What the veto episode tells me about DU...

[MrScorpio]

That it's probably a good idea to wait until President Obama actually does something FIRST, before blaming him for even doing it.

Yet, still... This is DU.

As long as we're around, I'm sure that we'll keep the virtual popcorn vendors knee deep in hot blondes and hotter Ferraris for quite a long time.

[laconicsax]

1. Fuck Obama!

How dare he issue an Executive Order mandating the death penalty for anyone who breastfeeds a circumcised baby at the Olive Garden?!? This isn't the change I voted for.

[Drunken Irishman]

2. LOL

[johnaries]

5. There you go, quoting wsws and fdl again. nt

[HughMoran]

50. LMAO

:rofl:

[Ken Burch]

7. Dude...it was right there in the platform!

And frankly, it's the only reason we carried Indiana.

[laconicsax]

8. LOL!

[gateley]

14. Please bring your Olive Garden hysteria to The Lounge. nt

[progressoid]

61. Way to mis-state the facts Nazi

It was the death penalty for anyone who smokes a circumcised baby at the Olive Garden.

:eyes:

[laconicsax]

63. Distortions will get you nowhere.

The smoking provision only has to do with cornflake chicken and you know it.

[progressoid]

64. Ha, look who's talking.

There is no way you can prove the cornflake chicken connection. More hyperbole and supposition.

[laconicsax]

67. Yeah? Prove me wrong!

Show me the text of the EO and point out where it says I'm wrong. This is the Internet: Burden of proof isn't on the person making the claim, it's on whomever reads it.

[progressoid]

68. Here's your burden of proof:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6awXw_baxY



And, no I don't Rick Roll.

[CatWoman]

65. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

:rofl:

[Ozymanithrax]

3. It also helps if people actually spend 2 or 3 minutes before they...

believe something, and maybe ask a question or two.

[pipi_k]

38. What I see a lot of...

on FaceBook is people posting the crap du jour that ends with the statement "confirmed on Snopes" and I go to Snopes and it hasn't been "confirmed" at all.

Sometimes it's been outright denied, other times it's only half true.

But people just don't take the time to check this stuff out before they spread it around because they think just because someone else said it was "confirmed" someplace, that must mean it's true.

[Newsjock]

4. The fault here was with Congress

Who let this thing go through without so much as a roll-call vote. Either they were clueless about the consequences of the bill, or they were complicit in trying to sneak this past the people and the president.

Neither possibility is particularly attractive to ponder.

[pa28]

11. Absolutely. The W.H. deserves credit here for stopping this in the interest of sunlight.

This bill went through on greased rails which is more interesting than the contents of the bill itself. I'm guessing some similar bills are on the way and even though they may be necessary I want some openness and public scrutiny.

[bluestateguy]

6. The cycle works this way

1. An anonymously sourced and/or highly speculative article appears in a corporate media newspaper/network, about what the White House might be thinking about considering doing.

2. Outrage erupts on DU and other Left blogs, where the "thinking about considering doing" and anonymously sources quotes are morphed into: it's already a done deal. The usual cast of characters scream betrayal and start making plans for the 2012 primaries.

3. The bullshit corporate media story turns out to be rubbish, or at best only slightly accurate, but the thread reporting this drops like a rock.

4. Meanwhile, the people screaming "betrayal!" continue to be heard louder and louder.

[necso]

10. Lol, too true.

But to be fair, some of those doing this may be witting.

[grantcart]

13. then stir, mix and repeat so that the previous completely off base

allegation and outrage is forgotten and eclipsed by the next. Opps by now he second one has already been replaced by the third.

[Tarheel_Dem]

17. +1000. And they square the fake charges with their readers, by pretending

they stopped the White House from doing x, y, or z because they reported on it. There's no way to hold them accountable because no one knows these "anonymous senior officials" except the reporter of the made up story. :shrug: It's a vicious, and cynical cycle.

[Radical Activist]

22. And that's how the left blagosphere is manipulated by the right wing.

Those original rumors often come from conservative sources for just the purpose you describe. One example was in Woodward's book. They wanted to pressure Obama to put even more troops in Afghanistan than he wanted so they leaked a story suggesting he was planning that. Some of the netroots fell for it and eagerly spread the cynical story of betrayal.

Or, a pharma lobbyist starts spreading rumors that there was a deal to get rid of the public option. That story worked very well for them.

[Number23]

29. Beautifully said!

I wonder though, is it that the "left blagosphere is manipulated by the right wing" or is that members of the "professional left" are also part of the manipulation of liberals?

I don't think it's a coincidence that the same folks on Salon, HuffPost etc. that find fault with damn near everything this President does write something which then makes its way to DU where the same folks here that constantly find fault with everything this President does pick it up and run with it. And make no mistake -- it is ALWAYS the same people.

Regardless, we love to put up that only teabaggers and the uninformed are being manipulated by the media. The frothing of a consistently loud but tiny group of "progressives" over every perceived slight from Obama -- real or imagined -- is proof that it ain't just teabaggers being manipulated here.

[Gaedel]

46. It is amazing

These knuckle-dragging, moran tea baggers with low IQ seem to be able to manipulate the left with such clever and diabolical tricks.

Every time we blow one out our butts, we can blame them instead of solving our own problem.

[JNelson6563]

53. Amen to both you and Radical Activist!

I agree completely with both of your posts. :toast:

Julie

[Radical Activist]

57. It's certainly both.

There are plenty of motivations to stoke faux-outrage on the left. Controversy sells papers and generates online traffic.

I know I've gotten more than one fundraising email from progressive groups trying to cash in on progressive disappointment with Obama and Rahm's "fucking retarded" comment in particular. Maybe that's why it became a meme that never dies? Stoking outrage is useful to some people.
And then of course we have partisan Greens and Marxists who will say any Democratic President is a failure no matter what he does.

[depakid]

39. You have got to be kidding me

I mean, come on now.

The mods have obviously expressed some preferences in this thread, but conspiracy theory I think can still be called out.

At least, one would hope.

[Radical Activist]

55. It's pretty obvious.

I already gave one example. It's not a conspiracy theory when the facts are out there for everyone to see.

Remember the stories claiming that "top Democrats" were considering supporting an extension of Bush's tax cuts for the rich? Of course, that implication then morphed into the accusation online that Obama was going to back down. In reality, he didn't and there's no evidence that he ever considered it. It was only a few conservative blue dog Democrats who supported extending all the tax cuts. Those stories came from conservatives who generated them as a tactic to push their cause. And you fell for it. You should be as skeptical of the media as you are of Obama.

[CBR]

35. +1000.... truth nt

[JonLP24]

66. 1. Is a trial balloon

However when it comes to this story I don't recall it. All I recall is the bill gets through the house and on the Preisdent's desk. The WH says they're "reviewing the legislation" and the next day he "pocket vetoes" it. That is all I recall happening.

That is to say I was in the "wait and see" camp.

[BlueCollar]

9. hot blondes and Ferraris?

Damnit...nobody told me

[MrScorpio]

12. Get into the virtual popcorn business, Bro

It's always poppin'!

[BlueCollar]

15. I'm all focused on the War on Christmas...n/t

[meowomon]

23. WHAT? There's a War on Christmas?

Damn, how can anyone want to hurt baby Jesus?

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

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

[tavalon]

34. I look forward to that one all year!

[Name removed]

16. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[depakid]

18. What it shows is that when secrective processes are exposed in the blogosphere

and pressure's put on by the readers of sites like DU (among many others) we stand a chance of getting results that benefit ordinary people as opposed to well funded, organized financial interests.

[Tarheel_Dem]

19. ...

:rofl:

[Born_A_Truman]

21. I'll join you ..

:rofl:

[grantcart]

24. Yep the blogosphere made Obama veto it

:rofl:


And if we retain both houses it will be because at the last second the blogoshpere jumped to the aid of the Party


:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:


And if we retain both houses and it causes the Republicans to challenge their caucus leaders it was because the blogosphere 'turned up the temperature and held their feet to the fire".


:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Name removed]

25. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

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

[Tarheel_Dem]

28. I might need surgery, cuz I think I split my sides. The DU Anti-Obama brain trust is....

in deep doo-doo. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[SammyWinstonJack]

37. Yes because Obama has never said, "Go out and make me do it, now has he?

:eyes:

[Ikonoklast]

41. Are you being serious?

The overall effect of 'the blogosphere' is so vanishingly small it can hardly be said it exists at all.

What a grandiose sense of importance you must have.



One person knocking on doors to GOTV has more directt political effect than every blogger on the planet Earth, combined.

[depakid]

43. If this had gone under the radar, no one knows what might have occurred.

In this- or in who knows how many other instances.

Seems to me, it's a good thing to have information on issues like this disseminated in a timely manner, when people still have a chance to act on it.

btw: I didn't see any "preemptive blaming" so to speak, though did see some "lack of confidence" in what the Whitehouse might do -which, based on the record in various other issues, actions and inactions is perfectly understandable.

beyond that, about all I can say is that if the "blogosphere's" influence is so "vanishingly small" then some on these threads sure seem to be shouting and stamping their feet over nothing.

[HughMoran]

51. Everything government does is a secret plot to get you

[Radical Activist]

20. Shame on Obama for backing off his Iraq withdrawal timeline!!!

Oh no, wait. That was another false alarm. He stuck to the timeline he campaigned on.

[JohnnyLib2]

26. Pardon my munching while ya'll argue.

:popcorn:

[grahamhgreen]

30. He hasn't vetoed it yet...

[JTFrog]

31. Wrong.

Presidential Memorandum--H.R. 3808

It is necessary to have further deliberations about the possible unintended impact of H.R. 3808, the "Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act of 2010," on consumer protections, including those for mortgages, before the bill can be finalized. Accordingly, I am withholding my approval of this bill. (The Pocket Veto Case, 279 U.S. 655 (1929)).

The authors of this bill no doubt had the best intentions in mind when trying to remove impediments to interstate commerce. My Administration will work with them and other leaders in Congress to explore the best ways to achieve this goal going forward.

To leave no doubt that the bill is being vetoed, in addition to withholding my signature, I am returning H.R. 3808 to the Clerk of the House of Representatives, along with this Memorandum of Disapproval.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,
October 8, 2010.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2010/10/08/presidential-memorandum-hr-3808

[Tarheel_Dem]

32. You weren't expecting a retraction, were you? That would be to admit

that the "pre-emptive outrage" expressed here at DU was totally orchestrated & unwarranted, and that takes integrity. Don't expect too much, I certainly don't. But thanks for your efforts to destroy the lie factory, otherwise known as the leftosphere. :thumbsup:

[SidDithers]

45. ...

Sid

[grahamhgreen]

56. Cool!

[canetoad]

33. Pre-emptive blaming

keeps everyone on their toes. And don't you forget it.

[JohnnyLib2]

40. !!

:rofl:


Don'tcha just love tug-of-wars, cyber style?

[Spazito]

42. Well said...

"...wait until President Obama actually does something FIRST, before blaming him for even doing it." Now, that would be refreshing wouldn't it!

Recommended.

[MineralMan]

44. My very favorite example of this is the "Catfood Commission"

business. To hear some people talk, the decision has been made, and was made even before the first meeting of the body that is supposed to make recommendations for dealing with our budget deficit.

All attempts to point out that the commission hasn't published their report have been in vain. The "Catfood Commission" folks continually report that "the fix is in" and that President Obama is going to destroy Social Security. This meme has been broadcast over and over again here on DU, in a naked attempt to slam the President for something that hasn't happened and most likely won't ever happen.

The detractors point to one or two members of the Commission, and say, "See...this is who will decide." Never mind the rest of the members of that Commission, who are conveniently never named in these attacks.

That is the single most deceptive meme being broadcast here on DU, in my opinion.

[JamesA1102]

47. Don't confuse the demagogues with facts. nt

[HughMoran]

52. Sucker

You're Social Security is already gone - take those blinders off!!11!!one!!

[treestar]

48. Yep!

And no one admits they were wrong and STILL finds something wrong with the way it was vetoed.

[MineralMan]

49. The funniest thing of all was the assumption that President

Obama and his legal advisors didn't know the process for a pocket veto and how to do it. Most of the time, that assumption was put forward by people who did not have a clue as to what a pocket veto was or how it was used. That, despite the clear language of the Consitution on that issue.

Finding a reason to attack the Obama Administration is the first priority. Facts don't matter, apparently.

I was appalled at the abject ignorance of how our system of government works in the threads yesterday. It's so easy to learn something about it, but it's more fun, I guess, to display ignorance. There's nothing wrong with being ignorant of the facts, but there's a lot wrong in not trying to educates oneself before writing from ignorance and denying the facts when they are presented.

Sometimes I think it's deliberate, but I don't like to think that about fellow DUers.

[Radical Activist]

54. Obama is going to support extending Bush's tax cuts for the rich!!!

Oh wait...that was another false alarm. He's fighting hard against extending tax cuts for the wealthy.

[onenote]

58. I'm quite certain some DUers will follow your advice

and wait until Obama acts before blaming him,...no matter what action that is!

[azmouse]

59. Awesome thread!!

:thumbsup:

[EFerrari]

60. People leap to conclusions and not only about Obama.

It happens more with him because DU talks about him more than anything else.

[TK421]

62. This guy?

Oh...you said THE Veto, not DeVito...sorry!!