Screwing unions better than Bush: "Change you can believe in"

Below is a comment from a person named Mitch on this Mother Jones post. Mitch gets it like only a good old fashioned FDR/Truman liberal can. I love this comment.


Mitch's comment:


Screwing unions better than Bush: "Change you can believe in"?

Submitted by Mitch on March 30, 2009 - 6:18pm.

The one constant in the Obama administration's treatment of these different industries is an extraordinary amount of protectiveness towards corporate executives and an equally extraordinary disdain towards workers, particularly blue collar union workers.

I could not help noticing that all of the "shared sacrifices" involved in saving GM will be shared by the taxpayers, shareholders, bond holders, and, of course, the silly little blue collar workers who pathetically cling to their middle class existence yet do all the actual manufacturing.

Naturally, Obama does not require top executives of GM to participate in the aforementioned "shared sacrificing" and "haircuts" by having their generous health care benefits and multi-million dollar retirement plans "renegotiated" because of the inviolability of (non-union) contracts. Silly little workers. Silly little people who work with their dirty hands. Silly little people who always worked hard, believed in the system and played by the rules all their lives. Silly little people who built this country. Silly little workers who vote a solid Democratic ticket and supported Obama. So silly: Should've gone to Harvard or Yale, and then maybe into finance or journalism.

This is change only in the sense that he is giving better speeches than Bush. Screwing taxpayers, shareholders, bondholders out of their money and workers out of their money, jobs, health care and retirement isn't exactly what I'd call “change you can believe in".

Mitch

Readers notes/Women of the Year

Today's Rappy Nominations:




So much enjoying the comments from the regulars lately. (and you lurkers - dive in! The
water is....uh...wet??)

A comment from reader Marie on last night's post that is precisely on point when it comes to the increasingly loathsome Obama: Obama is not a coward - he is a passive-aggressive careerist who can't find a bus large enough to throw us all under. But here - on this site - many of us - and you,JSOM - saw what this man was and what he was selling and rejected it.
Well, well, this is what slavish devotion will get you. A free ticket to the Capitol steps to hear yourself humiliated by a preacher thug who is BFF with the new Prez. Obama is a man as dangerous as W - in that he is no less driven by his ego pathologies.


A women after my own heart...



Also - after the "despicable quotes" Rappy nominations were announced reader Kara reminded me of a big oversight - the "cling to guns and religion" arrogant riff by Obama in San Francisco. There will be a special award created for easy going arrogance combined with elegant snottiness: TheArianna - sponsored by John-Roger. Guess who wins this year??!!??!!

And a comment on Caroline K. that nails it for me:
The Caroline situation really feels like dropping another sexist shoe. I don't know if anyone has worked really hard for a promotion only to have the boss decide to appoint his girlfriend to the position? Anyway, that's what it feels like.
yttik | 12.17.08 - 6:53 am | #

Special thanks.

I want to thank all the readers of Liberal Rapture. This blog's traffic has gone up and up this year - and I am delighted, grateful and humbled by it. (Though, less than one percent of you post comments! Hey - lurkers, we want to hear from you too! Don't be shy!)
It has been a fascinating year. Painful for many. Misogyny and Homophobia were thrown into sharp relief - even as racism waned. (despite Axelrod's best efforts to fan the flames of faux racism.)

But it has also been fun for me. I have enjoyed blogging about BHO to a surprising degree. The PUMAs did great work in all the places that the media refused to investigate. It was not for naught. Our job is to watch closely. Unlike the Right - we will be able to put any Obama deceit or screwup or corruption into a non ideological CONTEXT for our readers and listeners.

We know
what
we know.

Anyway - not sure what i want to do with the midday post. "Obama Watch" will continue on this blog. At night, when i have time to read and write, L.R. will be chattering about the good, the bad and the ugly...(Michelle's dress last night??? What was that??)
I think I'll make the Gay of the Day the Gay of the Week.
And feature some local news or pics - FROM YOU GUYS - I love the photos that have been sent to me. Send local stories too. John@liberalrapture.com

The other three days? Don't know. You tell me.

And thanks again READERS! Don't become strangers because the election is over.

You guys made my year!

Accusations and Explanations

I've been thinking about my stance on comments. I've removed all banned I.P's. This blog has grown a lot in the past few months and I feel an obligation to the small by consistent audience here. On occasion Pro- Obama commenters have all but hijacked threads. I see no reason to allow this. I want this blog to be a refuge where those disturbed by BHO can alight to gripe, explain, point out fallacies, raise concerns, insult...whatever....Therefore - and follow me here - I am laying down rules for Pro- Obama commenters. This is not fair - but it is more fair than the treatment Pro-Clinton folks got at Kos.

Anyone is welcome to make their case for Obama. But pro-Obama comments that do not address the serious questions about BHO's past, experience, associations, and worthiness raised here and elsewhere will be nixed.

This blog pokes fun, attacks, and is opinionated. It also accuses. When L.R. says he has no experience worthy of the White House those who disagree must either rationally justify why experience does not matter or explain why his actual experience crosses the "White House bar".

When L.R. accuses BHO of dissembling about his past associations - the onus is on BHO's supporters to explain why the accusation is incorrect or irrelevant. Example: Thoughtful people think 20 years at Trinity Church brings up legitimate questions about BHO's character. I think these questions are valid. Obama supporters must explain why they are not valid or give reasons, based in rational thought, as to why they are not valid.

When L.R. accuses BHO of lying ("my banking committee" and the Selma speech come to mind.) it is clear from this end that he's lied. It is up to Obama supporters to explain why they are not lies or to justify their support for a liar.

When L.R. accuses BHO of flip flopping - FISA etc - and questions his character it is up to BHO supporters to explain why flip flopping on major constitutional issues does NOT go to character. Screeching about the alleged horrors of John McCain does nothing to justify Obama's flip flops.

The accusations against Obama may have been tenuous at one point. They no longer are. Evidence mounts daily that he has been dishonest about his stances on issues and his past. If one feels he has not been dishonest: refute it WITH FACTS.

Finally: I will not be fair. I do not have to be. I pay for this blog. Go voice your opinions on the Daily Kos if you don't like it. Many reasonable people have been removed from that "liberal" blog. The simple fact is I'll give the anti-Obama commenters a long leash. No such courtesy will be afforded pro- Obama posters. It is only recently that the blogosphere has balanced itself a bit after a long run of mindless Clinton hatred. PODS: Support Obama and refute our accusations with facts or go away.

I spent a long time searching for reasons to get behind BHO. The only thing I discovered is that he cannot and should not be trusted. Feel free to prove that this time was not well spent. Reasons based in dislike for McCain or Clinton are not reasons at all.

When I write an angry post about Obama responding with "fight the smears" quotes and fear mongering about the opposition just won't fly here. Let me be AGONIZINGLY clear on this point: They would be fine if BHO had tangible experience worthy of obtaining the position he wants.

He does not.

They would be fine if Obama had demonstrated strength of character to go with a lengthy resume.

He has not. Quite the opposite.

Much as Kerry annoyed me it was self evident in my opinion that:

A. He was the better choice.

B. He had enough experience for the job. Ditto for Mondale, McGovern, Humphrey, Dole, etc.

C. Though his character was imperfect it certainly was solid enough for the Presidency.

I am fed up with being told the reason to support Obama is because he's a registered Democrat and that he's not McCain. No. No it is not. I will not sell my soul in a craps game that a bunch of overheated college kids, George Soros, and duplicitous Democratic "leaders" insist I must play.

If Obama wins, and if Obama runs for re-election in 2012, and if he proves to be an adequate, good or great President I will not only vote for him against any imaginable GOP opponent - I will work my ass off for him. I will also refute myself on this blog. With apologies all around that will go on for months.

Until then he remains a half term, flip flopping, lying junior Senator with a murky past who emerged from a corrupt machine who then ran a skilled, but vicious, campaign.

Finally, broad, funny, insults make me happy. Read Shakespeare or read the Greeks for some of the best found anywhere. However, I will protect my peeps from personal attacks.

Have a great weekend!

Banning the trolls.

A few days ago I flushed the first comment from this blog ever. It was a insanely gross remark that went to race. A regular very anti-Obama commenter here alerted me to it.
My co-blogger Lynne and I have had a few discussions about what is not acceptable. Death threats against anyone is a big no no. Racism and sexism are others. I admit much is gray area. But all in all we tend to like as open a forum as possible. It is also a learning curve. After 2 years of getting 20-50 hits a day we are now averaging 400-700 depending on how you read the site meter (Between new news and old news on the left hand side.Click it and you can see all sorts of interesting numbers. Most I don't understand.).

Someone called me a "racist" twice over 2 days. Should that be enough to drop kick him out? Not sure. But I did. The misue of the word has reached an epic scale mostly because Obamites are screaming it left and right. It has become a cue word, used as a "gotcha". Obamites are screaming it now to end conversations and then recline in the Smug Barca lounger and sip their mochas and nibble some sushi. The one element of Obama's life I find inspiring is how far he's come being a bi-racial man. The rest of his narrative is a pile of corrupt Chicago dung. His wife is stuck in a 1970 resentment groove and inspires nothing but contempt.

What the Obamaites are doing by screaming the word "racist!" at anyone who opens their mouth and says 2 words about race is rendering the word impotent. The ridiculous Obermann went ape shit because Ferarro said exactly what John Kerry said - but she was for Clinton so it must have been RACIST! The Huff Post is polluted with blanket indictments of white voters in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and elsewhere.

So why did I ban this guy? Because when he went back to calling me a racist again today and I realized he was merely using it in the "Obama Way": tag people with the great pop culture crime word of the last 20 years and then YOU WIN! Like with so many other things this campaign season I say:

Bullshit.

That nonsense is not happening here. Race has been injected into this campaign far more by Obama than Clinton. He's used it like a Labrador retriever. Fetching it when he needed it, and throwing it far afield when he did not.

Besides, I am not a racist. I won't make the pathetic white boy list to prove it. I don't know what it is too walk a mile in a black man's shoes. Never will. I do know that I went to the matt in faculty meetings as a high school history teacher because black kids were being called "behavior problems" and white kids doing the same crap were not. Did not make a lot of friends there. And went to the matt again when they tried to ban certain hair styles in the school - all of which only the African American kids were sporting. (Since I did not know WTF I was talking about I actually did some due diligence on African womens' traditional hair styles back then. It is really interesting.)
I also carry a lot of the same baggage many white men do in this society. When I got stern I often referred to the males as "boy" to the horror of one of the African American parents. At the time I did not know the history of using that word to degrade black adults. I was mortified and stopped. Learning curve in action.

I guess I did make the pathetic white boy list. Still, the point is we HAVE TO BE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT RACE. People of goodwill support Clinton and they should be allowed a part in the conversation. ( I am a bit short on the good will after what Obama and the media have done this year.) Calling us racist whenever we point up something about Obama's history (which encompasses affirmative action) is not helpful.
Call me a racist. Just back it up. If you call me a pig sucking cur - fine - no need to back that up. Pig sucking cur does not carry 500 years of historical baggage. Plus it's a little funny, which always helps in my book.
I knew based on the oozing smug "obamite" contempt of the comment I flushed that this man was merely throwing the word "racist" into the mix to gain some perceived "win." Plus, he called all Clinton voters dumb in that "oh the little people are so silly" way.I hate that shit. It is my blog and like I said - there is gray area. Buh Bye.

In fairness he was reacting to a comment I made that was close to the edge in the current atmosphere - no doubt. But it wasn't racist. Barry and Michelle have benefited from affirmative action. Get over it.
Wild insults are in a great tradition of American politics. I have no problem with 90% of them. Read up on the Adams/Jefferson race of 1800 if you want some history.
Part of the fun for me of having a blog is that I get to vent. Ditto for commenting on blogs. This is not a newspaper ( though pro Clinton blogs have done a fairer job than the MSM this year.).

I call Olbermann etc bigots because they are. I call Wright a racist because he is. There is no argument about this - but feel free to attempt one.

Or, better yet, go get a blog. It is not hard.