Heh.

[WilliamPitt]

[SammyWinstonJack]

1. ...

[DrDan]

2. lol - must be the product of a DU reader

[demmiblue]

3. Oh my!

[quinnox]

4. This is another example of a thread that will drive the unrec crew loopy

I can feel it. Thanks for the chuckle. I might have to use this graphic sometime myself.

[Better Believe It]

19. That "crew" can use use jury system to makes threads disappear. It's much more effective.

[WilliamPitt]

21. I haven't had a thread deleted yet.

But it is a new year...

[Better Believe It]

32. I hope you're not soon targeted. You've been here longer and have a wide

following so it might be more difficult for the "haters" to censor you via the "jury" system.

[snooper2]

210. The only reason people are hating on you is because you never delivered on your promise

to deliever a freaking new record by the end of 2011....

Fail..

Now your fans are pissed----

[Better Believe It]

214. What in the world are you writing about? Fans? Promises made? Freaking new record?

[snooper2]

215. Aren't you who you say you are?

[Mira]

66. I have. One.

And it was - I guess - appropriate, though it shocked me. Those who know me would have laughed at the knocked off socks clinging to the wall.

Happy New Year, Will. May all your endeavors turn out well, and make your year as good as you possibly can for you and yours.

[lunatica]

150. You're not trying hard enough. I had one deleted with two jurors voting against it

It must have been quite an insult because the person also put me on ignore.

[FarLeftFist]

77. The problem with this is that if I was to make the opposite of this: Obama Critics Bingo

It would read like RW trash insulting Lefty's and would be banished from existence.

[Burgman]

5. And you have a better REALISTIC candidate for this year's race?

[WilliamPitt]

8. That should be somewhere on the card.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

16. don't you love it when people write your material for you!?!

that was priceless!

sP

[WilliamPitt]

17. Use the right bait, and the fish will jump into your boat.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

93. Lol. Thanks for the laugh.

[Jester Messiah]

105. So what you're saying is that you don't have a good answer.

So you'll put it on your little card and counter with smugness.

[EFerrari]

138. He doesn't understand politics.

[Telly Savalas]

100. So in other words, no

The Left in the U.S. is completely impotent.

[WilliamPitt]

110. Definitely belongs on the card.

Extra points for you!

[UnrepentantLiberal]

128. Yeah, they left one out.

LOL.

[SammyWinstonJack]

136. It should be.

[Jakes Progress]

143. Wow. Too many apologies to fit on a Bingo card.

That has to be a record.

[Ichingcarpenter]

6. Bingo..... is your name O

Pretty funny

[Autumn]

7. That's funny

[hlthe2b]

9. Oh, my... I can already predict...

the DUers who will take great offense at this.

But, all I can say is LavenderLiberal seems to have been reading DU the past couple of years... There may be a few more to add, but he'd need a bigger Bingo card.

[WillyT]

10. LOL !!! - K & R !!!

[ProSense]

11. Love it!

We were right: Ron Paul isn't anti war and he's a racist.

I'd love to see the Ron Paul Apologist Bingon or the Greenwald Apologist Bingo

http://www.democraticunderground.com/100297462

http://www.democraticunderground.com/100297462

[WilliamPitt]

12. Know any graphic artists?

"But he disavowed the newsletters years ago"

[ProSense]

13. Or:

"He's horrible, but I agree with him on somethings!!! For example, he's a racist supported by racists who want blacks to acknowledge that they were better off as slaves, an anti-gay bigot supported by people who want to kill gays, but, hey, at least he wants to close U.S. bases in other countries and legalize weed".

http://www.democraticunderground.com/100296072

[Scuba]

15. That's actually a pretty good synopsis of Paul. I'd add, "revert to the gold standard...

...since the People have none."

[Shining Jack]

52. You love it?

Now I'm lost. Where does Will mentions Ron Paul?

[Jakes Progress]

144. Not you've hit the crux of the PS argument strategy.

[Maven]

114. Don't you mean, "BINGO!"?

[demmiblue]

14. They forgot the other p words...

pragmatist and purist.

[JoePhilly]

18. Sadly, as an Obama supporter, I'll have to put up with this for 5 more years

[treestar]

41. I wonder what they are going to stand for during Obama's second term

Their "threat" of support withdrawal won't wash.

Probably pine for 2016 and whatever savior is not going to run then, either.

[JoePhilly]

87. I keep waiting to see the screamers start a "2016 Candidates" group ...

You'd think they would be hard at work trying to find or build the ubber-Progressive candidate, now that the hopes of a primary opponent against Obama have pretty much died ... and yet surprisingly ... no such group exists here yet.

If they were serious ... maybe they'd be working on that ... but nope.

[CakeGrrl]

60. The Rec list is a Who's Who of steady detractors.

I think they'll actually be UPSET when this President is re-elected in 2012.

And I look forward to that.

[Vanje]

64. They never really loved him

Did they?

[CakeGrrl]

69. Is that humor? Sarcasm?

Some of them never wanted him here to answer this 'question' seriously, and that's up to them. But for those who were pretty transparent about that yet insist it comes from some newfound disappointment borne of the President's actions, that's a load of crap.

Just sayin'.

[Vanje]

86. Yep

Like I was saying.

[PurityOfEssence]

75. That's my favorite vapid rejoinder

This isn't meant as an insult to you, but it comes up from time to time from the Obama Pom-Pom squad to silence any dissent: "admit it, you NEVER really liked him!"

For some of us, the cozying up to religion, overt corporatism and chronic tactics of being on both sides of all issues that couldn't be ducked outright was all rather apparent at his emergence on the national stage. Those so blindly in love with the man simply can't conceive of a non-reactionary not having started out with the same love. There's also some bizarre entitlement to it all, too: somehow we OWE it to this man to give up everything, bend over backward and generally defend him with awe-struck piety. This kind of respect for a human is something usually reserved for a great hero or someone who has triumphed over great adversity or something.

We were sold a personality, not any real policies. The election was deliberately vague on what his action would be on many important issues, but we were repeatedly bullied and cajoled that it didn't matter because he had such an other-worldly and morally pristine character. So much for all that. We were also sold that he would be a courageous fighter, when his long and obvious legislative record was basically what he is right now: ultramoderate at best and more concerned with electability than anything.

Yes, some of us never really loved him; we were leftists who were paying attention.

[peace frog]

76. Amen to that

[CakeGrrl]

78. The ones who were ACTUALLY paying attention

were, IMO, those of us who were not shocked out of their shoes that he has pretty much done what he said he would during the campaign (BARRING the pathological level of Republican obstruction) and went stomping off to rip bumperstickers off our cars in an emotional fit of pique...and then came back to post dramatically about it.

Please do cite an example where the "Obama Pom-Pom" squad demanded that you defend him with awe-struck piety. How did you ever resist?

As for "love", I believe it was Norquist associate Jane Hamsher who used the rather inappropriate analogy of the boyfriend when she goaded her readers into resenting the President even more by whispering "He's just not that into you" in their ears.

Of course, between the hyperbole and the name calling at fellow DUers, you're probably not really looking to have an actual discussion about this.

So in the spirit of the thread:

[AnotherMcIntosh]

95. If he truly "he has pretty much done what he said he would during the campaign," how do you explain

that, just days after being sworn in, he broke his promise to "to stop the revolving door that lets onetime lobbyists go to work for the Federal Government and oversee contracts that could harm — or help — their former employer" by appointing Raytheon's former top lobbyist, William Lynn to be in the Pentagon's management and serve as Deputy Secretary of Defense?
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1874165,00.html

William Lynn, of course, is not the only former lobbyist to be brought into a high level position within the Administration.

[Gold Metal Flake]

213. Crickets

[BootinUp]

79. christsake! you haven't changed a bit.

[PurityOfEssence]

101. Eloquence itself

Thanks for the worthwhile contribution to the forum.

[Cameron27]

113. Very well said.

[FredStembottom]

146. ...and I'm still smarting from having this same trick worked on me in the 90's.

" The election was deliberately vague on what his action would be on many important issues, but we were repeatedly bullied and cajoled that it didn't matter because he had such an other-worldly and morally pristine character."

Clinton II?

C "felt our pain" then signed into law (in the case of NAFTA, worked mightily for) the devastating blows that took the middle class down.

What's different this time is that I skipped the shocked/hurt stage.

[truth2power]

159. Excellent post, Purity. You said, "We were sold a personality, not any real policies." So true!...

Here's a 2009 article by Chris Hedges:

Buying Brand Obama

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090503_buying_brand_obama/

<snip>

"The Obama campaign was named Advertising Age’s marketer of the year for 2008 and edged out runners-up Apple and Zappos.com. Take it from the professionals. Brand Obama is a marketer’s dream. President Obama does one thing and Brand Obama gets you to believe another. This is the essence of successful advertising. You buy or do what the advertiser wants because of how they can make you feel."

Yes, some of us "were leftists who were paying attention." That's what it's really about.

[joshcryer]

196. Obama's politics were consistent, and he's done more that he said he'd do...

...than most Presidents, particularly given the circumstances he was handed.

If you were "sold" that he would be a "courageous fighter" I do feel for you, because people did think that Obama would do things he never said he'd do, and they were impressed by his populist rhetoric without reading between the lines.

Basically those people were duped into thinking a post-partisan would do what a populist would do.

And the first thing the post-partisan (ie, ultra-bipartisan) did? Installed a center-right cabinet.

I personally laughed my ass off when that happened (it was kind of cathartic after the primaries). Since then I've just felt sorry for all of those people who, for some reason or another, intellectually overlooked Obama's post-partisan ideology. Either through sheer idiocy, or delusional worship.

[PurityOfEssence]

197. "post-partisan ideology"

He wants a statue. He wants EVERYONE to love him. He thinks such silliness is possible. The laughingly unwarranted Nobel Peace Prize should be enough, but is it?

Meanwhile, the ultra-inclusive self-worshiping corporatist sanctimony is not a great act of forward-looking genius, it's all done at our expense. There WILL BE NO POST-PARTISAN POLITICS in the near future: they play for keeps and we play for some kind of approval that will never come.

It's about him. It's a cult. It's tiresome.

He has violated the UN Participation Act more than any President except Truman. He has violated the War Powers Resolution more than any President than Clinton.

As for consistency, he played fast and loose with people's expectations, and, if you use the asshole right-wing metric that it's all the fault of the customer, he's fine. If you use anything akin to a moral judgment of what is to be expected from one's stated purpose, he fails resoundingly: he ducked most moments of standing for or against various policies, and he has consistently striven to be above the law.

He is not a leader; he is a campaigner. Somehow, regardless of how he strips our Constitutional rights from us and enables financial fraud and wars of aggression, he is still the beneficiary of undying love from those who would NEVER tolerate such actions from a Republican. The most important issue at hand is the environment, and he's shown himself to be the WD-40 of Corporatism on that front.

Save your ridicule for the clueless.

By the way, do you still claim--as you did endlessly--that the attack on Libya without a vote of both Houses of Congress was not a violation of the UN Participation Act of 1945? Do you still claim that attacking Libya without a Congressional declaration of war, authorization of force or in response to an attack was not a violation of the War Powers Resolution of 1973? Do you contest that the War Powers Resolution of 1973 is the law of the land that governs powers granted in the Constitution?

You seem to be backing off from calling people "dishonest" lately. I guess that's from backlash here on the board.

"Post-Partisanship" is just another expression of the self-aggrandizing ego fantasizing that one is so personally fabulous that one's own personal specialness transcends mere mortal travails.

I have children and a life, and I'm not going to throw those things away just so a bunch of narcissists can keep alive the weird fantasy that this man is a living god. I'm also not going to let them kill inconvenient foreigners who stand in the way of mineral riches. I deeply resent the continual calls for us to shut up when those of our side are doing more to destroy all that is good and true about our country than the Republicans.

They hate us. Sucking up to them is stupidity; the only reason any sentient being would do so is out of a need to be morally superior or to garner support from the right that will never come.

[joshcryer]

200. Absolutely, post-partisanship is hardly an admirable way to govern. Partisanship...

...gets a bad rap, imo. Everyone wants the magical unity candidate who will "get things done, and bring the parties together," but the fascists in the House, which we in part helped elect, would've never gone for it, ever. Anyone could've predicted it, anyone who actually paid attention to the rhetoric should've seen it coming a mile away. Nothing of it is unsurprising, unexpected, unforeseen. Obama is exactly the person the American people elected.

It's hardly, of course, the fault of the "customer" as you put it. I like to call them consumers, as Obama ran the most magnificent ad campaign money could ever buy. He completely controlled the narrative running the most arduous, comprehensive, intelligent consumer-oriented plan that has ever been conceived in the history of our politics. Nothing comes close. He sold himself so well that people, to this day, think he was supposed to be a populist, even when his nomination speech addressed all of the things he was going to do, from escalating in Afghanistan, to going after the Taliban, to withdrawing from Iraq (that, btw, was also sneaky, as SOFA was effectively written by the time the elections came around, and he knew the outcome of that, easiest commitment to make, ever). He even mentions tax cuts and deficit reduction. It's glorious how easily played the ignorant, the uninspired really are.

Uninspired, you ask? What, how the hell do you think Obama was going to go after the Taliban? Invade Pakistan and Yemen under the auspices of UN support? Naw, Bush had already enabled him the full authority to rain hellfire on anyone he wanted for any reason, arbitrarily. Completely predictable, to anyone with an iota of inspiration and understanding of what someone with Obama's ideology would do.

Tax cuts? Golly gee, we probably tuned that out completely, but we know how easy tax cuts and tax extensions would be to get in a congress that's controlled by a party that votes in a bloc 90% of the time.

As far as dishonesty? Well, it's easy enough. It's hard for me to believe that most DUers, particularly old timers, would have actually bought into Obama's populist rhetoric, and instead saw his post-partisan ideology for what it was. An effectively neutered, highly compromising position that fails as soon as any sort of obstruction is met. So it's at least clear to me those those highly intelligent DUers aren't being genuine when they feign ignorance that they weren't aware or, nor could they have predicted the ultimate outcome. To do so would be to place an epic lack of faith in the intelligence of those DUers, and I chose not to do that. Meanwhile, I'd like positions that I don't actually have not be ascribed to me by the less honest, as it's really annoying to have to explain everything I write because people prefer to slander as opposed to have a genuine discussion.

Libya, though, is an interesting case study. Your unfounded fears over islamists appear to be increasingly diminished by the day, and it is amusing, at least to me, that you used to feign horrors at the potential of islamists taking control, when Obama unethically and immorally rains down hellfire on islamist "terrorists" in other countries under the guise of targeted killing, very likely garnering the votes of others who also feign horror over scary islamists. And yet, I doubt you can see the irony in having had perpetuated those highly unfounded, highly unethical fears in the past.

Finally, it's interesting that we do agree on something. Sucking up to the right is stupidity. And yet here we are, the stupidest form of governance by a President still remains shockingly better, and consistent, than I ever could've expected. That is more of an indictment of the current state of our government than praise, imo.

[joshcryer]

203. Oh, and one more thing we agree on:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=100930

[JackRiddler]

120. If you "love" any politician you don't know personally, you may be missing the point of democracy.

It's not to have leaders or celebrities or demagogues or royalty you "love."

It's to have a representative government that protects the rights and enacts the will of the people.

[Vanje]

160. I DO love the dog though

Bo is cool.

[JackRiddler]

163. Well, unlike most politicians, the dog actually works for you.

And if you meet the dog, you know everything it tells you, good or bad, will be straight, honest and sincere.

[snooper2]

211. A lot of them are still bitter...must suck...

I think that's also due to the demographics of day-time DU'ers though...

[stevenleser]

106. Its a great list from which to populate my new ignore list. Don't knock it!

[Number23]

84. I know. This has been on the net for ages. Freepers love it

It was old and tired when it was first posted years ago.

[JoePhilly]

89. I find it funny ... kind of like the NOBAMA bumper stickers ...

I have a neighbor who has one ... GOP right wing base guy all the way ... I keep asking him when he's going to get a bumper sticker with the name of his preferred candidate on it ... and "which of the GOP candidates do you want as the GOP nominee?" ... he can't answer me.

[Number23]

99. I think it's funny too

There are few less effective ways for people to proudly project "I'm politically and culturally impotent and have nothing better to do with my time" than stuff like this.

Edit: Just did a search. Even as lazy as my search was, some of the earliest postings of this were June 2010. Like I said, this is old. Tired and old.

[JackRiddler]

164. No one should ever post old things. Only tweets from the last seven minutes are good.

[Number23]

179. I'm sure your comment is clever/relevant/witty to you.

[JackRiddler]

186. Zing! I am slain!

[Number23]

191. Happy I could do my part.

[RetroLounge]

205. "Freepers love it"

We're gonna need a new bingo card

You guys never disappoint...



RL

[Jakes Progress]

145. But at least the OP gives you a talking point list.

[bigtree]

20. but

. . . it's made of straw.

[mmonk]

22. LOL

[fascisthunter]

23. HAHAHAHAHA....lol

Enjoy the game today, sir, and a Happy New Year to you and your friends and family.

[WilliamPitt]

24. Many thanks

and the same to you and yours.

[sarcasmo]

25. Bingo!

[Vanje]

26. Rec! Kick! nt

[FarLeftFist]

27. Who needs apologies? He's the best President of my lifetime....So far.

[WillyT]

33. So You're 12 ???

[madinmaryland]

35. Lets see...

LBJ (though I was very young, and don't remember him).
Nixon
Ford
Carter
Reagan
Bush I
Clinton
Bush II
Obama

I don't think any of them, except for LBJ would be ranked as great (and even with him, it is a stretch - think Viet Nam).

[Cleita]

38. For me.

FDR
Truman
Eisenhower
Kennedy
LBJ

The rest haven't been worth much, which is why I suppose we are in trouble today, although we did have some good years with Clinton. It wasn't enough though to keep Bush2 out of office though and him totally wrecking what was the country that FDR rescued from the Great Depression.

[FarLeftFist]

51. 31

[Warren Stupidity]

92. That explains your perspective.

You aren't old enough to have lived under an actual new deal democrat administration. For you everything has been within the context of the Reagan-Thatcher neoliberal counter revolution.

[Jakes Progress]

148. This explains the ascendency of the reagan democrats.

[Jakes Progress]

147. Another one for the card.

Bingo?

[scentopine]

80. Is that all it takes to qualify for your endorsement?

The nation is in crisis needing leadership and our president is in love with the corrupting influences of bad government. The executive branch continues to turn its back on justice, fairness, principals and ethics.

The USA is severely damaged from Wall Street to torture to military being used as police force to stifle dissent (protestors are now classified as low level terrorists).

It is about Obama's drill-baby-drill policy. It's about endorsing fracking and giving 10's of billions for nuclear energy while giving CEOs tax breaks for outsourcing labor to unregulated markets in Asia.

It is about a corrupt executive branch stuffed with lobbyists and CEOs who formulate public policy that benefits lobbyists and CEOs.

It is about Obama's ruthless pursuit and persecution of whistle blowers in government. It is about lack of checks and balances - the rich CEOs are forgiven, the poor are thrown in jail.

It's about unwarranted military build up in Afghanistan and the continued slaughter of thousands and thousands of civilians, while those guilty of war crimes are given amnesty.

It is about an education policy endorsing treating educators like corporate slaves with minimum wages and no benefits while treating CEOs like kings with sickening pay and tax breaks even as they drive the nations economy into the gutter.

I can't tell Obama apart from the 1980's Reagan neo-con. He endorses all the violent war and military power to protect Wall Street CEOs (the neo-con), while letting Wall Street CEOs formulate public policy (the neo-lib).

It's about a health care policy written by health care CEOs to benefit only health care CEOs.

We need a great leader in office who doesn't apply the rules based on politically convenience. Given outsourcing jobs to Asia, tax breaks for millionaires, trade agreements, torture, wiretapping and indefinite detention as well as his deference towards Wall Street rich, Obama has proven to be a terrible mistake and deserving of a primary challenge.

We must hold Obama responsible for his reckless indifference to our slow destruction as a free, fair and just nation that rewards innovation and solid workmanship.

As it stands, America is a nation of swindlers and Obama has done nothing to remedy this.

[FarLeftFist]

81. Here's a good place to start if you're looking for differences:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-kept/?page=1

[scentopine]

82. this is nibbling around the edges, the big policies that change a nation

energy policies, wall street regulation, economic recovery, sending jobs to low skill, low wage unregulated labor in Asia, prosecution of Wall Street crime, prosecution of war criminals i.e. the issues that change the course of a nation to make it better, he has failed completely.

[Pab Sungenis]

155. Your link only outlined ones he kept.

159 to be exact. However, more telling are the ones that are listed as broken (56), "compromised" (49), and stalled (66) for a total of 171 failures.

And some of the failures are really big failures (like the Bush Tax Cuts, EFCA, ending bank bonuses, the Foreclosure Prevention Fund, importation of prescription drugs, Gitmo, and so on): http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-broken/?page=2

Some of the "stalled" ones are big, too: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/stalled/

Please do not act surprised when you're told many of us are beyond disappointed in Obama, and the only reason we're voting for him in November is because the Republicans are worse. Which in and of itself was a failure because many of us saw Obama as, for the first time in many of our lifetimes, as a chance to break the "lesser of two evils" trend.

[JoePhilly]

90. So you're going to start a "Progressive Candidate for 2016" group right???

Let's face facts ... Obama will be the Democratic Nominee in 2012 ... the super progressive candidate you pine away for is not coming for 2012.

And so, surely you are busy working on finding and or building this Progressive candidate so they can compete and win in 2016 ... right?

And you'd be trying to enlist others on DU towards that end .... no??

Well??

[JackRiddler]

122. No, I'm going to join tens of millions of people on the street shutting this madness down in 2012.

[JoePhilly]

127. Tens of millions ... really?

What exactly do you plan to "shut down"?

[JackRiddler]

130. Wall Street, for a start.

[sabrina 1]

202. I'll be there with you. Along with as many of my friends and their friends as I can.

The system is broken, badly. And it's now up to the people, the politicians don't work for us.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

97. Well said. Thanks.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

133. Great post.

This is what soured me on him.

[Jakes Progress]

149. Great Post

A better summary than the list of minutiae that usually appears as "wins".

[truth2power]

161. Thank you, scentofpine, for one of the few responses that has some substance to it....

Instead of the name-calling and cute little one-liners, I'd like to see the Obama supporters address any or all of your points, above. They seem not to be aware that ridicule does nothing to change minds. Perhaps that's not their goal anyway.

I could pick any of your points for someone to refute, but here's one, being an educator myself:

"It is about an education policy endorsing treating educators like corporate slaves with minimum wages and no benefits while treating CEOs like kings with sickening pay and tax breaks even as they drive the nations economy into the gutter."

How can anyone dispute that Obama, through his appointee Arne Duncan, is busy destroying our public education system, while corporate CEO's are kept on the payroll(sic) and given obscene bonuses even after having driven their companies into bankruptcy?

[WillyT]

162. + 1,000,000,000... What You Said !!! - Great Post !!!

[Number23]

180. I love all the props you got right before you got tombstoned

If that doesn't perfectly sum up what ails this place, nothing ever will. Absolutely hilarious.

[stevenleser]

184. Yep. I finally decided there was no point in dealing and have put literally everyone reccing this on

ignore. DU is a much nicer place now!

Honestly, I really didnt want to do it, but the nonsense got to be too much.

[Number23]

190. I don't use ignore and never will

But I understand you gotta do what you gotta do. And you're right, this thread was a clarion call for the very special. Most of these folks are probably on more than one person's ignore list so they may as well be on yours too.

[stevenleser]

206. I guess if I could see a point to fighting with these people I would continue doing so.

I'm good at fighting and being prickly. But I wont do it without having a point and a chance of changing something.

Fact is, people who criticize the President on the left the way many folks do here are in such a minority they really don't matter. Even if you accept that 16% of Liberals are unhappy with the President, I think research has shown that amount is split between those who think he is too conservative and those who think he is too Liberal, so at most, only 8% of Liberals think the President isn't Liberal enough. Half those people seem to have come here and recced this OP.

I also dont have a lot of patience for people who refuse to learn from massive recent mistakes. The whole "X Democrat isn't much better or better at all than Y Republican" meme should have been dead and buried after it was made in reference to Gore and Bush and people realized THAT mistake. If someone was too obtuse to get that, nothing you or I say is going to make a dent, so I'm back to, again, what is the point of arguing with these folks?

[JackRiddler]

165. Maybe but it's a bit like asking what was the best natural disaster of your lifetime.

[getdown]

28. Keep Hope Alive

[QC]

29. You never really loved him!

[Solly Mack]

30. lololololol

[Patriot 76]

31. I personally love gallows humor from the perpetually outraged!

The clock is ticking on you folks.

[quinnox]

36. come on, its good to have a sense of humor

lighten up a little, its the New Year!

[Zhade]

96. Don't worry, we'll be right here.

You're not sending those of us with a conscience anywhere. Keep dreaming.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

135. That won't stop them from trying.

[EFerrari]

137. LOL. Hook!

[JackRiddler]

166. "The clock is ticking on you folks."

Well, that sounds pretty straightforward, though subject to different interpretations.

Are "you folks" going to suddenly die out?

Whatever do you mean?

[MichiganVote]

34. Good but we need some for the other clowns running too.

[Odin2005]

37. EPIC WIN, Thanks Will!

[CakeGrrl]

59. The "EPIC WIN" will be by the POTUS in 2012.

Unless you're hoping for a different outcome.


Cheers!

[JackRiddler]

132. Certainly there's no other human concern on this planet.

[SammyWinstonJack]

139. +1.

[Major Hogwash]

39. Who runs LavenderLiberal dot com?

That is really weird.

"It's only one song!"
Man, that's getting desperate for attention.

[CakeGrrl]

61. FDL spinoff? Would not be a surprise in the least.

In Greenwald We Trust!

[LeftyMom]

62. Wow.

[CakeGrrl]

70. I calls 'em like I sees 'em.

[LeftyMom]

71. Next time maybe you could try googling first.

Jumping to blame the usual suspects instead makes you look foolish.

edit: You could always ask who made that image. Plenty of people could tell you, since she posts on DU.

[CakeGrrl]

74. Let's cut to the chase and spare the back and forth:

Based on the reactions to the post, it's really about "How dare anyone disagree with our criticisms?" and this issue has come up HOW many times since, oh, the '08 primaries?

Beyond the enthusiastic recs, I imagine any level of disagreement will be met with a challenge to take this thread in the direction of all the others. I assume that's why you posted the popcorn?

[LeftyMom]

83. I posted the popcorn because your post was silly.

The attribution is on the image, and you still assumed it was from Jane Hamsher somehow, because apparently you think any left-leaning criticism of Obama or his fan club somehow traces back to her.

Look, nobody cares if you guys like Obama, or even if you draw little hearts all over the Obama posters on your wall. Just don't be surprised if the rest of us think your reasons are goofy and your obsession is a bit strange.

[CakeGrrl]

88. I never thought Hamsher was the author. And the authorship isn't the point.

"The rest of you" should really come up with something better to do unless snarking on and attempting to condescend to other DUers is your top priority.

THAT, in my opinion, is a rather strange and silly obsession in an election year with a fucking insane GOP waiting to get their hands on the levers of power.

But hey, play "Us vs. Them" all you like!

[fascisthunter]

98. indeed (nt)

[Maven]

115. "your obsession is a bit strange"

You can say that again, LM.

[Quantess]

217. Yes, indeed!

[Jakes Progress]

151. Then put on some glasses.

Get a few principles that mean more than a picture of a man in a bathing suit.

[JackRiddler]

167. Good question! Who runs Lavender Liberal? I think it's Greenwald, Taibbi and Nader.

Also, Chavez, Ron Paul, the Chinese economic threat, PUMA, Ahmedinejad and the Avian Flu. And the conspiracy theorists. Damn them!

[Vanje]

174. LOL!

Yeah!!!!!!!!!!

[EFerrari]

182. Lmao

[treestar]

40. Is there such a thing as a supporter?

No one is perfect. Why do we have to be called "apologists?"

What is wrong with supporting what we feel to be the best candidate, that we deserved that?

"It's all up to Congress." I for one have never said that, only pointed to the fact Congress has power, too. The reverse is, "it's all up to the President." When people act as if Congress has no power, they deserve to have it pointed out to them that they should read up on Articles I through III of the Constitution.

There are a lot of bitter PUMAs. And it is true that the Republicans are the likely alternative.

[LeftyMom]

42. OOoh, sooo close to bingo.

Keep typing, would you?

[treestar]

45. If you insist on being negative about everything

You don't even stand for any candidate. If you want to support third parties, you're not supposed to do it on DU.

And you're unlikely to convince us with that stupid bingo card that we should abandon the Democrats for whatever third party you want to support.

Just bitter and negative.

[LeftyMom]

47. That's an awfully long string of personal attacks replying to things I haven't said.

Please feel free to maintain your bitter, negative ranting regarding your perception of my bitterness and negativity. It's amusing.

[Shining Jack]

53. +1

And that poster is close to BINGO!

[JackRiddler]

123. I'll save your statement as a generic response that will come in handy many times.

"That's an awfully long string of personal attacks replying to things I haven't said."

Or maybe just use it as a sig line, so it's always at the ready?

Thanks!

[Cali_Democrat]

56. LOL

[stillwaiting]

43. Wherefore art thou: "He doesn't have a MAGIC WAND!!! nt

[QC]

49. You just want a dictator!

[maximusveritas]

44. By listing them like that, they become less true

How funny.

[helderheid]

46. Hahahahaha!!!

[RetroLounge]

48. Ha!

[Oilwellian]

50. Perfect

That about covers all of them. Thanks Will.

[proverbialwisdom]

157. "Take off yr bedroom slippers, put on yr marching shoes," spoken to Congressional Black Caucus.

Why say that? That puts responsibility on us beyond voting to provide relatively leaderless leverage to give cover to policy change. The complaining assumes he WON'T do xyz, what if he CAN'T without a major assist from the public? Has that been tried already and failed? Nope, not yet. This thread pile on is BS.

FOR MORE:
Google search for: obama put on your boots
Echoes of #OWS: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/07/full-text-barack-obama-speech
Eat, drink, human rights: http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jan/23/opinion/la-oe-roth-china-human-rights-20110123
Oval office rug: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/03/AR2010090305100.html
Google search for: obama romero visit

These stories don't fit the Bingo board meme which I personally regard as learned helplessness "victim-speak." Think inspiring Howard Zinn book covers/titles instead. Until Zinn's approaches (THE PEOPLE SPEAK) fail with the explicit involvement of the administration (never happen IMO), the Bingo board joke is self-defeating, counterproductive and promotes self-victimization.

http://www.amazon.com/People-Speak-Extended-Howard-Zinn/dp/B002W1HBNO/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1325515641&sr=8-1
http://www.amazon.com/Power-Governments-Cannot-Suppress/dp/0872864758/ref=sr_1_12?ie=UTF8&qid=1325459808&sr=8-12
http://www.amazon.com/Voices-Peoples-History-United-States/dp/1583229167/ref=sr_1_13?ie=UTF8&qid=1325459808&sr=8-13
http://www.amazon.com/You-Cant-Neutral-Moving-Train/dp/0807071277/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1325459808&sr=8-4

WE are the ones we've been waiting for. Straight up, there it is. What's so difficult about that?

Worth a try.

[RobertBlue]

54. k&r!

Lol!

[Cali_Democrat]

55. That's gonna leave a mark. n/t

[CakeGrrl]

57. No "apologistics" here. I'm PROUDLY voting for him in 2012.

Rah.

Rah.

Rah.

Let his re-election drive the people who love this OP loopy.

[Jakes Progress]

152. Uh.

That is what an apologist does. Support someone without regard to principle or reason.

[Pab Sungenis]

156. Why do you insist we want to defeat him?

It would have been nice to have a choice on the Democratic side, but we don't. We'll have to vote for him in November, but without much hope (or Hope for that matter) that the next four years will be much different.

[RainDog]

58. lol n/t

[Survivoreesta]

63. Meh>

[valerief]

65. Whoa, that's so on target! nt

[joshcryer]

67. It's not up to congress?

What a really easy pass that's giving the Republicans.

[Hawkowl]

68. Blackout Bingo!!!

Jackpot!

[Electric Monk]

91. You make a lot of good points, but your final paragraph might earn you a pizza

[ellisonz]

121. Pizza served. n/t

[snooper2]

212. Hidden post made the exact same points as Mike "Weiner" Savage

You agree with Laura Ingram as well?

[MadrasT]

73. Hahahaha

Priceless. Love it!

[melissaf]

85. ouch

[Zhade]

94. You've never seen bingo games end so fast!

Lightning round!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

102. "Stop whining about getting your pony"

LOL!

[donheld]

103. Thank you Will!

[DirkGently]

104. Hmmmmmmm. mmmmm. mmmm. mmmmm. Excellent.

[Jester Messiah]

107. Mmmm, divisiveness for divisiveness' sake. Reminds me of the '08 primaries.

The Repubs are bound and determined to lose, but here comes the circular firing squad to stir the pot and set us against each other anyway.

[WilliamPitt]

109. Again,

Belongs on the card.

[Jester Messiah]

173. And again, you can't answer the charge, so you stick it on your little card and act smug.

I had thought better of you.

[stevenleser]

177. Don't worry Jester, make lemonade out of lemons, as the saying goes.

Last edited Mon Jan 2, 2012, 06:28 PM - Edit history (1)

Do you really want to dialogue with people who call you an apologist and all the rest? This thread is taylor made for identifying people who intend to come at supporters of the President a certain way. If you don't like dialoguing with people who behave this way, because, quite frankly, I don't, put those who like and express support for this OP on ignore. Most of those folks who will throw phrases like "99th dimensional chess..." etc., at us are all here and the admins have given us the tools to deal with it in a civilized way. I say we use those tools.

[Jester Messiah]

194. I'm just waiting to see if he has the balls to answer. [nt]

[99Forever]

108. Probably not at all original, but dare I say...

BINGO!

[Douglas Carpenter]

111. ponies and rainbows - don't forget the ponies and rainbows

[EFerrari]

153. I think you just invented the self-replying, self-replicating OP.

lol

[sufrommich]

158. Then your snarky attack on DUers who

support the democratic president worked out well, bully for you. Well done.

[thelordofhell]

116. Ahhh look........Yearning for the simpler times

When a Democratic President wasn't in the White House and it was lot easier to hate on who was in charge.

So go ahead and play your little game (and mark off the "Whaddya gonna do, vote republican?" for me), because in the end, you are going to vote for President Obama because any Democratic Party representative if preferable to any republican party representative.

Obama/Biden 2012

[DeathToTheOil]

117. Dumb & Dumber

Title and thread, respectively.

I now see clearly the hierarchical component of DU: A starred, long-time(?) OP gets 120+ Rs, while posting an ejaculatory headline, and a text whining about how Obama has "disappointed" him. Wake up and smell the Real World already!

[Fumesucker]

124. The point being that we've all read every single one of those lines written in all seriousness..

Or at least any long term reader of DU has heard them well beyond the point of nausea.

If you think the OP is dumb then you think the terms listed are not divisive in any way shape or form when used as a form of argumentation.

[stevenleser]

176. Ah, and of course none of the terms thrown the way of those of us who support the president are

divisive. Starting with the word 'apologist' at the bottom of the bingo card?

[Fumesucker]

198. I'm reminded of Will Rogers' quip about not belonging to an organized political party..

Because he was a Democrat.

Those who are critical of Obama from the left are much less concerned about divisiveness than are those who support every single thing Obama does.

And yet the Obama Booster Club does everything it can to drive away anyone who is at all critical of Obama from the left, as if you think they're going to vote for a Republican over Obama..

[SwampG8r]

216. they count on the fact that you have nowhere to go with your vote

to allow them to be as rude as humanly possible

[girl gone mad]

126. "Wake up and smell the Real World already!"

Good one!

We're gonna need a bigger card.

[kenny blankenship]

118. I read the whole thing

Didn't see one attack there on Glenn Greenwald's parentage or sexuality.
FAIL.

[UrbScotty]

119. Many of these can also be found on "84%-er Bingo" - 84% being Obama's approval among liberal Dems.

[cyglet]

125. They didn't bother to poll me

[MissDeeds]

140. Or me

[stevenleser]

175. Polling doesnt mean 100% of the population is asked, only a representative subset.

Don't worry, I'm sure if you poll 600 Liberals, you will get a representative amount who believe exactly like you do. That's the 16%.

[Bolo Boffin]

129. What a magnificent

example of confirmation bias building. Pretending the actual answers are just spin? Priceless.

[JackRiddler]

168. Thank you for highlighting the desirability of a "Sophistry Bingo"

"Confirmation bias" is a good one. It must be said with absolute conviction!

[Bolo Boffin]

170. Making sure all the good arguments are automatically excluded from the debate

It's not just for 9/11 Truth anymore!

[JackRiddler]

172. Glad to help you confirm your bias about that.

Since it's where you're always heading anyway.

[MannyGoldstein]

131. Very convenient

Now we just need "the list" in the same post and we'll have one-stop shopping for that crowd.

[FlaGranny]

134. Football!!

Politics resembles football. "My team - no matter what."

Obama has been ineffective in the things that really matter to ALL our lives. I was expecting an FDR or at least an LBJ. I admit I did not do much research on his voting record. Instead I listened to his speeches and thought he would be progressive. It was thrilling when he won. Obama is not a progressive Democrat - he is much more a moderate Republican like Eisenhower (maybe even a bit to the right of Eisenhower).

There is no question that I will vote for him as the alternative is unthinkable, as it probably is for most of us. That doesn't mean that I can't feel let down and disappointed that we are still fighting wars, still do not have decent health care, still falling further and further behind the 1 percenters, still seeing the criminals receiving their million plus bonuses instead of sitting in a jail cell, still losing jobs to cheap overseas labor. I can guarantee you that an LBJ would have gotten the job done.

I don't think that many voters today are old enough to remember what a "real" Democratic president is like. An effective president must know how to "twist balls" if necessary. Thank God that FDR and LBJ did or today we would be in much worse shape than we are now.

[Bohunk68]

142. I'm with ya, Granny

A lot of the youngsters that post here glorifying his highness, have no sense of history or the results of that history. I've been a lurker for years and have often agreed with many postings on both sides of many issues. It's what happens with getting older and having a longer time line, issues are shades of gray and not black and white. I was thrilled when Obama got elected and hopeful that Change we could believe in was around the corner, but the first appointments of Wall Street Insiders tore away the veil pretty quick, that, and Rick Warren. While I understood his attempts to reach across the aisle and be bigger, it just didn't work. I understand the forgiveness of 7 times 70 and all that. But, after your hand has been bitten over and over again, welllllll, it's time to start another way of dealing with things. Sure, I'll vote for him, but not with any of the enthusiasm that I did in '08. And, of yes, the repeal of DADT was done by Congress, as he kept saying it had to be. He, himself, merely signed the bill, just like he signed the NDAA. Giveth with one hand, taketh with another. I'm just not hopeful anymore. Keep it up Will, your voice is needed. Tired of pom poms, give me results.

[MissDeeds]

141. Absolutely spot on

Thanks for this. The apologists seem to think the buck stops anywhere BUT with the president.

K&R

[Jakes Progress]

154. Perfect. K&R This thread has given us enough for Apologist Bingo II

[unionworks]

169. No....no....

...HE'S PLAYING 11 DIMENSSIONAL BINGO!

[unionworks]

171. Hey William,

I just went to check out the site where the bingo card came from. Would you believe (according to them) they were hacked Sunday, and are no longer going to be on the net?

[stevenleser]

178. Karma nt

[johnaries]

181. This just proves that once seemingly reasonable

people make up their minds, no amount of reason or logic can change it.

Sure, some of those statements are borderline silly, but some of them are spot - on.

Everyone had expectations, many of us set expectations so high that no human being could acheive them. Especially when operating within the restraints of the government set-up by the Constitution. GWB spat and shat on the Constitution. Obama restored the checks and balances of the Constitution, which in some cases also tied his hands in acheiving many of the expectations set for him. Yet it appears that many here would rather he had been more of a dictator than even GWB in order to acheive the expectations that they had.

Oh, what's the use? It seems that the people I'm talking to already have their minds made up and nothing anyone says can persuade them otherwise. They simply "make fun" of the logic they used to claim they embraced.

There, Will, why don't you write an article about that? I would happily read it.

[EFerrari]

183. You know, you don't have to pick your responses from the card

to respond to this thread.

[Solly Mack]

187. LMAO

That was priceless!! A fecking classic!!!

[hifiguy]

209. DUzy!!

[JackRiddler]

185. With regard to your statement: "Obama restored the checks and balances of the Constitution."

How? You might have a case for saying: He wanted to, he tried here and there. But please tell what checks and balances upset under Bush (or before) have been restored under Obama? Was there an end to any of the following: general warrantless surveillance of millions, the power of indefinite preemptive detention of suspects without legal counsel or informing their family, Guantanamo and secret prisons, presidential power to designate enemy combatants (under whatever label) who are fair game for assassination without trial, authority to assassinate foreign leaders, the concept that the whole world including the "homeland" is battlefield, the USA PATRIOT Act with its expansive definitions of "terrorism," the Homeland Security Department, militarization of police, use of military as police, vertical and horizontal integration of hundreds of state and local police agencies under federal supervision without independent let alone civilian oversight, plans for "Code Red" without the silly colors, harrassment of whistleblowers (Thomas Drake), unwarranted classification and over-classification of millions of documents, vast secret agencies that are unaccountable and barely overseen by another branch ("Top Secret" budget now up to 80 billion dollars), privatization of government security functions (two thirds of "Top Secret" budget now goes to private contractors), legal harrassment of voters off the rolls and use of felony as a means to suppress the vote? Some of these, it is true (like the last example) you can say Obama tried or is trying to change; some of these Bush "achievements" accomplished ad-hoc his administration has consciously consolidated or made worse (as with the just-signed Defense Authorization). But which of these has gotten better since 2009? What has actually changed in the law or in common government practice, that you can make the statement in the past tense: "Obama restored the checks and balances of the Constitution"? Please tell us.

[great white snark]

188. So many recs so few Democrats.

We get it, pointing out the intricacies and limitations of governing means you are an apologist.

[stevenleser]

189. Exactly. The other point is, if they think any other liberal or progressive would be better at

the political game of getting policies passed, why aren't they politically astute enough to get nominated or elected President? Seems that getting elected is much easier than getting large amounts of your party's agenda passed.

If your dream candidate doesn't even have enough political game to get nominated, let alone elected, how would they get anything done?

[Number23]

192. Snark, not so long ago, something this moronic would have gotten over 300 recs

As long as an OP disparaged the president and his supporters, it got big, sloppy kisses from the Perpetually Petulant.

Maybe it's because this is so old. Maybe it's because of the holidays. Maybe many don't find this clever. Maybe it's the smackdown the admins are putting on trolls, even some posting here for years. But things seem to be a bit different.

[great white snark]

193. You're right but it's still frustrating.

Hopefully as the election draws nearer we can all put the disruptions aside and just work on giving Obama 4 more deservingly earned years.

[Rex]

201. Yeah that must be it.

Couldn't be that a group of people might disagree with what you think (ironically) and still vote for someone in the Democratic Party. I know, impossible, that would require a trinary thinking apparatus.

But you are right about one thing...so few Democrats.

[Rex]

195. Heh.

[Bonobo]

199. They missed "He's not a king, you know!" nt

[RetroLounge]

204. K&R

RL

[Liberal_in_LA]

207. boo!

[hifiguy]

208. Ain't it the truth..... nt

[Survivoreesta]

218. You're a Massive Genius>

[WilliamPitt]

219. You have no sense of humor.

:nosarcasm:

[JackRiddler]

220. Encountered a new one: "Why did you wait until an election year to criticize?"