BooMan Vents...

[babylonsister]

http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2009/10/13/1939/2773

Can I Vent?

by BooMan
Tue Oct 13th, 2009 at 01:09:39 AM EST


Yesterday was probably the most embarrassing day yet for the progressive blogosphere during the short reign of the Obama administration. So, now is probably a good time to just let loose and register my disgust with the movement I've been a part of for the last five years.

If you supported Obama during the primaries, you know who you are and this does not necessarily apply to you. For the rest of you, you spent the primaries either shilling for Clinton and telling us our guy was all talk and no show, or you spent them bitching that David Plouffe wouldn't respond to and obey your emailed wisdom. As soon as he won the presidency, you started bitching about his appointments. As soon as he became president, you started bitching about his messaging, his framing, his agenda, and his lack of deference to your opinion. I want to know where the point was in this process when Obama was supposed to conclude that you were his allies and that you were responsible for his victory. When was he supposed to conclude that he owed you something, or that you had any respect for him, or that you credited his good intentions, or that you understood the myriad responsibilities of the job might mean that your pet issues might have to wait six months, a year, or two years to get to the top of his agenda.

You call him a warmonger, but he gets the Nobel Peace Prize. He ends torture and allows his Attorney General to investigate it, and you call him a torturer. He tries to enact health care reform with a robust public option and you accuse him of seeking every opportunity to sell-out to the insurance industry. He bails out the cratering financial services industry and prevents a second Great Depression, and you accuse him of selling his soul to corporate CEO's. I'm not saying that all of these criticisms lack validity. I'm not saying that people shouldn't advocate for the things they care about passionately. I just want to know where you get the fucking idea that an anonymous White House staffer who gets asked about all this criticism would feel obligated to show you deference and respect.

What's he supposed to say? That all the criticism is right on the mark?

The truth of the matter is, right or wrong, the progressive blogosphere has been a more severe and on point critic of the Obama administration than any teabagger. And, in many ways, that is to the community's credit. We don't embrace the cheerleader's role and that gives us more credibility. When the president screws up, we're willing to call him on it. But, Jesus Christ, do you expect the administration to lie down and say, 'Thank you, sir, may I have another'?

If you berate them for not closing Guantanamo fast enough, not ending Don't Ask, Don't Tell fast enough, not evacuating Iraq fast enough, not passing a health care bill fast enough, and so on...do you not expect one their number to at some point push back and point out that making these kind of changes takes time and is a bit difficult?

And, where the hell do you get off taking it personally? Aren't you the ones accusing them of being whores to the insurance industry and Wall Street and the military-industrial complex? Do you think they are going to find that criticism generous and well-intended?

Criticism is fine. But the sense of entitlement involved here is staggering. Ooh, some big, bad White House adviser defended the administration against one more heated attack. My feelings are hurt. Guess what? You should get over it.

I think the White House is willing to listen to criticism from their allies. From you? Not so much.

[Connie_Corleone]

1. Spot on.

Constructive criticism is one thing. But this constant overreaction and having a fit over every media story quoting "anonymous sources" gets tiring.

[Phx_Dem]

2. Couldn't have said it better myself! Excellent.

[vaberella]

3. 100% . A few posters on DU came to mind in this article.

Ugh...always the same. What the left who do this want, is not a man who follows the law of the land r remembers the past and tries not to do the same. What want is a Bush for the left. I'd rather not have that since we don't live in a monarchy and I don't want to see a repeat.

[Cha]

22. Oh yeah, that's all I thought

of since I don't watch corporatemedia.

[Pirate Smile]

4. It would be easy to name names of who exactly that post is talking about - and they have little

credibility because their complaints are so chronic that it is like the boy who cried wolf.

[Xipe Totec]

5. For the record

"If you supported Obama during the primaries, you know who you are and this does not necessarily apply to you. For the rest of you, you spent the primaries either shilling for Clinton..."

Since when is supporting a different Democratic candidate "shilling"?

"..and telling us our guy was all talk and no show...",

I did not.


"...or you spent them bitching that David Plouffe wouldn't respond to and obey your emailed wisdom..."

I didn't e-mail any "wisdom" to anybody, much less David Plouffe.


"...As soon as he won the presidency, you started bitching about his appointments..."


I did not.


"...As soon as he became president, you started bitching about his messaging, his framing, his agenda, and his lack of deference to your opinion..."

I did not.


"...I want to know where the point was in this process when Obama was supposed to conclude that you were his allies and that you were responsible for his victory..."

When he won the primary, and we closed ranks to elect him President.


"When was he supposed to conclude that he owed you something...",

When he got elected.


"...or that you had any respect for him...",

When I showed him my respect.


"...or that you credited his good intentions...",

When I gave him credit for good intentions.


"...or that you understood the myriad responsibilities of the job might mean that your pet issues might have to wait six months, a year, or two years to get to the top of his agenda..."

When did the platform of the Democratic party, on which he was elected, become "pet issues"?


"...You call him a warmonger...",

I did not.


"...but he gets the Nobel Peace Prize..."

Congratulations.


"...He ends torture and allows his Attorney General to investigate it, and you call him a torturer..."

I never did that.


"...He tries to enact health care reform with a robust public option and you accuse him of seeking every opportunity to sell-out to the insurance industry..."

Never did that either...

And on, and on, and on...


So far, the only thing you have been right about, is that I supported Hillary Clinton in the primaries.

To that, I plead guilty.

[Connie_Corleone]

6. If you didn't do or say any of things he wrote about, then he wasn't talking to you.

He's talking to the people who did all of the things mentioned above.

[Oregone]

9. How about me?

A lot of the cheerleaders here think I am a total asshole. But, well, I was in Obama's corner in the primaries.

Do I get a pass? Lemme know. Im incredibly concerned at this call out. I tremble in the shadow of the center; there are no bounds I want to cross.

[Connie_Corleone]

12. Well, one look at your sigline says it all.

[Oregone]

15. Aw, damn. You got me!

But remember, in a hypothetical, even if I would of wanted Huey Long to run for president, that doesn't mean I would of wanted FDR to lose. Maybe I just don't like group-think bandwagons

[Connie_Corleone]

17. No. It just makes you really old.

[Oregone]

18. You have no idea

I may even be your father. So please respect your wiser elders

[ampad]

73. Well I guess an elder would be expected to lead

by example. Calling folks cheerleaders is not a a way to start. Also, I was always told you earn respect. Age does not earn you respect. I have meet many asshole 20, 30 years my elder.

[pollo poco]

94. dining room table fer sure

You should read up on brain science and human evolution before you go taking a crap on old people.

And as Bill Maher says, "Remember, he's the president, not your boyfriend.

[Connie_Corleone]

98. It's called a joke. And I don't take a "crap" on old people.

I'm the caregiver for my grandmother who is in the late stages of Alzheimer's.

Don't assume you know me and what I think about the elderly based on a reply to someone who just wants to spar back and forth for the hell of it.

That fucking pisses me off!! Keep your sorry assumptions to yourself!

[Blue-Jay]

46. Referring to people as "cheerleaders" is not something an asshole would do.

[pollo poco]

92. Bash bash bash

The comment points out that by merely supporting Hillary, one can be lumped into the anti Obama camp.
This place is as full of black and white thinking as any other in this dining room table of a country.

[Xipe Totec]

100. He was talking to everybody who supported a different candidate during the primaries

He made no distinction.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

91. I am with you on everything you said

except I supported Obama all thoughout the primaries, I voted for Obama for Senate for that matter. This rant presupposes that if you have problems with Obama the President you must have had problems with Obama the candidate, you are Hillary supporter or you are mad David Plouffe didnt respond personally to you???? Seriously?

Far be it for any of us to hold our President accountable. I know who the ranter is referring to and I for one am glad those people are holding him accountable. It's too bad many of us were attack dogs for 8 years and when our guy got in there we became guard dogs.

[tblue37]

99. That's not what he is venting about. He is referring to the fact that

leftwing bloggers were outraged over a report that an anonymous WH aide had mmade some comment about them that was less than admiring. BooMan is saying that that WH aide doesn't think of people who have not supported Obama at all as if they are his special "allies," so when he (the anonymous WH aide, mind you, not Obama himself) says something about them and about not necessarily bowing to them, that is not sufficient cause for the left bloggers to get their panties in a wad. He also says he is glad leftwing bloggers hold the administration's feet to the fire. He just thinks it is ridiculous that they get so overheated at the idea that some anonymous WH aide might have dissed them a little bit. He thinks they take it all too personally.

That is very different from saying they shouldn't citicize Obama. That is not even remotely the subject of his vent.

Read for comprehension.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

103. I was responding to the post above mine

not the OP. I understood the OP's intent overall but the rant claims that if you question the administration whether it is the President or an anonymous WH aide you must be one of these people was a bit ridiculous. Which is what I stated above.

[Xipe Totec]

112. If you supported Obama during the primaries... For the rest of you...

If you supported Obama during the primaries, you know who you are and this does not necessarily apply to you. For the rest of you,...

I think the OP was quite clear: Anybody who did not support Obama in the primaries is a second class citizen in the Democratic party.

I get it.

[spoony]

7. In other words, another STFU thread.

Do you lot ever get tired of scolding people for daring to disagree with you?

[babylonsister]

8. And do you ever give him credit, for anything? nt

[spoony]

11. Yes, I do.

Have I defended my existence enough now or do you need links? And what does that have to do with what I posted besides proving that you're only interested in how much a given poster agrees with the President?

[babylonsister]

14. I don't much care what you've posted, but if you're going to scold

me for posting this, you're being a bit hypocritical, because that's what you're doing.

I like the fact Booman has pointed out that some people, not necessarily you, are never satisfied despite what is actually going on.

That's not scolding but you can interpret it however you choose.

[Oregone]

13. He has a great smile, you know

[Teaser]

27. don't worry, if they get tired of it, I'll step in to scold you too.

.

[spoony]

31. Deal.

Just be sure to call me an illiterate freeper America-hating idiot, then follow up to say I lack respect, otherwise I might not recognise it as the same familiar background noise I've become accustomed to.

[Cha]

29. No, can't you read what boo said?

It's all about respect.. anyone can continue whining their heads off disrespectfully but, they're not going to get anywhere.

[spoony]

30. You mean the kind of respect that defines all criticism as whining?

I would explain to you the irony of it all, but really, what're the chances it'd do any good?

[Cha]

33. When there is disrepect ..you can believe I

will call it whining.

[CakeGrrl]

41. Did you even read it?

There seems to be a need to ignore the difference between criticism and berating - the author tried to make that distinction.

Throw in a big helping of "You can dish it out, but you sure can't take it." I can recall everything he said being said on these boards, and people jumping to rec threads about the Obama the warmonger or Obama the corporatist or Obama hasn't done a damned thing or Obama has abandoned liberals. And I've seen a bunch of "Obama the empty suit" comments.

But a WH source says that bloggers should get serious and understand that, basically, all the shit that has to be unraveled is pretty goddamned complex, and the same people who love to "speak truth to power" go ballistic and get their panties in a twist? Give me a break.

[babylonsister]

45. Thank you. nt

[spoony]

50. Oh, the irony.

"There seems to be a need to ignore the difference between criticism and berating"

This is a lesson that needs to be learned on DU, but not by me. It needs to be taken to heart by those who constantly call all posters who aren't in total agreement with their support of all things Obama to be "whiners" (with their "panties in a twist" no less) who didn't get their "ponies" etc.

This isn't about the article or its author or about some WH d-bag underling's dislike of bloggers, it was posted HERE as a shot at certain posters, as such scold threads so often are, in an attempt to dismiss and suppress criticism. Often relevant criticism. Often reasonable criticism. Please don't even bother attempting to tell me that it doesn't happen; that people aren't gang-tackled with 'whiner/pony' crap whenever substantial criticism is leveled--regardless of its tone. It's a problem, but not one we "can't take" so that charge is similarly dubious.

[CakeGrrl]

55. I believe it was posted here because the symptoms are much in evidence here

as they are in other places, based on the comments on his blog.

I am soooooo tired of people claiming that they're being silenced. If a mod hasn't locked your account, you haven't been silenced.

And no one said anything about stifling "reasonable" and "relevant" criticism. I guess I can't help assuming you didn't read the blog entry because he made that point clearly.

Maybe it ain't you, but I can recall EVERY example that was used as having been used here.

It comes down to whether things such as calling the President an "empty suit" are considered to be constructive encouragement. To me, it sure as hell isn't. Some of it is nothing but attacks rooted in something less than a sincere desire to see the President do the right things and it sure helps the MSM help the RW in attacking him.

If you don't like being 'gang-tackled' for your comments, alert on people or tell 'em to get stuffed.

I stand by my agreement with the article. I think it's ridiculous for SOME people (if it isn't you, it isn't you) to lob any sort of namecalling salvo at the President and/or his administration and expect the WH to think it's all done in the spirit of respectful dissent and bow and scrape to such sage advice.

And I think it's ironic that people who do that with relish are so damned sensitive at hearing that it wasn't interpreted as hearts and flowers.

[ampad]

74. Silenced! LOL

Take a look over at GD. They are not being silenced. The silenced meme is just a tool to keep their ears from hearing criticism.

[CakeGrrl]

83. I know, right?

That's where someone said the "thinking people" go so this forum is left to the "cheerleaders".

:eyes:

That's the kind of attitude that divides. And those who have that attitude are pretty much the same ones who complain that people are trying to silence them when that is not even logistically possible. It's just obtuse reasoning.

[Number23]

138. This whole GD vs GD-P war is so goddamned stupid I can't even believe there are so many

lonely, useless, pitiful fools on this web site playing along with it.

There is enough stupidity here for BOTH forums. Plenty to go around, and Lord knows it does.

Anyone who feels that because Obama is criticized more heavily for the dumbest damn things in the world in GD that this somehow makes GD a "haven for thinking people" is as deluded and confused as the folks in GD-P who watch cable news 24 hours a day and rave 24 hours a day about how sucky and "anti-Obama" the coverage is. If it upsets you, if you think it's that bad, then STOP WATCHING IT.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

104. Thank you nt

[Tarheel_Dem]

42. Another one who can dish it out heapingly, but can't take it. Surprise, surprise. NOT!

[spoony]

49. Dish what out?

I doubt you even know me here. Show me what I've dished out, and also where I said I can't "take it." See that's another mistake people make here. Dissent doesn't equal hatred, being vocal doesn't equal being a whiner, and disagreeing with a tactic doesn't mean you can't deal with it.

[BeyondGeography]

10. Props to BooMan...That's how the real terrorists win

:patriot:

[Oregone]

16. Yeah, um, we got to fight em over there so they, uhh...

"That's how the real terrorists win" --- that being dissent.



Yes, thats an oldie but a goodie that flew well past 2001. Thanks for dusting it off.

[BeyondGeography]

21. Wasting energy amongst ourselves over Aravosis and Hamsher-inspired bullshit

Yeah, that's the ticket. :thumbsup:

[Oregone]

24. Hey, don't yell at me. A terrorist just won a round of Kanasta

Its a shame we should ever have a discussion about policy

[Cha]

26. Yeah, I was on hamsher's email list

until I wrote back that I didn't appreciate her disingenuousness..from August 18, 2009

"No, Jane, it didn't become clear to me at all that President Obama wants to drop Public Option.

I take the President at his word. I do believe in rewarding good behavior..I also believe in not supporting bad behavior.

There are many people out here who support the President by not passing disingenuous bad information."

Cha *****
New York

Lying Scare tactics like their's are just as bad as the wankers at the other end of the spectrum.

[Engineer4Obama]

34. What I don't get about her is that she has her own site fire dog lake

but she feels that she needs to expand that and her paid bloggers have pretty much taken over a good portion of DailyKOS. It just feels really slimy to me.

[Cha]

36. It is slimey..that's the way I feel about

their tactics.

Are they getting called on in at dk by other posters?..other than booman?:)

[Engineer4Obama]

37. Here and there

But when It broke there was a shit storm over it because the posters had been not entirely forthcoming about it. The opt-out option was another rift between the community there and the FDL crew. I think resentment is growing for them. I think people are tired of being told to rage on command.

[Cha]

38. Yay.

[Clio the Leo]

19. love it. NT

[Cha]

20. I know..it's all about Respect and if

people aren't showing it why should they expect it in return?

This is from a blogger on dk regarding criticizing PO.

"I agree. It is one reason that even when I criticized, it is in the frame of holding him to his own high expectations."

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/10/13/792711/-The-Peace-PrizeEugene-Robinson-nails-it

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8699733

[HopeOverFear]

23. thanks, Boo. Some of these people need to be told to STFU.

I'm sick of their damn whining.

[depakid]

54. That reminds me VERY much of the sort of thing I heard during the Clinton administration

starting in 1994....

You know, the year that a lot of progressives did just that- and also stayed home come November of that year.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

105. It is reminding me a lot of the

blind Bush loyalists during Katrina and when the war was going south who wouldn't say anything bad about Bush and maligned anyone on their side who dared questioned what Bush was doing. It is too bad that many of us were attack dogs for 8 years and when our guy got in we became the guard dogs. So who better to unleash the hounds of hell on than Firedoglake and Daily Kos.

[butterfly77]

115. Wrong..

you got to know when to hold em,and know when to fold em...But,we have been hearing this complaining shit since day one even before...

[spiritual_gunfighter]

116. Usually it is

the guard dogs that think any kind of dissent or even questioning what the administration is doing or not doing is "complaining shit". I think it is telling that some of us are becoming the Bush syncophants that we all hated for 8 years.

[CakeGrrl]

25. Excellent, and as was said, spot-on.

I mean, if someone thinks this guy is a corporate suck-ass sellout, then fine, but don't pretend it's being said out of a sincere wish that he simply do better, or that if he'd only do as they demand then they could respect him. Not f'in likely with the language I've seen used.

Once some of these things DO come to pass, I expect there'll be quite a bit of "not enough", "should've been done a lot sooner", or just crickets.

[beachmom]

28. Yeah, as soon as I figured out that the remark was more

about the netroots, in general, and not the gay marchers, I thought the whole thing was an overreaction.

And I agree with Booman that there are people who will never say anything nice, and therefore were never allies to the President. But I also agree that an ongoing robust debate is good for the Party.

[Engineer4Obama]

32. K&R

[ruggerson]

35. Primary Rehash

Obama primary supporters good.

Everyone else bad.

[Cha]

39. No, but it's not surprising you

got that out of it.

[ruggerson]

40. I got that out of it because that's exactly what it is

[Cha]

123. No it isn't..it's about

framing in a respectful way.

Nothing to do with the primaries..we have so moved on as has Hillary.

[ruggerson]

133. What about this is unclear?

From the OP:

"If you supported Obama during the primaries, you know who you are and this does not necessarily apply to you. For the rest of you, you spent the primaries either shilling for Clinton and telling us our guy was all talk and no show, or you spent them bitching that David Plouffe wouldn't respond to and obey your emailed wisdom."


Primary rehash.

[dsc]

170. gee what a shock

you get confronted by the exact quote and silence.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

106. It is very telling

that Booman felt the need to bring up the Primary wars, the above poster wasn't the one that brought it up it was the OP's inane circular firing squad rant.

[Tarheel_Dem]

43. Booman is right on point. (nt)

[uponit7771]

44. HOT DAMN!!!!!!

[Number23]

47. Good Lord, somebody should have said this MONTHS ago.

[Cha]

48. And, they can say it again ..ad infinitum

because it will never stop.

[depakid]

51. Wow- this guy reminds me of why I chose not to get on the bandwagon

He's as vacuous a jerk as those he's ostensibly complaining about.

[Myrina]

63. +10

:)

[Toasterlad]

78. +20

[spiritual_gunfighter]

109. +30

What a great idea Booman! Let's unleash the hounds of hell on the progressive blogosphere because they dropped their Obama pom pom's. How dare they hold our President to account. Weren't we all supposed to march in lockstep once we got our guy in the White House?

[FrenchieCat]

52. I understand how Booman feels....

Sometimes, one can't take it anymore....

I'm not asking much for this President....just a little teeny itty bit of respect.

Boo reminded me of this thread I did a while back....
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=258x8066

[Cha]

53. And, this was way back

in the beginning of September..I've learned so much about the so called "left" since then.

They lie to get what they want and it ain't pretty nor is "Respect" ever entered into it..why would it be when you lie to give your followers red meat?

[SeattleGirl]

56. "Can I Vent?" You sure as hell can!

I can identify with this so much. I'm sick of some of the crap I read from the left. Is Obama perfect? Hell no. But there are some on the left who seem to expect him to be perfect. Does he deserve criticism? Yep, he does. But screaming at the top of ones lungs 24/7, bitching constantly, and expecting that Obama was elected to office just to take care of your personal issue drives me crazy.

Everybody has things they want to see happen. Everybody has an issue that for them is number one. Everybody. And there ARE a lot of issues to deal with. And I DO think that people need to make their voices heard. They DO need to keep calling for the changes they want. But for those who throw tantrums when their issue doesn't get taken care of RIGHT NOW, I don't have much patience for you.

Obama is NOT a miracle worker, and the fact that he isn't doesn't mean he doesn't give a shit about your issue. It means that some changes, many changes in fact, take time. Obama is not the end all and be all; he doesn't run this ship by himself. If all you can do is bitch, you aren't helping. It's highly unlikely that Obama is going to come to you, perched upon high on your throne, and hand you what you want on a silver platter. If you want him to get his hands dirty, guess what? You have to get your hands dirty too.

(And FYI, like BooMan, my remarks are directed at the people guilty of what I'm talking about. They are not directed at everybody who has a cause or an issue that is of utmost importance to them. Many people ARE out there getting their hands dirty, fighting like mad for what's important to them. To you, I say, carry on!)

[babylonsister]

60. Good post, SG. Even if the prez did approach some people

with their 'wants' resolved on a silver platter, they'd still complain it's not enough.

The chronic complainers get me down, coupled with the constant lack of respect.

I think Mr. BooMan captured that perfectly.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

113. Booman is being a bit Britney in his rant

and so are the people piling on the left blogosphere.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82py_wk5vE4

[SeattleGirl]

124. I don't share your opinion.

Frankly, I think there are some people on the left (and I am not accusing you, just FYI) who will get pissed at anybody who is NOT pissed off all the time at Obama.

They are the ones doing the Brittany. Or rather, a reverse Brittany: "Don't leave Obama alone!!! Whaaaaaaaaa!!!"

Just sayin'.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

132. The clip isnt of Chris Crocker

it is of a Britney Spears interview that is featured in Fahrenheit 911 where she says "I think we just all need to trust our president".

[SeattleGirl]

148. I've seen Fahrenheit 9/11 several times, so I'm aware of that clip.

I don't know who Chris Crocker is, and I'm not sure why you mentioned him/her.

No context for me.

[liquid diamond]

57. K & R

You know who you are.

[Starry Messenger]

58. Who is BooMan? n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

61. A very important question.

One, he is a person that calls campaigning for a Democrat 'shilling. Two, he is a person who does so under a fake name. Third, he is a person who is whining about people who are more famous than he is, for doing the same thing. And that is the key. Booman is a person who shows no evidence that he has ever gained what he sought in life, that he knows how to win anything. The personalized attacks in this screed do not sound like a person who is getting what he seeks using the methods he promotes. He sounds frustrated and upset. Those who know how to get what they are seeking, well, they do not have to worry about other people's opinions, as they are expected, predicted, and are in fact part of our own game plan.
"To announce that there should be no criticism of the President, or that we should stand by the President right or wrong is not only servile and unpatriotic, it is morally treasonable to the American public." TR, American President. Teddy did not agree with 'Booman'. Teddy knew how to get what he wanted.

[Myrina]

64. Well said!

We were all about 'questioning the President' when his last name was Bush and his incompetence and criminality was obvious; why should we all suddenly have to shut up and march in line just because the Prez was elected from within 'our' party? If anything, we should hold him even more accountable because he (is supposed to) represent us & our point of view more directly than Dimson ever pretended to.

[Starry Messenger]

70. Thank you Bluenorthwest.

These last few sentences in the OP jumped out at me:

And, where the hell do you get off taking it personally? Aren't you the ones accusing them of being whores to the insurance industry and Wall Street and the military-industrial complex? Do you think they are going to find that criticism generous and well-intended?

Criticism is fine. But the sense of entitlement involved here is staggering. Ooh, some big, bad White House adviser defended the administration against one more heated attack. My feelings are hurt. Guess what? You should get over it.

I think the White House is willing to listen to criticism from their allies. From you? Not so much.

I've never seen a more impassioned defense of the status quo at the expense of the people who suffer from their decisions. Politicians will have their feelings hurt, but those of the hoi polloi don't matter? Is that what I'm seeing?

[Toasterlad]

79. +3

People who yelled and screamed at Bush but roll over and spread their legs for Obama make me fucking puke.

[change_notfinetuning]

72. Don't know who the BooHooMan is, but HE takes things too personally.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

111. Booman is Britney Spears

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82py_wk5vE4

[Kind of Blue]

59. K&R. I don't know who BooMan is but I love the way he thinks!

Thank you, Babylonsister

[rvablue]

62. I 100% agree with all of this, with the tiny exception of one phrase:

"shilling for Clinton."

I didn't "shill" for Clinton in the primaries, I supported her. Don't like to be condescended to for it, frankly.

Otherwise, this rant is spot on. I'm still so happy Obama was elected and I said at the outset (the day after the election), that he was going to get a full year in office before I started judging in detail where things are headed.

And if I hear one more time that President Obama hasn't come out strongly in favor of a public option, I think I'll scream. May I direct all of the naysayers and handwringers to his address to the joint session. He layed it out in no uncertain terms that he wants the PO.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

65. can we contribute to the debate if we supported Obama from day 1 but think he's off the mark now?

...or should we just keep our yaps shut and not call it like we see it?

Crikey, man, it's fucking democracy, and I'm not kneeling down before him just because I voted for him. Yes, on many issues he's the damn man--and that's certainly worth remembering--and he's far far better than any other viable option for the office from 08. But he's going to have to take some friggin' commentary. Personally, I couldn't care less if the WH comments on that commentary, but IT IS NO CITIZEN'S DUTY EVER TO BE AN ALLY OF A PRESIDENT. EVER. Support him when in your point of view he is right, don't when he isn't. If he was Queen, emperor, God, or if we were freeper Bush-worshippers--well, then maybe we'd have to approach this differently. In my opinion, there's a lot of justifying the things Obama does simply because he's a Democrat or just because he's Obama. And, in my opinion, that sort of following renders democracy obsolete.

[ampad]

66. Thanks for posting

Right on point! Excellent

[madmom]

67. Ok, I generally don't speak out on these "vents" on Obama from either side, but

here is my take on it. I started out an Edwards supporter (yeah, I know) then was a Clinton supporter. I jumped on the Obama bandwagon late in the primary (SO was always there,dog I hate it when he's right) I worked for Obama's election, I canvased, I phone banked, I did everything I could. Even protested at a mccain rally. Now, is Obama doing everything I want so far, ummm well no. Am I out there calling him dis-respectful names (empty suit, corporate-sell-out etc.) no. What I AM doing though is calling my congressmen, writing LTTE, talking with people who aren't "there" yet.It does no good to undermine your own side with negativity it also does no good to see everything through rose colored glasses. Obama said make him do it, but since when does whining and complaining ever get you what you want? It just puts people more on the defensive. Just keep reminding and nudging in the right direction and I suspect we WILL get there, but it takes time, after all "Rome wasn't built in a day."


are we there yet?..are we there yet?...are we there yet?...huh, huh, are we there yet?

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ampad]

76. I wish I could rec this post

Spot on! They also seem to think it comes from threats as well.

[ruggerson]

130. You wish you couldl recommend a post that so denigrated gays and lesbians that the mods deleted it?

Is that what you wish?

[Toasterlad]

77. "The guy is a sane, intelligent hetrosexual man with a happy family"

Which, in your mind, means he doesn't have to do shit for gay people...as you've illustrated several times over the past few days.

[ruggerson]

131. This thread is populated

with people who agree with that poster.

[Toasterlad]

140. It Sure the Hell Is

I smell more than a whiff of "I got mine".

[madmom]

69. FYI..showing respect does NOT mean kneeling down to or kowtowing to. That is all.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

108. But it does mean not calling Obama "Bush's Third Term", as some DUers have.

I think this "vent" is getting at those people, and perhaps a few more.

[change_notfinetuning]

71. I was an early Obama supporter, but I've never seen anyone win at chess by

taking only pawns.

I congratulate President Obama on winning the Nobel Peace Prize and I still have a lot of hope on all fronts. Unfortunately, his selection of advisers and cabinet members was abysmal. The ideas are stale and the decisions are safe to a fault. Fine tuning at best; business as usual in many cases.

The problem isn't Obama. The problem is that we don't have more Obamas. But that, at least in part, is his own fault.

[Toasterlad]

75. The President Works for ME. I Don't Work For Him.

How fucking arrogant to say that the President of the United States doesn't owe me respect. The President of the United States damn well owes me respect, as he owes respect to every other American. And the White House better be damn willing to listen to criticism from EVERYONE, not just their ass-kissing "allies".

How fucking arrogant to make allowances for a "White House Advisor" (a cowardly, unnamed White House advisor, at that) denigrating an entire group of people because they have some justifiably harsh words regarding the criminal inactivity of this administration, which PROMISED things they have yet to start any meaningful progress toward.

This essay could easily have been written for the Bush administration. The arrogance and contempt for regular Americans is palpable. I'd like to believe it's just the author's own warped view of this administration that prompts this vile screed. Unfortunately, "White House Advisors" from THIS administration ARE denigrating an entire group of people, and the progress that was promised HASN'T been attempted.

People are not wrong for criticizing their government. That's how a fucking democracy WORKS. And people don't owe their allegiance to their government.

The President works for ME. I don't work for him.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

80. hell FUCKING yes. thanks, Toasterlad.

[treestar]

93. He works for the USA. Not YOU.

[Toasterlad]

95. Guess Who Lives In the USA?

Learn to think.

[spoony]

137. The "USA" like a corporation, is not a sentient thing.

It has no rights. It is the people who are to be served, not a concept.

[mkultra]

147. unless your not his constituent.

Then technically, he doesn't. Freepers get this wrong all the time. elected officials work for the people who voted for them.
They may say that they work for the people, but they do the bidding of those who support their platform.

[Toasterlad]

149. By Definition, All Americans Are the President's Constituents

So, yes, technically, the fucking president works for me, whether I voted for him or not. For the record, I, like the vast majority of gay people, DID vote for him. The vast majority of gay people who do a disproportionate share of work for the Democratic party, and without whom this president would not have been elected. And yet, he has seen fit to ignore the promises he made to us since inauguration day, the promises that are supposed to be part of his platform. He has neglected to do morally correct things that ANY president should do, whether or not gay people voted for him. Your fucked-up view of the way elected office should work to the contrary, Obama is obligated to work for gay people.

It doesn't matter to Obama whether you voted for him or not. It only matters if you're straight or gay.

[mkultra]

155. and by definition, a consituent is someone who authorizes another to represent him.

a constituent is someone who elects another to represent him or her. As is common knowledge and tradition in American polotics, politicians due the bidding of those who elect him. We take turns trying to get the most votes so that our views can be represented. No, Obama is not expected to serve and forward your views if you are his opponent. You dont get to lose the election and then try to hijack the elected official. You have to wait your turn again.

[Name removed]

158. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mkultra]

160. yeah, this is where this argument loses traction

Obama has done what he said he would do and is working all others within expectations.

Don't get me wrong, i believe that equality is important and that separate is never equal and that a right delayed is a right denied.
I just don't think its the number one issue that needs focus at this moment. No one is dying because of marriage and children aren't starving because of marriage.


Its really just about the scale. punch yourself in the throat. I might do us all some good.

[Name removed]

161. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mkultra]

163. I know that lashing out at everyone who doesnt agree with you is your bag

But it simply shows how stupid you are. Ill continue supporting my gay friends who don't attack me over presidential policy. You, however, i don't support.

[Toasterlad]

164. You Have No Gay Friends

No one who believes that gay equality is so insignificant an issue has gay friends. You have no gay friends, and thank god or whatever for that. No one deserves your kind of "friendship", least of all a gay person.

Next you'll be claiming that "some of my best friends are black."

[mkultra]

166. well, as a metter of fact

I have a few gay friends and many black friends. One of my good friends that i grew up with is gay and me and him have talked about it. He is pissed but knows better than to lash out at those who actually support him. He is passionate about his rights and knows that im not as outraged as he is. He may just be considerably smarter than you.

[Flying Dream Blues]

151. Thanks for playing. nt

[mkultra]

156. if you didnt elect Obama, he is not going to advance your views

Its pretty simple and everyone should know that.

[PassingFair]

81. That made no sense whatsoever.

Who is he talking to?

The "PROGRESSIVE BLOGOSHPERE"?

Progressives BACKED Obama, Edwards and Kucinich.

As opposed to those who backed
a LEADER of the DLC.

DLC = ANTI-PROGRESSIVE



Just what point is this "Booman" supposed to be making?

:crazy:

[Jakes Progress]

128. Was it in "Devil and Daniel Webster"

that there was a character who spent all his time pointing out the sins of others because he thought that every time he identified a sin in someone else it made him more special to God. Each sin he found was was an excuse for his own.

It seems the OP wants to be one of the "special" people for Obama.

I find this kind of STFU post much more divisive than one that says the administration is not progressive enough. It does go back to the primaries where so many wanted to oust the non-believers. Obama's message back then was that we needed every Democrat we could get. That is even more the case in the coming two elections. But posts like these just alienate those that will be needed in two years. They want a special, exclusive club that only they can join. It won't get them anywhere with the next election, but they care less about that than their sense that they should be held up for specialness because of their blind faith.

[Cheney Killed Bambi]

82. Great post

If there were a best blog posts of 2009 competition, I would vote for that one.

[debbierlus]

84. This is sad. This rant isn't accurate. Love the part of the 'robust public option'

The one that covers 5% of the population.

(According to Obama....)

He just sent another 13,000 troops to the occupation in Afghanistan....

He is a man of peace.

Whatever guys. Keep holding onto to your projected image instead of the reality.

(Btw, Obama's appointed Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner managed to bail out Goldmansachs, his former employer, and they are now rolling in 23 billion dollars of bonuses at the company, they doubled them from last year!)

But, that isn't Obama's fault...he only appointed the criminal. And, now he is trying to reappoint Bernacke even though he won't tell us where he put 2 TRILLION DOLLLARS)

Yeah Obama. Good work.

[Duncan]

85. I have a "sense of entitlement"

I am not a cheerleader or a critic, and I tend to agree with comments from both, but I feel I am entitled to discussion, not dismissal.

[JDPriestly]

86. Obama never was my first choice. I have had to fight all my life, and

I wanted a fighter. I don't want a physical fight. I want a moral fight. Obama does not wage the moral fight. That is what frustrates me about him. I don't think he sees things in moral terms. He only sees them in political terms -- in terms of everybody getting along.

We did not get the 40 hour week or the minimum wage by following people like Obama. That's all I have to say.

[Kermitt Gribble]

87. Author doesn't have very solid arguments

"He tries to enact health care reform with a robust public option"

"He ends torture"

When did these things happen?? Torture has been outsourced, and I've never read or heard any specific talk from the admin about a 'robust' public option. It's been stated over and over that a public option is not a key piece to reform.



"bails out the cratering financial services industry and prevents a second Great Depression"

Which is it? I've seen people here argue incessantly that Bush is responsible for the bailouts. Whomever is responsible, I wouldn't view the bailouts as a positive thing. And to say a depression has been prevented is a bit premature.

'B' for effort, 'F' for factual content.

[kestrel91316]

88. +10

[cliffordu]

89. Yep - K&R

[Prism]

90. So nice to see authoritarianism alive and well

If this rant came from a Republican in regards to Bush, people here would be falling all over themselves proclaiming the chilling effect these attitudes have on speech, how dissent is the highest form of patriotism, that it is our duty as citizens to hold our government accountable.

Instead, the authoritarians cheer it, demand the citizens respect their government, and gleefully tell everyone to STFU.

Bizarro world.

But that's where we are now. You know what they say about power. I just didn't think it would take so short a time to manifest this kind of moral and civic corruption.

[Starry Messenger]

96. That's why I kept my sig pic after the election.

I thought I was going to be able to change it. :crazy:

[tomp]

97. so fucking wrongheaded it disgusts me that anyone would support it.

but, then again, no surprise at all.

does booman think this is going to get anyone anywhere? it's just another shot across the bow of anyone not in lockstep with obama and the obamphiles.

don't come looking for my vote in 2012, it won't be there.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

110. So why are you here? (nt)

[Kermitt Gribble]

121. tomp is here for the same reason the rest of us are here.

Because we identify with the ideals of the Democratic party. So, we are supposed to leave the board if we don't agree 100% with the direction the party is heading?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

139. That sounds like 100% disagreement.

In which case, yes, you should leave.

[Kermitt Gribble]

141. Glad you don't get to make the rules here.

Maybe you should start NicholasDWolfwoodUnderground.com - a site for the 23 percenters on the Dem side. And I don't see anything in tomp's post that suggests 100% disagreement.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

142. I wouldn't mind joining a site that did find it acceptable to call Obama "Bush's Third Term"

I truly would. And if that makes me part of the "23%" I'm happy to join them.

[tomp]

157. not to support obama or booman. nt

[CakeGrrl]

118. Hmm. "Obamaphiles". Don't let the door hit ya! n/t

[Cha]

122. Okay..never did expect it..not with the disrespect

thrown around this board. That's a given.

[mkultra]

146. are you voting for McCain this time too?

[MNDemNY]

101. Are you saying Obama does not want my vote in 2012??

Would he rather we just "shut up" AND stay home in 2012?

[Toasterlad]

102. Never Fear, They'll Be Groveling For Your Vote In 2012.

It will be amazing to see how quickly we go from completely disposable to part of the team once election time rolls around again. Obamabots are exactly like Bushbots: they have absolutely no shame.

[Lilith Velkor]

107. No, they won't.

I think you may be forgetting the other way they are exactly like Bushbots: they are sore winners. I expect the browbeating and insults to only escalate as the election nears. It worked in 2008, didn't it? (And please, pay no attention to the economic collapse behind the curtain.)

[Toasterlad]

126. Hmm. You're Probably Right.

They won't ask for our vote, they'll demand it. And if we say we won't give it them, they'll ask us why we hate America.

[mkultra]

145. yeash, because your threats to vote for McCain really scared us last time

Like i said then, don't let the door hit you on the way out.

[Toasterlad]

150. Never Threatened Once To Vote For McCain, So You Should Stop Lying.

However, if I don't have full equality by the time Obama's first term is over, he's definitely not getting my vote for a second. And I won't be alone.

Straighty better wake up. No more counting on the gays to do your grunt-work, make your phone-calls, stump door-to-door, reach into their wallets, and get nothing back but wait-wait-wait. Think you can get Obama elected again without us?

We'll see.

[mkultra]

162. "I would vote for him 100 times before I'd vote for Clinton or Obama."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=2793602#2794516

[Toasterlad]

165. I Notice You Left Off the Part Where I Said "I can't in good conscience vote for McCain"

But then, you've already proved you've got no problems lying to make your case. Like when you pretended to have gay friends.

As I said, I never threatened to vote for McCain. But I dearly wish I HAD stuck to my guns and written in Kucinich like I intended, instead of letting my hatred of Palin convince me to actually vote for Obama. Rest assured, I'll never make that mistake again.

[mkultra]

167. ahh cognitive dissonance is fun

So even though you would vote for McCain "100 times before you would vote for Obama" you still claim that you actually voted for Obama instead of McCain? Did you actually vote for McCain 100 times so that you could cast a ballot for Obama?

[dsc]

171. you out and out lied about what that poster said

there is no other word for it. Shame on you.

[mkultra]

172. his post speaks for itself

he said he would vote for McCain instead of Obama and now hes claiming that he voted for Obama instead but THIS time his threats are real.

Seems pretty clear to me.

[dsc]

174. No he didn't

He said he would vote for Kucinich instead of Hillary or Obama in both the primary and general election. You are just lying through your teeth.

[mkultra]

175. i quoted him directly out of his own post verbatim.

he said he would vote for McCain 100 times before he voted for Obama. Its in black in white by his own hand.
Here is the larger selection for contextual clarity.

"Spare me your nonsense. I can't in good conscience vote for McCain, but I would vote for him 100 times before I'd vote for Clinton or Obama. At least the man has an OUNCE of conviction, despite his asinine courting of the religious right."

[butterfly77]

114. Plus the fact that..

many act as know that a lot of the problem is the Blue dogs who need to be targeted constantly...

[Cowpunk]

117. Yes, how DARE you demand that Obama keep his promises.

Does this man not realize he's speaking to the people who got Barack Obama elected? The vast majority of progressives fell in behind Obama during and after the primaries.

And since when are healthcare reform, the wars, Wall Street corruption, and defense of the U.S. Constitution "pet issues"?

[butterfly77]

125. Do you seriously think that..

the pres would just walk into the whitehouse and would be able to take care of all of this mess within in the last 10 months, you don't but you will pretend to. He is fighing Dems as well as CONS...

[Cowpunk]

136. You pick up this strawman stuff quick NT

[quiet.american]

119. The BooMan Speaketh a Righteous Rant. Thumbs up. nt

[JuniperLea]

120. This former Hillary gal agrees...

I remember being called a Hillbot and an Obamatron in response to the same post during the primaries. Nothing much has changed.

The guy's been at the helm a scant 10 months, and all the detractors tap their feet impatiently... complaining... whining... nit picking.

It all only serves to make them look ridiculous.

I reserve the right to bitch about him a year from now... but any sooner is really stupid, imho. No, fucking stupid. Yeah, that's better.

[daedalus_dude]

127. Huge strawman. nt

[Piewhacket]

129. Strawman... ooooo... Now this... if Obama & the dems don't deliver on health care...

next election there won't BE an Obama administration.

We want:
1) Gitmo closed NOW!
2) Afganistan and Iraq wars brought to a close FAST.
3) Health Insurance for all. (cut the BS and Nationalize the Health Insurance Industry, idiots)
4) Torturers and accomplices in PRISON
5) Repeal (not revise) Patriot Act.
6) Repeal telecom Immunity.
7) Unravel Defense of Marriage stupidity.
8) Dump "don't ask, don't tell"

thats for starters, Mr. President (and your dysfunctional staff) so get (bleep) busy or resign
and get out of the (bleeping) way.

[CakeGrrl]

134. Spoken like someone who's been sitting in on

these WH meetings and has caught them with their collective thumbs up their asses this whole time on each and every one of those issues.

Oh, wait...

[mkultra]

144. good luck. We didnt need you for this one and we dont next time either

PUMA's made the same threats and we called their bluff.

[Piewhacket]

153. I made no threat. Perhaps "we", that is, imperious "you", needs glasses?

[Cha]

176. President Obama is busy and you're

the way.

[rucky]

135. BooMan versus StrawMan

mono a nolo

[mkultra]

143. yup. At some point, you must decide that you don't need friends who act like enemies

That the way you act about the administration runs on a scale from very happy all the way up to freeper.

After a while of hearing you claim that you voted and supported and worked for him but somehow, you are now angry because he is doing EXACTLY what he campaigned on, we start to think your all somewhat full of shit.

[HopeOverFear]

152. ++++++1

[Piewhacket]

154. er... "the way you act"??? who are you two talking to? the air?

[Name removed]

159. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Lyric]

168. Okay, so...we should stay home in 2012 because we're not welcome anymore?

So to hell with party unity? The "progressive blogosphere" should just STFU and GTFA?

Gee, who are the PUMAs now?

:shrug:

[Hekate]

169. Impressive rant with many good points. Pass the butter, please

:popcorn:

[Dawgs]

173. Beautiful!!

It's not going to stop the crybabies, but it still needed to be said.