insipid

Last active
2 years, 6 months ago
  • What the fuck does Obama have to do with it? There’s no President that would of allowed the indiscriminate dumping of documents by a soldier. FDR? The guy you guys are all clamoring for Obama to be more like? Would certainly of executed Mr. Manning if he did that during WWII. LBJ? JFK? Both of them were hard core hawks that would of pulled the switch.

    The notion that there’s a President anytime anywhere in our history that would let this go is a delusion.

  • Military justice has NEVER been reasonable or proportional. I was just a National Guardsman and i sure as hell knew that. Bradley should of known that.

    You can’t just dump 100s of thousands of documents and expect to get away with it. I’m sorry, but i see nothing unfair or unreasonable about Mr. Mannings treatment. The trial was fair, the sentence was fair.

  • Sorry, i thought i was replying to Mattcarmody above. Nothing anti-semetic about your post eternal.

  • Happy to see that it’s not JUST racism at FDL. Anti-semitism is doing pretty well too.

    I’m not really sure what the bitch is. The man indiscriminately released thousands and thousands of pages of documents. Was some of it “whistleblowing?”. Sure. But a lot of it was leaking. FDL, predictably, is selecting the good stuff he revealed but leaving out the bad stuff.

    Either way, he’s a soldier in the army. He didn’t try to go through the chain of command, he didn’t bother looking at what he was sending out. He KNEW he was breaking the law. He beat the most serious offense. No matter what, even with the charges he admitted to he was going to get some serious time. Did you think they were going to throw him a parade?

  • insipid commented on the blog post Obama, The Not-So-Great Debate, Austerity and the Election

    2012-08-31 18:52:04View | Delete

    Well, that’s the Bill O’Reilly response when people point out his racism, either shout him down, shut him up or ignore him. Stop the double standard and i’ll stop pointing it out.

  • insipid commented on the blog post The Lost Narrative of the Stimulus

    2012-08-31 15:10:28View | Delete

    A long time ago I got into an argument with some people about Abraham Lincoln. They insisted that Abraham Lincoln was a slaveholder and that they read it in some book. I told them at the time that “If I read a book that said something that patently absurd and ignorant I’d stop reading and throw it across the room.” While I wouldn’t throw my computer across the room, I’d certainly stop reading David Dayen were it not for the fact that he still has influence.

    You say you didn’t “crack” the book. Very believable after reading this:

    This is a law that deliberately tried to hide its main tangible benefit, based on some questionable behavioral science, by taking a few dollars less out of weekly paychecks through lowering withholding instead of handing people $500.

    The payroll tax holiday had nothing to do with the stimulus. That came with the budget negotiation deal almost two years later. Not that I should expect you to know that, you were too busy with your “OBAMA CAVES!” narrative to actually learn what was in the deal. I understand.
    The fact that you don’t know this very basic thing is illustrative of the problem. There are too many in the media that feel that they can speak intelligently about politics without knowing policy. In fact they talk about policy as little as possible and favor speaking almost entirely about the politics. Thus the Obama administration has a dual disadvantage 1. They have to inform people about what is in the legislation and 2. They have to counter the IDENTICAL “Obama is weak and ineffectual” meme coming from both the left and the right.

    That is a problem that Roosevelt did not have to deal with. Yes, there was politics but because there were fewer media outlets those that wrote for newspapers at least had to know what they were talking about. If someone made a whopper of a mistake like the one David made in his opening paragraph, he’d be fired and there’d be a big correction the next day.
    Thus back then, the politics sprang from the policy. Today the PERCEPTION of the policy stems from the politics of the author. Both the left and the right ignore the policy and instead pursue the Democrats suck! meme. And the Obama administration has to fight both the meme and the policy ignorance. Since very few our even interested in reporting the policy. As David demonstrated, very few even know the policy.

    If the supposed progressives started first by learning the policy and based their analysis on that I have no doubt that the politics would take care of itself.

    But instead we have a major blogger for one of the most influential blogs revealing just stunning ignorance about not one, but two pieces of legislation. I don’t mind the fact that you’re stupid, David. It’s that you’re damaging and stupid. It’s that you’re dangerous and stupid. That you feel that you can- from a position of ignorance -lecture this President and still be taken seriously.

  • insipid commented on the blog post Obama, The Not-So-Great Debate, Austerity and the Election

    2012-08-31 10:46:13View | Delete

    Yes, that’s true. Social Security is solvent if we fund it. But in order to fund it we need to talk to Republicans. I’m sorry, we can’t just wish them into the cornfield, we can only vote them there. If you want to vote them away, i’m with you. But while they’re there pretending they don’t exist or getting mad at Obama for not “standing up” to them is the strategy of wishful thinking, not saving Solcial Security.

    Also, SS is not like the military. SS takes up far to much of our budget to fix at a moments notice. We don’t have the luxury of waiting till 2033 in order to fund the shortfall. Again, read the trustee report if you don’t believe me.

  • insipid commented on the blog post Obama, The Not-So-Great Debate, Austerity and the Election

    2012-08-31 10:39:34View | Delete

    Denials of racism does not mean anything. Every racist denies they are a racist. The way you’re able to tell is by the way they act, not what they say. While your racism is not as obvious as a bone through the nose nor as crude as a field of watermelons you are still racist in that they have one standard for white men and another for a black man (my guess is that the white presidents- who also dropped a considerable number of bombs- were never referred to as murderous curs).

    The fact is that there is not a single President in history that has ever measured up to the standards of the Professional Left which is 1. Get sweeping legislation done 2. Never make deals to get the legislation done 3. Never compromise an inch.

    FDR does not live up to that standard. He doesn’t even come close. FDR bailed out banks. And i don’t recall any mass arrest of “banksters” from my reading of history. FDR hired the head of General Motors to be his Secretary of Treasury, and he hired a robber baron to be the first head of the S.E.C. . Imagine what the PL of today would say to that?

    FDR “caved” to the blue dogs of his day when he excluded the vast majority of black people from Social Security eligibility. He also capitulated to the America Firsters when he denied Jewish refuges. Do I need to even mention the internment of Japanese Americans? Remember that FDR did all this “caving” while having majorities in both Houses that Obama could only imagine. The day that Obama sees 75 Senate Democrats will be the day when the Professional Left’s woeful comparisons have validity (this was at a time when there were only 96 Senators since Hawaii and Alaska weren’t States yet).

    While we all love to hear stories of the New American Camelot, the reality is that both JFK and RFK came to power largely by sucking up to Joseph McCarthy. JFK’s Secretary of the Treasury was a hold-over from Eisenhower’s administration. JFK’s chief economic accomplishment was in cutting capitol gains tax for the wealthy. JFK “caved” to Hoover’s desire to bug Martin Luther King and referred to CORE as “Pains in the asses.” Aside from a really nice speech, JFK wasn’t any better in terms of Civil Rights than Eisenhower.

    And with his 64 seat Senate majority and similar majority in the house what major legislative accomplishments did Kennedy accomplish for the 99% in his too short two years in office? The Peace Corp? He got that done through executive order. The fact is that JFK, unlike Barack Obama, was lousy at getting his agenda through Congress.

    Barack Obama has done more than any other President with similar majorities has done. That is a fact that I DEFY any member of the professional left to disprove. If Barack Obama is such a sub-par President then this should be an easy way to shut me up. If any President could do it, why didn’t they? I’ll even give a helpful link: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0774721.html.

    Clinton had the same majorities and an easier opposition to start and failed to get much done in the way of progressive legislation. Carter had 61 Dems in the Senate just as large a majority in the house his ENTIRE term to work with and did not do much with it.

    LBJ (68 Dems) caved to the insurance companies of HIS day in making sure that Medicare only applied to those over 65. This is when insurance companies had MUCH less pull then they have now. And then there’s the capitulation to the military industrial complex in Vietnam.

    Every President, Democratic and Republican, compromises to get their agenda passed. There is no President that measures up to the standards imposed on Obama. The fact that they’re holding THIS President to such a double standard is the precise reason why minority authors such as Mellissa Harris Perry, Imani Gandy of Angry Black Lady and Spandan Chakrabarty of the People’s View think that much of the hyper- criticism coming from the left is based largely on racism. The Professional Left cries foul at these allegations but until they explain the obvious double standard, this accusation appears valid.

  • insipid commented on the blog post Obama, The Not-So-Great Debate, Austerity and the Election

    2012-08-31 10:20:25View | Delete

    Holy straw-man Batman!

    The ONE argument that you CLAIM I’m making that I actually am making is that there is little difference between tea-left and tea-right. They’re both characterized by blatant lies and, yes, racism.

    Like the Dim Son, they invent a whole new reality when the existing one does not favor them. In this alternate reality, Obama and the Democratic Party cannot fail, they can only be failed. Jane Hamsher, Glenn Greenwald, and a handful of lefty bloggers are far more influential on public opinion than the President of the United States.

    First off, YOU’RE the ones claiming to be the Democratic “base” declaring that the President ignore or criticize the typing commandos at his peril. My criticism of the “handful of lefty bloggers” which includes Arianna Huffington is the same as my criticism of Fox News- they lie. They lie for the same purpose- to depress Democratic turn-out. Neither Fox News nor the Frustrati are more influential on public opinion than the President. What they are good at is fomenting anger and hatred towards this President among a rabid few. At the same time both are ironically claiming to be the ultimate keepers of the truth. Fox at least mobilizes people to action- FDL just seems to want folks to whine.

    Republican Presidents are invincible evil Supermen, but Democratic Presidents are so, so limited. Gore won Florida in 2000 when it’s time to bash Bush, and Bush won Florida when it’s time to bash Nader. The magic number of Senators floats up and down at will from 51 to 60 to 70. When progressive voters don’t show up to the polls, it’s because they’re “purists” who “didn’t get their pony”, or in your own words “We either forget how bad things were and don’t show up to the polls or we decide they’re not getting better fast enough and don’t show up for the polls.”

    I don’t know about the mythical “obamabot” but I do know that I never claimed Bush won in Florida. I did claim that Bush lost Florida but that the frustrate at the time enabled him to be close enough to steal it. Nuance! Deal with it.
    Bush was evil, but no superman. His record in terms of domestic accomplishments was as pathetic as the rest of his presidency. There was no Social Security reform, no immigration reform, Harriet Miers is not on the SC. He had two major domestic accomplishments: No Child Left Behind, passed with the help of Ted Kennedy and the Tax cuts. He wanted the Bush tax cuts to be permanent. They’re not, the only way Republicans can keep them is by making concessions to Democrats.
    While it is true that President Bush accomplished almost his entire foreign agenda, the same can be said of President Obama. That’s just a function of the way our Constitution was set up. However President Obama, unlike Bush, has a record of domestic accomplishments far exceeding any President since Johnson. In fact, President Obama has been a more transformational President for Democrats than Reagan was for Republicans.

    So far, Obamabots and their predecessors in the Democratic Party have failed to create Homo Democraticus. Yelling at people to blindly support their political party no matter what has not created a revolution in human behavior. Progressive are human just like everyone else, and they want to vote for candidates who make a real difference in their lives.

    I’m not asking you to “blindly” support anyone. What I am requesting is that you stop blindly condemning . President Obama has made a real difference in the lives of millions of people including myself. He’s made a difference to those who are saving 600 a year because of the closing donut hole. He’s made a difference to people like me who can now get insurance because of the high-risk pool. He’s made a difference to those who are no longer being charged a $37.00 overdraft fee on a pack of gum. He’s made a difference to gays who can now serve openly in the military. He’s made a difference to the union people working in a GM plant. He’s made a difference to the parents of a child with a pre-existing condition.

    Many voters did not find that things were “not getting better fast enough” in Obama’s first two years. They found that their situation was getting worse. Income declined by more during the “recovery” than during the recession. In the first two years of the “recovery”, 88% of the gains went to corporate profits, far more than in any recovery in at least the past four decades. There were a truly shocking number of foreclosures and the Administration did little to prevent them. Millions lost their jobs.

    Again, it’s a lie that Republicans got “everything they wanted”. Aside from that, this is EXACTLY what happened under FDR. The economic crises we faced in 2008 with 800,000 jobs being lost a month and the economy contracting at 9% was at least as great, if not greater, than the crises we faced in 1929. The only reason why it was not worse than 1929 was 1. The remnants of the New Deal/great Society and 2. The Herculean efforts of a great President and Congress that prevented that disaster from occurring. Yet despite the fact that the economy for the first two years of Roosevelt was growing at a slower rate than it is now, Democrats THAN went to the polls and gave him a LARGER majority. They didn’t whine- they acted. That’s why they are called the greatest generation.

  • insipid commented on the blog post Obama, The Not-So-Great Debate, Austerity and the Election

    2012-08-30 22:37:38View | Delete

    What’s amazing to me is not how similar President Obama is to the Republicans, but how similar sites like this are to tea party sites. Basically both red state and this site lie in order to arrive at the same conclusion: the black man is coming to steal from you, be afraid. Both are delusional, of couse, so far President Obama has raised the Social Safety net more than any President since Johnson and was willing to shut down the whole damn U.S. government in order to save Planned Parenthood. But, if you are to believe David Dayen the President unwilling to end Planned Parenthood, he is bound and determined to slash end Social Security.

    David, like the right wing, proves his point through selective quotes. Yes, he’s showing the proper Krugmanian umbrage over “belt tightening” analogies but refuses to also aknowledge that he’s stolen that annalogy in order to justify increased investments. But why focus on that when we can all be mad at the “he didn’t build that” or in this case “let’s tighten our belt.”

    The main difference between tea party left and tea party right is that at least tea party right works tpwards a goal that they’re achieving: wiping out the social safety net. And David Dayen, by treating any mention of any deal as this traitorous betrayal of all things good and holy is actually HELPING them with that goal. While it’s true that SS did not contribute to the debt and is doing fine for now, the long term solvency of SS should be addressed.

    This is not me, an Obama “appologist” saying that it’s the Trustee Report

    Lawmakers should not delay addressing the long-run financial challenges facing Social Security and Medicare. If they take action sooner rather than later, more options and more time will be available to phase in changes so that the public has adequate time to prepare. Earlier action will also help elected officials minimize adverse impacts on vulnerable populations, including lower-income workers and people already dependent on program benefits.

    Many right wingers use the trustee report as evidence that the system doesn’t work and that we should end it. That’s NOT what the report says. In fact the changes that need to be made to set SS on a solid footing are slight and there are many ways to address it without causing a lot of pain or “slashing” benefits. That’s true because we have a while before any crises happens, but the longer we wait the more difficult it will be to address. Again, that’s not this resident “appologist” saying that, that’s the SS trustees saying that. Unfortunately, since most of you have no interest in even attempting to give President Obama FDR like Majorities, the only way to address this problem is to deal with Republicans. Sorry, that’s the reality you helped create in 2010.

    By insisting, obstinately that this President who’s so far expanded the Safety net can’t even talk about the safety net you’re insuring actual draconian cuts in the future. By insisting that our side (and yes, President Obama is on your side, even if you don’t know it) can’t even talk about SS or Medicare you’re insuring that ONLY their side is talking about it since the Republicans make no demands as to what their leadership can and cannot say.

    The reason why the Republicans are latching onto the 716 Billion dollar lie is because they want to perpetuate the beliefe that it is impossible to save money and still keep-in fact improve- the system. President Obama’s changes added 8 years to the solvency of medicare AND increased benefits for seniors. And most of you, to your shame, fought tooth and nail to stop him. Now you, like the Republicans are using the same scare tactics doing all you can to insure that it’s only the Republicans that have a say in how SS is dealt with. I only hope you fail as badly as you did last time.

  • insipid commented on the blog post Late Night: Eleventy Dimensional Chess

    2012-06-29 04:59:46View | Delete

    Oh, you have a list! How very Hannityesque of you! Great technique put out a lot of bullshit knowing that it takes a second to spout an incantation but it takes time to refute the talking points. Safe to say it will be a sad day for you but a good day for the country WHEN Bradley Manning gets life in prison. And i’m sure you would of been there railing against FDR picking Captains of industry to head HIS Treasury Department. And you would of been full of shit then too.

    But since you’re so into the google how about this:

    http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/march_april_2012/features/obamas_top_50_accomplishments035755.php/

    And yes, my point is an accurate one. Real liberals SUPPORT Obama even in bad times:

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/01/1001902/-Polls-Liberals-steady-in-Obama-support-everyone-in-DC-looks-worse-to-public

    So my thesis is proven, you speak for whiners, not liberals.

  • insipid commented on the blog post Late Night: Eleventy Dimensional Chess

    2012-06-28 20:43:37View | Delete

    Excuse me, but YOU do not get to speak for what liberals feel. You can speak for the irrelevant firebaggers and the crowd that has been preaching rebellion and electing Republicans since 1968 but you can’t speak for liberals. I am a liberal, MLK was a liberal, Nelson Mandella and Frederick Douglas were liberals. Any real liberal would be thrilled with Obama because he has gotten more progressive legislation done and did more for Civil Rights then any President in the past 50 years and did it with the most antagonistic Congress ever. Real liberals believe in progress over whining, activism over camping, voting over “teaching them a lesson”. Real liberals believe in the possible, accomplish it and then work for more. Barack Obama is a real liberal.

    Here’s a good quote from a “real” liberal:

    “Is not this trickery the hallmark of this Wall Street tool, this President who always stabs in the back while he embraces? How unctuous is his empty solicitude for the ragged, hungry children…with the ruthlessness of a devoted Wall Street lackey spending billions for war and profits and trampling on the faces of the poor.”

    Sounds like Jane could of wrote it, right? Only it was written about FDR by the leader of the Communists at the time, Earl Browder. Now who today is recognized as the father of modern liberalism and who is forgotten? 20 years from now President Obama will be beloved as the man who gave us universal health care and Jane Hamphshire will be a footnote who we’ll introduce to show how crazy some on the left were. Either that or she’ll be pretending she was with him all along and lamenting why President Clooney couldn’t be more like him.

  • insipid commented on the blog post Obama Didn’t Lose Today

    2012-06-28 18:53:04View | Delete

    No, i’m a Democrat. A lifelong Democrat. I’m just saying the way it is. You can’t pretend that Bob Dole represent what is today’s Republican anymore. Saying that it is a Republican Bill because the Republicans of twenty years ago supported it is dihonest.

    The Republican party doesn’t represent the Bob Doles anymore because the Right wing got active. If the Democrats don’t represent the frustrati, it’s because they got lazy.

    Believe it or not, your goals and my goals are probably the same. You just see this as something preventing single payer, i see this as a first step towards that goal.

  • insipid commented on the blog post Obama Didn’t Lose Today

    2012-06-28 18:21:20View | Delete

    Right. Government subsidies to health insurers, provided by taxes, make up the difference. Take from what used to be the middle class and give to the poor. Be still my heart.

    Actually it is paid for by an increase in taxes on those making over 250k and the mandate. So, once again, you’re wrong. Maybe you sould just read the bill instead of what Jon spoon-feeds you about it?

  • insipid commented on the blog post Obama Didn’t Lose Today

    2012-06-28 18:16:59View | Delete

    Why does it matter who proposes the thing? It saves peoples lives and lowers the cost of health care. It’s a good thing.

    Plus let’s dispense with one idiotic notion. It is now a Democratic bill. Not just because a Democrat passed it but because the parties have changed. The Republican party is now the party of the teabaggers because the teabaggers took it over.

    Conversey the folks that make up the majority of this board have made theirselves irrelevant because you’ve left the Democratic party. Dennis Kucinich lost, and lost BIG. He lost not to a Republican, but to another Democrat.

    So this is not a Republican bill anymore because the Republican party is now a crazy for coco puffs party. That’s because the Tea Party folks when they got mad they mobilized they ran for office they showed up to vote. When you guys got mad you stayed home to “Teach Obama a lesson” and you went camping on a city block.

    Well, the lesson is that a single person in a voting booth is more powerful then a thousand people occupying Wall Street. The Republican party no longer represents the Bob Doles or the “old” Mitt Romney because the Republicans got active. The democratic party does not represent Jane Hampshire or Jon Walker anymore because they got lazy, and dressed their laziness up as principles.

  • insipid commented on the blog post Obama Didn’t Lose Today

    2012-06-28 18:03:02View | Delete

    I was addressing Jon, not you.

  • insipid commented on the blog post Obama Didn’t Lose Today

    2012-06-28 18:02:28View | Delete

    The worst part is that it does so little for the under-insured. Maybe people will believe medical costs will go down after 2014. But medical related bankruptcies are going to keep rolling in.

    That’s just false. There is a cap on how much you can shell out based on your income. There’s also a minimum amount of coverage that health care must give, including mandatory payments of preventive care services.

    Classic Obama. Put a liberal veneer on a Republican bill and call it a smashing victory.

    It is a smashing victory. Not just for him but for the millions that are helped by the bill. It’s a smashing defeat for the baggers on the right and the left who’d rather people die if it means they don’t get their way.

  • insipid commented on the blog post Obama Didn’t Lose Today

    2012-06-28 17:55:01View | Delete

    Still going with the idiotic thesis that Obama is running from the law? How many times do you firebaggers have to be proven wrong until you accept the facts that 1. You don’t know what you’re talking about and 2. The President is a whole lot smarter than you.

    The provisions of the law are popular Jon. They just don’t know what is in the law because people like you would rather misinform then tell the truth about the law.

    But the truth is that- despite your best efforts- over 6 million kids between 18 and 26 have health care now.

    Despite your best efforts, seniors are now enjoying the benefits of a closed donut hole.

    Desptiet your best efforts over thirty million people will be able to get health care in 2012.

    Despite your best efforts the insurance companies are now limited to an overhead of 80-85 percent and already folks are getting money back.

    Despite your best efforts people are already enjoying the benefits of free preventive care.

    We are much closer to single payer now because the bill was passed. The insurance company no longer has the millions to spend on lobyists because that is NOT a part of care. And despite the extra customers, because of the loss provisions it is no longer a cash cow.

    So you’re just wrong. Obama has not run from the affordable care act, he’s actively campaigning on it. And he’ll continue to do so. Cause now when Romney says he’ll repeal the affordable care act in a debate Obama can simply say “Which part?”

    If he says he’ll re-open the donut hole, he loses the senior vote.
    If he says he’ll get rid of the children staying on your health plan, he loses what little he has of the youth vote.
    If he says he’ll get rid of the end to pre-existing conditions he loses everyone else.

    Even the mandate is only unpopular because people like you do a shitty as hell job explaining it. It only applies to people rich enough to not get subsidies and still refuse to get insurance. Less than 6% of the population. The tax goes to the fact that these people cost us a large amount of money each year due to emergency room visits.

    So no, he’s not “running” from it. He’s putting it front and center. And he should. He’s saved a lot of lives with it.

  • Yes, and i’m sure you can name me the 60 Senators and 235 congressmen that will vote for that.

  • It’s opposite day in FDL land:

    CNN poll, majority now support the individual mandate.

    http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/11/poll-majority-now-support-the-individual-mandate.php

    Plus, unlike most of you who just read the headlines, i actually LOOKED at the Kaiser poll. It meant mostly bad news for the likes of Jon Walker and other members of the media. Basically the poll says that the majority of people just are misinformed about the law. Unfortunately, Jon Walker is one of the chief misinformers.

  • Load More