tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4119943.post4601729991338998428..comments2023-09-29T06:57:06.991-07:00Comments on Anglachel's Journal: Media Darlings and Policy DisastersAnglachelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01110546252851760414noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4119943.post-4724614967100232272010-11-12T20:13:37.584-08:002010-11-12T20:13:37.584-08:00"The proper comparison to Obama is Herbert Ho..."The proper comparison to Obama is Herbert Hoover, and not on economic grounds. They are both right-wing progressives, a topic I will write about in coming weeks."<br /><br />I will really be looking forward to that!<br /><br />Great to be reading you again, Anglachel. Thanks for all you do.Palominohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01797386939480032699noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4119943.post-77799098997574534942010-11-12T17:12:54.479-08:002010-11-12T17:12:54.479-08:00Palomino,
Good point about BTD. He ended up being...Palomino,<br /><br />Good point about BTD. He ended up being the only sane BHO supporter in the blogosphere by the end. I've cut him more slack than anybody else. In the end, I have respect for him that I do not feel for anyone else of the A-List bloggers.<br /><br />Even so, his protestations about media darling status combined with his insistence that there wasn't any difference points out that he knew very well there was a difference, but didn't have the courage to say so. He was part of the overall media circus, and the fact that he still can't see any difference (or, rather, is trying to pull Obama into the protected circle of Clinton Democratic politics) perpetuates the fantasy that Obama is not *fundamentally opposed* to the principles of the Democratic Party, as tattered and woebegone as they may be.<br /><br />BTD wants to believe that a tectonic shift has not happened in the party and in Left politics even as it slaps him in the face. He once asked if WKJM and fellow travelers would prefer to destroy the party than allow HRC to win, but could not carry out the rest of the thought. <br /><br />To be fair, you probably have to be a political theorist and historian to understand the strands of interest and power currently being woven together before our eyes. The proper comparison to Obama is Herbert Hoover, and not on economic grounds. They are both right-wing progressives, a topic I will write about in coming weeks.<br /><br />AnglachelAnglachelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01110546252851760414noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4119943.post-916471678339105732010-11-12T10:36:13.270-08:002010-11-12T10:36:13.270-08:00Just a footnote: When BTD calls Obama a Clinton De...Just a footnote: When BTD calls Obama a Clinton Democrat, he means it as a compliment, or at least as a statement of fact, not as a dismissal. BTD repeatedly has described himself as a centrist, and he sees Bill and Hillary Clinton as centrists as well. He also considers Obama a centrist. As BTD said many times during the 2008 primaries, he didn't see "a dime's worth of difference" between Obama and Hillary Clinton. I disagree with that assessment, but that is where BTD is coming from. He was never an Obot. He supported Obama ONLY because Obama was a "media darling." I think that was a very stupid reason to support Obama, but that is the reason BTD gave. He was never an Obama cheerleader. In fact, he frequently called out the Obama wing of the Democratic Party and the media for sexism directed at Hillary Clinton, and he fully understood and articulated the events of May 31, 2008, which dragged Obama over the finish line in the primaries. In other words, I don't think you can put BTD into the same camp as the "former Obama cheerleaders," regardless of BTD's boneheaded reason for supporting Obama.Palominohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01797386939480032699noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4119943.post-69589218506916128562010-11-11T18:39:40.618-08:002010-11-11T18:39:40.618-08:00I have several small deviations: first, the progre...I have several small deviations: first, the progressives are not progressive. They never mention labor, education, address the real issued behind the rich. They are big on wars, foreign policy, and ridiculing the right-wingers. Second, the hate for Clinton is Obama's hate of the working class in Ohio and Pennsylvania. They have a developed class system in which a hick, i.e. Clinton, is always a hick. Third, they loved Obama because not only he is black and they hate HRC, but because they admire the rich investor bankers and movie industry figures, Obama first supporters, who fill up the Huffington Post columns.<br /><br />They always ignored the fact that Clinton came out the gate shooting health care reform despite a tenfold greater opposition than Obama faced and gays in the military. That is progressive and a hick is forbidden to be progressive.<br />I totally agree that Obama was always conservative.Koshem Boshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01724595772791711326noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4119943.post-30307487284192587112010-11-11T16:42:32.410-08:002010-11-11T16:42:32.410-08:00Another good rant-- I've read several today-- ...Another good rant-- I've read several today-- must be a high pressure system in the Blogosphere today.Bob Harrisonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05242937151007030508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4119943.post-84588555448183421682010-11-11T12:19:20.572-08:002010-11-11T12:19:20.572-08:00One question I'd like them to answer is that, ...One question I'd like them to answer is that, if Barky was so similar to Clinton ... then why was HE the designated media darling and she the antichrist? If he was just like her ... why was it so important to the media powers that be that her candidacy be destroyed?<br /><br />If Snowball and Napoleon really were interchangeable, then why was Snowball run off the farm?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com