So, he didn't respect "progressives" in the morning? (4.00 / 4)

Maybe holding his feet to the fire from the very beginning would have turned out to be the smart thing to do, as well as the right thing to do. This part of Dan's post, quoting Harwood, also got left out:

In an email to the Huffington Post on Monday, Harwood clarified that the quote was not meant to convey any displeasure on the part of the administration for the gay community's public advocacy.

"My comments quoting an Obama adviser about liberal bloggers/pajamas weren't about the LGBT community or the marchers," he wrote. "They referred more broadly to those grumbling on the left about an array of issues in addition to gay rights, including the war in Afghanistan and health care and Guantanamo -- and whether all that added up to trouble with Obama's liberal base..."

So, Harwood's comment wasn't directed at gays, but to people with policy issues about Afghanistan, health care, and Gitmo.

Alrighty then. That does clarify things. Yeppers.

I am in earnest -- I will not equivocate -- I will not excuse -- I will not retreat a single inch -- AND I WILL BE HEARD.  

---

by: lambert @ Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 13:28:15 PM CDT

Respect has to be earned. (4.00 / 3)

Unfortunately, bending over and taking it in the face of relentless abuse doesn't earn respect - it earns the exact opposite, because whether in politics or on the playground abusers detest weakness.  What we need to do is stop making excuses for why we have to surrender on principle, and start getting in the faces of the powerful.  We have to be every bit as rabidly partisan (in the sense of acting as a progressive movement) and uncompromising as the far right.  If we don't, then we'll be playing forever on the defensive against an unrelenting offense.  That's a recipe for disaster.

---

by: Michael Kwiatkowski @ Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 13:48:18 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

So instead of pissing on LGBT bloggers (4.00 / 2)

he's pissing on the entire left blogosphere.  And he thought that was a better statement to make.  (Not a question.)

Think about that for a second.

He's saying to the gay community that they're not alone in receiving contempt from the White House.  It's directed at all the lefty bloggers, so the LGBT community should feel better now because they weren't singled out.

Then we get today's official response, which Adam rightly derided.  It goes back to what Paul and Robert Fuller have written about rankism and dignitarianism.  (I wanted to provide a link to search results for those terms, but all I get is the initial search.do URL with no extra identifying characters.)

I repeat what I said last night.  This is pure dumb-fuckery.

---

by: Gabriel D @ Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 14:13:18 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Very Well Put (4.00 / 3)

And it's nice to see another cool example of how high school hell can be used productively later in life.

"Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition"

---

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 13:29:22 PM CDT

no source no story (4.00 / 2)

every time some reporter runs with one of these let's you and him fight stories we need to tell them and their publication get back to us when you can get your sources on the record.

for all we know Harwood made it up. And even if he actually has a source, the quote could be distorted beyond all recognition.

this has nothing to do with what you think of Obama, it has to do with what you think of reporters who traffic in anonymous sources. If every time someone ran with one of these inane stories based on anonymous sources we heaped scorn upon them it would come to a stop. Meanwhile Harwood is the star of his very own lets you and him fight show.

Scorn is the only response such stories merit.

---

by: AliceDem @ Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 13:45:47 PM CDT

I think I have been extremely critical of Obama (4.00 / 2)

and his administration. I think it's been clear from day one he wants to hold us at arm's length and has shown in a multitude of ways he is not interested in our having a place in serious policy discussions. Given all that, the sentiments in the unattributed quote are not surprising.

Having said all that, the denial and repudiation of those remarks by the White House seem to make this a non-issue for me. Let's keep our eye on what is really going on and not just the static emanating from some nameless and faceless voices (unless they are not disowned).

---

by: VLaszlo @ Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 13:51:46 PM CDT

Are you kidding me? (0.00 / 0)

Or is it just yourself you're trying to fool?  As Greenwald points out, this was merely the latest in a long and growing train of offensive dismissals of the Democratic Party's base.  Why you'd believe the lame denials coming out of the White House every time they get caught with their pants down is beyond me.

"Oh no, dear, I wasn't cheating on you!  Honest!  It's just that I heard some commotion in here, and this hooker had obviously fallen on the floor, and when I went to pick her up I tripped and my pants fell down and my d*** landed in her p***y!"

Yeah, and if you believe that cockamamie bullshit, I've got a priceless silver serving pitcher to sell you for a cool million.

---

by: Michael Kwiatkowski @ Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 17:22:37 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Just does not sound like a big deal to me. (0.00 / 0)

n/t.

---

by: VLaszlo @ Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 18:57:07 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

By itself, maybe not. (0.00 / 0)

But as was pointed out, this is the latest in a long line of offenses that well and truly demonstrate the utter contempt the Obama White House has for the left.

---

by: Michael Kwiatkowski @ Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 06:22:59 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Agree more or less (0.00 / 0)

Given my perception of where Obama is, this will not be the last or worst of the attacks on the left. We do not do ourselves any favors or gain credit or cerdibility by jumping on every minor blip. IMO there will be plenty of big ones ahead. I agree their attitude seems clear.

---

by: VLaszlo @ Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 06:32:12 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

i consider myself ahead of the curve a lot of times (4.00 / 5)

and in the case of obama, i know i was. that is: i pledged not to lift a finger to work for his election, after he had a "third strike" moment wrt his official positions/statement/associations on gay rights. putting the homophobe on the campaign trail was the last straw for me. for different reasons, i also pledged not to work against him during the campaign, and to give him my vote and not vote for mccain. my election efforts went instead to local candidates, that year.

but i am one of those people who understands the value of respect, and people who don't show me any not only don't get any in return from me, if they disrespect me enough, they receive my active hostility and contempt.

Glennzilla had the best line:

Just this weekend, a "top gay Democrat close to Obama" was granted anonymity by Politico to dismiss administration critics on gay issues as "naive." Just six weeks ago, an equally cowardly "senior White House adviser" hiding behind anonymity told told The Washington Post that the only people who cared about the public option in health care were "the left of the left" -- those same fringe, irrational extremists. In June, an anonymous "friend of John Brennan's" told Jane Mayer in The New Yorker that the people who prevented Brennan's nomination as CIA Director (because of his support for some of the most radical Bush Terrorism policies) were nothing more than "a few Cheeto-eating people in the basement working in their underwear who write blogs." Last year, "Democrats on the Hill" anonymously dismissed opposition to telecom immunity and warrantless eavesdropping as nothing more than a fringe issue being exploited by Chris Dodd for his presidential campaign, and then anonymously warned Dodd to abandon his left-wing obstructionism if he wanted to resume good standing in the Democratic caucus. Can anyone miss the pattern?

it's not just a lack of respect, it's open hostility and disrespect to those of us on the "left." a "left" that in the cases of afghanistan, health care, and domestic spying, make up ~70-80% of the population. how can i have anything but contempt for politicians who can't understand what "will of the majority" means?

---

by: chicago dyke @ Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 13:53:03 PM CDT

What about... (4.00 / 2)

Well, never mind, CD. I'm sure you know where I was going, with that one.

* * *

What are you, going for the Nobel Prize for Being Prematurely Correct?

I am in earnest -- I will not equivocate -- I will not excuse -- I will not retreat a single inch -- AND I WILL BE HEARD.  

---

by: lambert @ Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 14:48:41 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Don't confuse "respect" with "tactics" (4.00 / 1)

Obama must be 'left of the left' then, because he's clearly stated he's for a public option.  Brennan's friend was pissed because his buddies job got shot down, so no surprise he'd bash 'bloggers,' and Democrat Congressmen are paid big bucks by telecoms - big news.

"Left" has been made a pejorative, and I doubt you get 70% agreeing with us on domestic spying because 80% don't understand the issue or don't give a fuck.

We need to be moving the Overtron window west-wards, so that "left" is the new "center."

---

by: Chasm @ Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 14:50:11 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Agree and Disagree (0.00 / 0)

While there seems no upside to publicly calling out the progressive blogosphere, I think it is important to remember the hierarchy here: "Blogs" of any stripe - left or right - carry no policy weight of any kind and never have.  No one at the White House has ever come to openleft.com for a policy or strategic opinion. They pay a lot of people already to form and argue these opinions.

Therefore there is no political upside or downside in praising generic online progressive voices since any random comment can be seized upon by O'Reilly for the outrage of the day. What's important is the ability to filter progressive concerns upward into the media sphere, something the right has perfected with it's Malkin-Drudge-Fox troika.  Bashing the online left covers the White Houses' flank, while pointing out that HuffPo is our equivalent of Drudge: if we can get our concerns to that circle of Media, we're covered.

Look at it this way, many members of Congress have no problems interacting with us on Kos.  To get to the Pres, it's got to be real news.

---

by: Chasm @ Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 14:37:05 PM CDT

Bashing the online left (4.00 / 1)

saps the morale of Obama's frontline infantry. Why you think that's a good thing is beyond me.

Montani semper liberi

---

by: Sadie Baker @ Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 17:34:32 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I think the point is... (4.00 / 2)

...that people seem to be obsessed about taking a CNBC anchor's word ('cos CNBC is sooooo on our side) for no other reason than it validates some bizarre masochism on the left...

Honestly, a CNBC anchor?  You trust a CNBC anchor for anything?  Not only was it an "anonymous" source, he didn't even offer a quote.. just an editorial, made up from his own anti-progressive worldview... and everyone is freaking out!

That's just ridiculous!  We are so easily played.... expect the right to keep doing it, 'cos it's just getting way too easy for them to divide us--just have Sean Hanity "quote" an anonymous white house staffer, and there will be intra-party civil war within the hour.

Pathetic, really....  I thought we were made of sterner stuff...

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!

---

by: lord_mike @ Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 15:54:22 PM CDT