This is a good idea (4.00 / 2)

Not only does it make conservatives feel good, liberals enjoy being the object of scorn.

Everyone wins!

---

by: Jim Neuman @ Thu Dec 18, 2008 at 01:20:26 AM UTC

Cant do too much poking (0.00 / 0)

He wants to be even handed!

---

by: LeftPoint @ Thu Dec 18, 2008 at 01:21:39 AM UTC

Ooh! Ooh! Pick me! (0.00 / 0)

  I know this one.  Nominate LaHood for Secretary of Transportation!  
 I wanted a complete overhaul of the transportation system of this country.  Will we even get incremental change with LaHood?

John McCain lets lobbyists shape his economic policy

---

by: cilerder86 @ Thu Dec 18, 2008 at 01:35:37 AM UTC

yeah about 50 cents (4.00 / 3)

when you pay 5 dollars to drive on the privately owned, federally subsidized freeway.

---

by: T Maysle @ Thu Dec 18, 2008 at 01:46:56 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Glenn Greenwald had a good take on this (4.00 / 5)

From:
The mind of the Democratic leadership

"You mean the one about how you should caucus with the Republicans?" Emanuel shot back. "That's a good letter. Makes you look bipartisan."

This little vignette provides a very vivid and crystallizing illustration of how Congressional Democratic leaders think and behave.  They consider it a good thing -- not a bad thing -- when they anger their own base.  They're thrilled when they get accused -- accurately -- of acting like Republicans and supporting right-wing measures, particularly on national security and "terrorism" issues.   They consider it a benefit -- an incentive -- when they are attacked for embracing Republican political policies and violating the principles of their own base.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/g...

---

by: triangunation @ Thu Dec 18, 2008 at 01:41:19 AM UTC

but there are STRICT conditions! (4.00 / 2)

they can only have double-scoop immunity and a complimentary bag of bailout money if they promise to fire all their union workers.

ha, just kidding, we'd never actually set conditions. that would be rude - like LIBERALS are rude.

not everything worth doing is profitable. not everything profitable is worth doing.

---

by: tatere @ Thu Dec 18, 2008 at 01:57:36 AM UTC

more melodrama ... (2.40 / 5)

Stoller could have a promising career in t.v.

But, no, seriously, I'm glad you guys are hard on Obama. All politicians need it. Sometimes I wish you were more organized and helped us readers act, rather than just vent. But that takes more work, so I get it. I read Glenn Greenwald for the substantive takes.

It is very possible that Obama's organizers will turn into his worst enemy. I hope so. On health care, we need a public plan. No compromise there. I attended one of the Obama groups last weekend and now we have a network to organize. Pretty cool.

---

by: Lolis X @ Thu Dec 18, 2008 at 02:09:52 AM UTC

I see (4.00 / 3)

I wasn't aware that Open Left never engaged in any activist campaigns. That's a new one.

---

by: Chris Bowers @ Thu Dec 18, 2008 at 02:50:17 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

wow. so healthcare is more important than MY civil rights to you? (2.00 / 2)

and you make that decision for the Democratic Party?

ass. hole.

For some reason, it seems that Obama has some pathological and deep-seated psychological need for Republicans to like him.  Seriously.  It's weird.

---

by: avenged savant @ Thu Dec 18, 2008 at 03:15:23 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

uprated for troll abuse. nt. (0.00 / 0)

---

by: seabrook @ Thu Dec 18, 2008 at 04:19:04 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Downrated... (0.00 / 0)

for gratuitous ad hominen swipes - "But that takes more work, so I get it."

Yeah it's light agitprop, but not every post has to be a ponderous work of intellect. I'd get bored if the frontpagers didn't mix up what they were trying to do and have some fun.

I'm holding out hope for when Matt or Chris will drop some poetry on us!

---

by: johnalive @ Thu Dec 18, 2008 at 04:57:18 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

No excuse for Rick Warren (4.00 / 4)

 There are literally TENS OF THOUSANDS of religious leaders who are NOT flaming wingnuts who would have been good choices to lead the invocation at the inauguration.

 Instead, Obama chose Rick Warren. A man who encapsulates the WORST of religion in America -- rigid, intolerant, right-wing fundamentalism. Exactly the twisted, perverted form of Christianity that Obama has always claimed NOT to espouse.

  Rick F***ing Warren. I guess Jerry Falwell's death made him unavailable.

  This decision suggests either (a) complete contempt for yet ANOTHER loyal Democratic constituency, or (b) a political tone-deafness that sheds new serious doubts on Obama's vaunted instincts. Obama has spit in the faces of every Christian in America who is NOT a wingnut fundamentalist. And he has spit in the faces of every GLBT American who worked so hard to get him elected.

  This is inexcusable. It was COMPLETELY unnecessary.

  Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.  

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn

---

by: Master Jack @ Thu Dec 18, 2008 at 02:24:32 AM UTC

This is the excuse, (4.00 / 3)

via balloon-juice:

If you followed the internal politics of evangelical and fundamentalist leaders, you'd see this for what it is-not an elevation of Warren, but a slap in the face of the old guard leaders like Dobson and LaHaye. They've been fighting to see who gets to be the spokesman for the movement, and lately it's been a tie. Obama just broke it.
    And let's be clear, there is a difference between those groups. Warren may not be progressive on gay rights, but he's been out front on a number of issues of global justice-traveling from Davos to Damascus, and working hard to get rank-and-file evangelicals invested in "creation care" environmentalism and the fight against global HIV/AIDS.
    If he were put in charge of HHS or listened to on gay policies, I'd be pissed. But what Obama is doing here isn't that. It's a move that marginalizes the worst on the religious right, elevates a guy who's more progressive than most religious leaders on a number of issues, and earns him some moderate cred at the outset.
    If Obama sells out on the progressive promise in actual policy, I'll be in the streets protesting with everyone else. But if his "selling out" is having a fairly moderate, popular evangelical give the invocation at the inaugural-when large sections of this country still worry Obama's a scary evil Mooooslim-then who gives a flying fuck?

Not saying I buy it, but that's the excuse.

And this actually is entirely consistent with Obama's political instincts. Remember McClurkin? That didn't cost Obama a dime.

---

by: Joel @ Thu Dec 18, 2008 at 03:31:38 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I don't buy it (4.00 / 5)

  Part of the problem we've had is that the only "Christians" given media space are the fundie wingnut lunatics. Which is what Rick Warren is, once you strip away the phony "moderate" shrinkwrap.

 Rick Warren isn't a slap in the face to the fundie right -- he's an affirmation of them. If Obama really wanted to marginalize the fundies and expand the media space to include mainstream Christians, then why not pick someone like Jim Wallis? He's not MY favorite, either, but he's a heck of a lot more moderate than Rick Warren, and more importantly, he's not OF the fundie lunatic crowd. Now THAT would have been a statement.

  Warren is to right-wing fundies what Brit Hume is to Fox News -- he sounds "reasonable" only compared to his stablemates. But he's very much part of the stable.


"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn

---

by: Master Jack @ Thu Dec 18, 2008 at 03:42:58 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

He did (0.00 / 0)

Obama really wanted to marginalize the fundies and expand the media space to include mainstream Christians, then why not pick someone like Jim Wallis?

Rev. Joe Lowry will be delivering the closing prayer.

REV. JOSEPH LOWERY, CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVIST: We know now that there were no weapons of mass destruction over there, but Coretta knew and we knew that there are weapons of misdirection right down here.

There's a good diary on Lowery at dKos.

On gay marriage:

"When you talk about the law discriminating, the law granting a privilege here, and a right here and denying it there, that's a civil rights issue. And I can't take that away from anybody." Joseph E. Lowery (ABC News, 03/13/04)

Also:

Ms. Douglass noted that the benediction, or closing prayers, would be offered by the Rev. Joseph E. Lowery, a civil rights icon who has expressed support for gay marriage, and that the Lesbian and Gay Band Association would march in the inaugural parade, the first time such a group would do so.

Do I think it was wrong to have Wallis at the inauguration?  Yes, I do.  But keep in mind the debate is who to keep out more than who to invite.  The complaint is Obama is being too inclusive, not too exclusive.

---

by: Mark Matson @ Thu Dec 18, 2008 at 08:10:41 AM UTC

[ Parent ]