tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11363027.post1027237388193101008..comments2024-03-28T00:02:35.850-05:00Comments on driftglass: Today In Both Sides Do It: Ron Fournier, The Sad Clown of Centrismdriftglasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09379167083253389153noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11363027.post-61074546055354561192016-02-18T11:54:10.057-06:002016-02-18T11:54:10.057-06:00Agreed. Iraq 2005, lifelong Democrat. Did my dut...Agreed. Iraq 2005, lifelong Democrat. Did my duty in spite of my personal politics.Spaceboyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18286720710724858144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11363027.post-76780220608848554432016-02-18T11:25:47.307-06:002016-02-18T11:25:47.307-06:00The definition of a "Lame Duck" is an of...The definition of a "Lame Duck" is an office holder who will not be returning to the office he or she currently holds (either after he or she has lost an election or otherwise is prevented from continuing in that office by term limits). This latter is the case with President Obama; however, he will not be a "lame duck" until there is a president elect, nearly 9 months from now. If the President is a "lame duck" then every member of the House of Representatives is also a "lame duck." "Lame ducks" exist only in the period of time between election day and the day on which a new office holder takes the oath.<br /><br />Of course, Republicans will falsely insist that President Obama is a "lame duck," but anyone who supports them in this error is a collaborator with them in their ongoing attempt (since the day he took office) to deny the president any opportunity to govern, or in this case, to fulfill his Constitutional duty to nominate someone to serve as an associate justice of the Supreme Court.<br /><br />It is an "interesting" morality that claims, we are justified in doing something improper because we believe that our opponents would do something improper if they were in a position to do so. That would be the end of the rule of law. It is a formula for license.<br /><br />There was a time when I believed that "both sides" agreed that the underlying principles of our polity were more important than who won any particular individual election. Events following the presidential election of 2000, with the installation of George W. Bush by 5 justices of the Supreme Court (whose reasoning came down to "because we can") cured me of that mistaken, idealistic assumption so far as the Republican party was concerned. <br /><br />I have yet to see any evidence that Democrats share the belief that "winning" must come first, and matters more than the integrity of the process. But by their actions, Republicans have shown that they treat political conflict as if it were war, and in war, where the threat is existential, all is justified. Once again, NO, both sides are not morally equivalent.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16310103807742995629noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11363027.post-82475474574061058412016-02-18T11:12:43.870-06:002016-02-18T11:12:43.870-06:00It saddens me that the wingnuts aren't even wi...It saddens me that the wingnuts aren't even willing to engage in a spirited debate. Any of the ones up for re-election need to be voted out of office this November. And, for the first time in my life, I am firmly in favor of term limits.<br />Wendyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18282613112168154071noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11363027.post-8833033716966397602016-02-18T10:42:18.397-06:002016-02-18T10:42:18.397-06:00@bowtiejack: projection, and obfuscation. They...@bowtiejack: projection, and obfuscation. They're not paying Fournier to make the issues clearer to his audience.proverbialleadballoonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11592049897382920314noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11363027.post-1745058657516151742016-02-18T06:49:08.204-06:002016-02-18T06:49:08.204-06:00I amuse myself on occasion by dropping twitter tur...I amuse myself on occasion by dropping twitter turds on his head when he's up to his more obvious bothsiderista shenanigans. Big Fun.drbopperthphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09065040490038194712noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11363027.post-30412941524991648682016-02-18T03:05:49.814-06:002016-02-18T03:05:49.814-06:00Hit it Bowiejack
" "psychological projec...<br />Hit it Bowiejack<br />" "psychological projection" aka "blame shifting". <br />--Beating Straw Man. For 35 years. The Straw Man does not exist and cannot retort.<br /><br />4 blows to the zombie head should be enough.<br /><br />1-Quote; "...and that the GOP isn’t the only party captive to its special interests." <br /><br />* Which political party brought K street to D.C.? It was a conservative SCOTUS that gave America Citizens United" Money is speech and unlimited. Corruption is legal. Your argument is that it is OK to be corrupt because others are?<br /><br />2-Quote; "If the roles were reversed and a Republican sat in the Oval Office, I believe Democrats would "<br /><br />* This is hypothetical. You know this because you took Joseph Smith's Mormon rocks, placed them in your hat and the Mormon God showed this unto you?<br /><br />3-Quote; (Milbank) " If I hadn’t watched the Democratic Party move further left".<br /><br />* As the right moved , sprinted, jumped further right they declared the leftward movement. As the far extreme right calls what was once the center, now call the left.'The left is the new extreme left. Yes, the left does look far away from the extreme outer limits where the right gathers to perform human sacrifice rituals. Just watch your GOP debates as evidence!<br /><br />Let me finish with this,<br /><br /> As a veteran who served under Dem and Repub presidents. <br /><br />No matter conservative or liberal. When you're called to war. Have to do some nasty deeds in the name of your country and keep others backs and keep yourself alive and sane.<br />We answer the call and perform. Like it or not. Being of the same political roots OR NOT.!<br />We may not like the war we are ordered into. We took an oath and perform.<br />There is a US Military Court of Justice to punish if you do not. unlike Congress as I see it.<br /><br />Senators take a similar oath as well. No matter if they are the same ideology of the president or not. They have a DUTY. That duty is to confirm. No, Ted Nugent is not competent for the SCOTUS (ideology aside). So deny him. But a justice on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Who was confirmed, has a credible record counts. Being liberal or conservative is not the qualifying factor for any senator to deny or confirm.It disgraces all past, present and future military who adhere professionally to that oath.<br /><br />The military does not choose its officers by ideology.<br /><br />The Court was a majority of Conservatives for some time. I bared it. So again the court may swing the other way for a while. So I feel the rugged individualist tough guy conservative can bar it for a while.<br />Know this, Stop telling me that only republicans can govern (rule) this nation...<br /><br /><br /><br />Robthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15736678459663803707noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11363027.post-22512574284834207592016-02-18T02:28:12.318-06:002016-02-18T02:28:12.318-06:00And Bork whined about it and dined out on it throu...And Bork whined about it and dined out on it through one sinecure or another for the rest of his miserable fucking wispy-beared life.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09300961605043014522noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11363027.post-65878905171057571162016-02-18T00:33:54.955-06:002016-02-18T00:33:54.955-06:00 What was that Jon Stewart said on his last show? ... What was that Jon Stewart said on his last show? If you smell something, say something? Count me in as having spoken up...<br /><br /> -Doug in Oakland dinthebeasthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12941071534250216503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11363027.post-45306550020444561052016-02-17T22:49:48.984-06:002016-02-17T22:49:48.984-06:00I can't put in words how disheartened I am wit...I can't put in words how disheartened I am with the media's (and the voting public's) take on this whole "should Obama be ALLOWED to nominate a SCOTUS, and should the Senate even talk to that nominee." Polling is pretty even (43-42 in favor of Obama nominating), Both Sider-ism is in full erection mode. A few hours ago I heard a talking head point out how Dems were disapproving of Harriet Miers, and thirty years ago were were critical of Robert Bork. You know, both sides equivalent.<br /><br />Fuck's sake, Miers withdrew her nomination after the Senate Judiciary committee dared ask her to fill out a questionaire pertaining to her views and qualifications (she had never served as a udge in any capacity). And Bork did make it past the Committee and get an up or down vote (losing, with six Repub Senators voting against him). For those too young to remember, Bork was the slimy quisling who Nixon got to fire special Prosecutor Archibald Cox on the Saturday Night Massacre during Watergate. After the sitting Repub Attorney General resigned rather than fire Cox, then the Deputy AG also resigned rather than help Nixon avoid investigation. Bork was the piece of shit third man in line who put kissing up to Nixon over following the law, much less morality. <br /><br />Yet both of those idiots had their day in the Senate. So did eventual Justice Anthony Kennedy under St. Ronnie. Confirmed in February 1988, during Ronnie's last 11 months in office on his second term. Not the same as Obama, since Reagan was a White Republican and Obama is ... well, you know.Habitat Vichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17745175381261470890noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11363027.post-58889443777677514432016-02-17T22:42:18.587-06:002016-02-17T22:42:18.587-06:00Yes, we know that if positions were reversed the D...Yes, we know that if positions were reversed the Democrats would do the same thing, are by god doing the same thing or something something something OR maybe the term we should be hunting for here is "psychological projection" aka "blame shifting". <br />https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection<br /><br />Of course, were someone in the media to report that "the GOP is simply accusing the other side of what they are in fact doing" there would be no more of those sweet sweet Georgetown cocktail party invitations or regular employment for that bad boy.<br /><br />Come to think of it though, blame shifting is pretty much the whole GOP conservative project. That seems to be borne out now in the frightful degeneration (although great TV!) of the GOP "debates" which consist of a roomful of liars calling each other liars.<br /><br />bowtiejackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03269786110593961195noreply@blogger.com