they are in a terrible situation. The lack of education leaves them (just like anyone else, regardless of ethnicity, who suffers from generations of illiteracy and innumeracy) more susceptible to unemployment, substance abuse, bankruptcy, incarceration, ….

Unfortunately a lot of “them” begin to believe that it is because of their ethnicity that these things happen to them. I don’t know of any easy solutions. I just think an awareness of the history helps.

Anyway, thanks for listening.

awareness plays a huge role but when much of the same obstructions (socio-economic) are still present, it is hard to make the argument that it isn’t ethnicity or race related. while I don’t agree that it is ‘a lot’ of them, it is enough that do believe this and don’t see it changing anytime soon (and given the past 8 years under shrub, can’t really fault their pessimism

I guess what I’m asking you to consider is that Jane will get heat no matter what she says about sexism. She’s either a feminazi or Barbara Billingsley on Leave it to Beaver.

Maybe that’s why she didn’t lock it down in the piece on Edwards. If she starts getting too detailed on certain topics, it just alienates more FDLers on all sides.

With all the issues we have facing us, IRAQ, FISA, lobbyists, …. I think we all have to show some flexibility/tolerance.

I know you have a site, I haven’t visited often enough. I have always had great respect for your positions.

Anyone better?

Let’s start with poor old “too 2004,” “too angry,” insufficiently focused-grouped John Edwards, and work our way along from there.

There’s Glenn Greenwald, whose actual WORK usually accounts for at least 85% of what is parroted here on a daily basis. Ditto with Marcy Wheeler, who rowed the oar that brought this place into the “big time” with the Scooter Libby trial. And there’s Scarecrow, Blue Texan and Attaturk, who speak with the voice of sanity in the early morning hours — thus enabling the “Prime Time” ladies to boast of their, um, “fair and balanced” coverage whenever anyone happens to call them on the “misogyny” witch hunts they’ve been launching since Coronation Clinton hit the uphill slope last fall.

And those are just the locals! Let me flip through my Rove-troll Rolodex and see who else I can rustle up.

I take back what I said about being “better educated.”

Please provide a link where any of the excellent authors you mentioned (many of whom she brought to FDL), ripped Jane.

Were you speaking globally on progressive issues, or just on sexism, or was it something else?

Let’s start with poor old “too 2004,” “too angry,” insufficiently focused-grouped John Edwards, and work our way along from there.

My guess is that she wrote that when we were all hoping Feingold would still run.

Whoa boy! Wright is a demagogic preacher using racial injustices and race as a battering ram. Remember Tawana Brawley and Rev. Sharpton saying even if she lied is doesn’t matter, think of all the bad things done by white boys against black women….blah, hate, blah, blah. Demagaguery from a different time and place but demogaguery nevertheless.
Ferraro harsh but very likely true belief raises the legitimate query: “How did that man get so far on so little and would he have travelled that distant if he were white??” A perfectly reasonable question for the applicant. He needs to answer is directly not by smearing Italian Queens for bigotry.

Ditto with Marcy Wheeler, who rowed the oar that brought this place into the “big time” with the Scooter Libby trial.

Wrong again.

No doubt that Marcy did most of the heavy lifting. It was Jane and Christy, however, who made it ACCESSIBLE.

As far as Greenwald is concerned, ask him how many books Jane helped him to sell.

Glenn’s not always real easy to read. He needs other people to make his stuff ACCESSIBLE.

Ok, I take back my thing about the Rovian troll.

You’re clearly not that.

Back to what I said, before, however, it’s not a perfect world. The liberal coalition is fragile. Why are you you-know-whatting on Jane?

So Martin, if Barack wins the nomination, are you going to vote for McCain?

In other words, she was saying that he only got where he is because he is black – disgusting.

I have just read through the post and comments. While not feeling particularly partisan, I am disheartened to see how the discussion has moved along, or sidetracked, or become stuck.

It seems to me that the comments do not lend themselves well (in general) to lengthy musings, and it is often easier to read quickly through the one or two line “moments.”

What is unfortunate (and I am not a reader of DKos and others where the divisions are apparently deep and bitter) is that this issue is really compelling, I think.

I would like to be learning from this moment in our history, and I welcome the perspectives different people of all ages are bringing to it. As a woman, I am deeply concerned about the anti-female backlash against Clinton. I personally have issues with her on the occupation and other matters, and I am aware that perhaps I am not as sensitive to the gender issue, perhaps because the policy issues trump the gender factor for me. I do see that gender continues to drive the high-art market, and that is something that I can certainly feel seriously po’d about. So I am sure it is a huge factor in the Clinton campaign and for women in politics. There is much inequity for women in our culture.

I think the race issue is becoming more nuanced over generations, and I think it is true that the older generations seem prone to maintain long-held understandings that remain without the nuance of these times. Prisons are part of the past and the future. . .where race is concerned.

Obama seems to be a man for our times. Certainly he is a man that the next generations “get.”

I am a regular reader of FDL, and I am glad for the work both Christy and Jane do to make it go.

juste,

FDL maybe a lot bigger than you realize.

I was raised a Goldwater Republican. I’m ashamed to tell you that I voted for George Bush in 2000.

When Dick shot Harry in the face, I could not believe how many hunters lurked here. For the first fews days after that, the absolute best place to get information about shooting birds, shooting birds in Texas, bird shot, the shotgun Dick used, penned hunts, hunting safety, and all the CSI questions that were being asked , was in the threads at FDL.

This is a “big tent,” but in order to keep it big, Jane may not have as much room as you think.

juste,

Forget about helping Glenn sell his first TWO books.

Where do you think Marcy got the seed money to write Anatomy of Deceit?

Jane Hamsher.

Jane had a big fund raiser at FDL and we ponied up ???$30, $40 grand , something like that.

When did you become a liberal?

“When did you become a liberal?”

Before you were born, is my best guess.

John Mc Cain calls our nation’s capitol city a “city of evil,” that old curmudgeon. Netroots and progressives are unwilling to face how much misogyny and racism infect our common mindset. As an elder thinking of my daughters’ generation and my granddaughters’, I know what we knew back when and failed to do about it; I know we’ve moved in a way so that their issues have been altered, but in the midst of all this chatter: Iraq, the planet, the health of our citizens, the economy, the world in which genocide has become as common as domestic serial killers, or young people on violent rampages: we have had decades of politics institutionalizing, enabling, the sinkhole, the disaster. It’s enough to make me want to have this whole collection on this huge thread go and read W.B. Yeats’ “The Second Coming.”

What year were you born?

I hear you, but (and not to minimize your concern, which I share) bit the rough beast has been slouching toward babylon with the frequency of a train schedule throughout history, and as little control as we have over our world, we have much more than most of the people who’ve ever lived – as long as we’re smart and don’t allow ourselves to be distracted and use it.

Which, of course, is still an open question.

Netroots and progressives are unwilling to face how much misogyny and racism infect our common mindset.

Huh?

You figure the Vichy Dems and the GOP are more willing to face how much misogyny and white supremacy affect our common mindset?

oh, I’ll answer that right around the the time the Censor — oops, I mean Moderator — lets my other response to you appear.

Wouldn’t wait up, though, if I wuz you. It’s a handy little trick in this “progressive” blog to put comments in “time out” until everyone has forgotten what they were about.

[RBG Note; yeah, not waiting up is probably a good idea cuz that comment is not going to appear in the threads. Feel free to try again if you’d like. Perhaps without the personal insults next time?]

Don’t think there were any “personal insults,” Censor RBG. At least not as most people would understand that term.

Of course, given the liberties that are taken with words like “misogyny” around here, can’t say as I’m surprised.

Oh wait — “misogyny” works the OTHER way, doesn’t it? Dang, this is confusing.

Have we had the pleasure of meeting before?

I told you the charade was crumbling, dude.

Wonder what I said? Wonder if most people would consider it a “personal insult”?

oh, I’ll leave that to you to figure out. After all, you ARE the All Knowing…..Most Merciful…..Most Omnipotent……right?

I thought so. It’s always interesting to see how some folks are willing to invest so much energy on a site they believe has such little impact.

Oh dear. This suggests you don’t even READ what you censor.

As I have stated before, the concern I have is that a site which has accumulated as SIGNIFICANT an impact as this one has, has MISUSED such impact as egregiously as this one has.

To quote the Goddess: Capice?

Every word. Typing my replies however can be a challenge while multi-tasking.

You may call it censorship if you like. I call it maintaining some semblance of a civil conversation.

Either way, it’s time to find some other blog where your contribution to the conversation are appreciated.

[Mod note; RBG, did you mean a singular or plural contribution?]

So we’re down to chips on shoulder, now, huh? You’re obviously a fundamentally person than The Obamas, so you probably won’t understand this, but what you see as those chips on their shoulders is really evidence that their personal success has not blinded them to the plights of others. Michelle Obama’s personal success didn’t prompt her to think, “I’m proud of my country because they gave ME something”. In other owrds, neither of them are the kind to say “I’ve got mine, to heel with you”.

Understand? Nah, probably not.

“Isn’t it time for Rev. Wright & Co. to let go of the distant past just a bit”?

In favor of the present, in which racism no longer exists, you mean?

KayinMaine, So many of us are tired of the namecalling. “Racist” is a big flaming rocket, and you really should be careful at whom you launch it. Even Obama has denied that he believes Ferrarro’s comments were racist. And to call Hillary a racist is to discount her entire life of public service, as well as that of her husband. Disagree with them; point out where you think they are wrong. But for Gods sake leave the juvenile and inciting insults behind. Is it not clear to you that in terms of public policy there is a but a razor’s edge between Obama and Hillary. The central issue for all of us right-thinking people needs to be who will more likely defeat McCain. I have long feared Obama’s ability to withstand the kind of Republican slimefest he will be facing if he is the nominee. Just imagine if these video clips of Reverend Wright at his mau-mauing best were first released this coming October. Do you really think Obama would have been able to recover? As it is I guarantee you that these images will be all over our television screens throughout a fall election if Obama is our nominee. We know Hillary can take it; she withstood the full crushing power of a special counsel investigation and emerged without a scratch. I am not so sanguine about Obama’s ability to withstand that same onslaught. We are one Supreme Court vote away from abolishing abortion, at least in many states, destroying anti-gun laws, giving even freer rein to the US intelligence community and its lust to spy on us. If we lose in November, the overwhelming odds are that the Republicans will get that vote. The stakes in this election could not be higher. They call for intelligent debate and a sober analysis by us and, yes, by all of the delegates, of who can best defeat the aging perpetual-war espouser who will be the Republican nominee.