Latest Threads
Greatest Threads
Home » Discuss » Journals » NanceGreggs Donate to DU
Advertise Liberally! The Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Advertise on more than 70 progressive blogs!
NanceGreggs's Journal: Nance Rants
Posted by NanceGreggs in General Discussion
Fri May 20th 2011, 10:21 PM
Last November, I logged off DU for the first time since becoming a member of this community five years before. I needed some time away from here, some distance from what was becoming a battleground between warring factions. It was not a decision of particular import at the time – no final farewells seemed necessary, as I had not made any decision to stay or go.

But over time, the decision made itself. DU had changed and was no longer a good fit for me, while it became a perfect fit for others. This is not only the way of websites; this is the way of the world. Times change, people change, political loyalties change. And DU and its membership are no different than the world at large.

However, when I was alerted to the fact that Skinner will be shutting down certain DU Groups as part of the launch of DU3 and was asking for input in that regard, it struck me that I might be the obvious choice for suggesting that the Barack Obama Group be deleted.

And so here I am, for the last time – not because I have an axe to grind or a bone to pick, or feel a need to post a GBCW. I am, as was said back in my day, already gone.

I am here because the BOGgers have moved on, and it seems obvious that our own forum has no place here. It is time to relinquish whatever space we once claimed as our own, so that said property can be passed on to those who now more rightfully belong here. Those of us who support Barack Obama, and are satisfied with his progress on behalf of our Party and our fellow citizens, are better served elsewhere, while those who are dissatisfied and feel a need to vent their frustrations have every right to expect as much bandwidth on DU as possible. It should “officially” be theirs.

My association with DU started with a single article, written and submitted for publication on the Home Page. That article went viral, as they say; I watched in fascination as my rants caught the attention not only of my fellow DUers, but others. I was awestruck to see my little ravings published on other websites, in newspapers, read on-air on radio programs. It was never my intent to be “noticed” – but it was a trip, pure and simple. To say I enjoyed every minute of it would be as vast an understatement as I can possibly imagine.

But most importantly, my association with DU has led to friendships I never dreamed I would have, with people who are now as much a part of my life as my family, my coworkers, my next door neighbours. I am particularly proud of the fact that several of my on-line friends are DUers who I disagreed with most, whose vitriol towards me was the most scathing and ferocious. As they say, politics often makes for strange bedfellows – and it often brings the most unlikely of us together in mutual respect, and the recognition that true political principles are most effective when applied to what we can accomplish together, rather than what we, as individuals, can find fault with.

On a personal note, I realize that I am a naturally positive person. As such, I tend to veer away from websites that focus on the negative. And I still admit to a total non-understanding of those who post on Democratic websites for the sole purpose of decrying the Party, its intentions, its goals, et cetera – while reiterating, over and over, that the Dems and the GOP are one and the same. It would seem that such people wouldn’t be bothered to post anywhere, being as it’s all for naught and all. And yet they persist – to what end, one can only wonder.

But then, as many have pointed out here on DemocraticUnderground, those who still believe in the Democratic party are obviously uninformed kool-aide drinkers who need re-educating. That being said, I have opted out of being re-educated. I still believe that positive action accomplishes more than negative inaction, and that complaining ad nasuem about what’s wrong with the world has little to do with making it right.

I realize that some are disappointed in President Obama, especially those who thought he was going to agree with them on every issue, one hundred percent of the time (a position I find to be a bit naïve, but there you have it.) I also realize that some people are not now, never have been, and never will be satisfied – regardless of who is in office. That’s just the way things are.

And so I suggest, Skinner, that the BOG be officially dismantled. It’s contributors have moved on to greener political website pastures, where supporting a Democratic president is considered to be a step in a positive direction. DemocraticUnderground has chosen to take a different tack, and I don’t question the motives nor wisdom thereof. It is what it is. But those of us who see things in a more positive, pro-active light must do what we must do – just as you and your DU Admin colleagues must do as you see fit in order to ensure DU’s survival and continued success.

The proposed bells-‘n’-whistles of DU3 look incredibly awesome! I’ve no doubt that a new generation of participants will be drawn into the political conversation as a result thereof. I sincerely hope they have something to offer beyond complaints about the Dem Party, and links to sites that encourage Dems to find fault with their own. DU is, after all, a political discussion board and, as such, it is the discussion that counts – bells ‘n whistles notwithstanding.

My time here was fantastic! It was full of honest discussion and incredible laughter. It was a place of sanctuary during incredibly bad times; a place that spoke of warm welcoming in days of cold-shouldered indifference. It was a respite from the insanity; a safe harbour in the midst of political storms that threatened to drown us all.

It was a place of common goals, common dreams, common aspirations – despite differences as to how to reach those goals, realize those dreams, achieve what we all aspired to.

I choose to remember DU as it was. What it is now belongs to those who I do not agree with nor identify with. But it is theirs to do with as they see fit – and my lack of participation will not be noticed; my rants will not be missed.

The BOG died a long time ago – despite the lunatic ramblings of those who post on sites that cannot be mentioned here, who still insist that BOGers dictate DU’s direction and policies, despite having departed long before the inane claims that they were in total control of what was posted here, and when, and why.

It is time to recognize the passing of THE BOG – not a passing away, but a passing along into websites that welcome those of a positive outlook and a positive demeanour; those who won’t take no, I can’t as an answer, those who won’t accept it’s all about ME as a policy to be accepted by those concerned with what is ultimately all about US.

I wish DU the best of everything – increased membership, increased participation, increased support.

The fact that I cannot, in good conscience as a Democrat, be part of DU’s future is neither here nor there. I am, after all, in a favoured position; I can state my political views without regard to what is financially expedient, what will garner monetary contributions, what will result in enough funds to keep afloat.

I sincerely wish the best of everything to the DU Powers that Be. To Skinner, EarlG and Elad: I have watched you prosper and grow, and take pride in thinking that I may have contributed in some small part. Kudos; you have done yourselves proud.

But life moves on. And those of us who believe in life must move on with it, and follow its positive flow. Democracy is not a website; it is a way of life. It requires participants who never see themselves as limited to being called “BOGgers”, or those content with being described as in or out according to the latest REC/UNREC philosophy. Democracy is a bit more – how shall I say it? – a bit more fucking important than that.

I wish everyone here all the best. Honestly and sincerely, I really do.

--- Nance
Read entry | Discuss (212 comments) | Recommend (<0 votes)
Posted by NanceGreggs in General Discussion: Presidency
Sun Nov 07th 2010, 10:03 PM
During the eight disastrous years of the BushCo Administration, the constant buzz among Democrats – especially those on DU – was the fact that Republicans stuck together and supported their own, no matter what.

This kind of support was dismissed as zombie-like lock-stepping, never to be confused with, nor equated to, the independent thinking among those under the Big Tent, who consistently defied the notion that people with common goals were incapable of achieving them without demanding like-mindedness among their ranks, devoid of individual opinions and/or the acknowledgement of separate-but-equal principles.

The Big Tent included a vast array of Democrats: centrists, middle-of-the-roaders; conservative-prone moderates and far-left extremists. And all were welcome, because that was our strength. We, as a Party, recognized that it was the tapestry of interwoven threads of myriad origin that made for better cloth, more enduring than the fabric crafted of one fiber, to the exclusion of all others deemed unacceptable by those who manned the political looms.

Where we have failed, IMHO, is in the recent admonitions to be less-than-inclusive of our own when they voice opinions that fall outside the accepted voice that MUST be deferred to – a.k.a. the loudest among us – something we have recognized as a major fault in our opposition, but somehow ultimately failed to see as detrimental when we adopted it as part of our own behaviour.

It is no surprise to the more astute here that demands to toe the line by self-proclaimed progressives, extreme liberals, far leftists have been divisive within our party, and the self-appointed spokespeople for the aforementioned have driven a wedge between the many groups that truly are, collectively, “the base” – that base so many claim to have exclusive rights to, as though no one of differing political stance has a right to be acknowledged for their efforts to achieve the goals common to us all.

It is somewhat ironic that the Big Tent – once representative of our proud heritage of honouring diversity and individual thought – has been gleefully rent asunder by those who, despite their claims of liberal-minded tolerance, have absolutely no tolerance for those who disagree with their own view of the world and how it can be made better for all.

There are some whose intolerance is the result of feeling marginalized by the greater numbers who are more pragmatic in their attitudes; those who have grown understandably impatient with fellow party members who seem reluctant to move ahead at a pace not necessarily acceptable to the nation-at-large.

But there are also those whose intolerance of any political stances taken, other than their own, is simply a matter of having it their way or no way – the consequences of such an attitude be damned. They have no empathy for those irreparably harmed by their attitude, nor sympathy for those whose lives are adversely affected by their insistence on all or nothing, their way or the highway, or the prospect of being judged as unworthy of being part of the collective “we” should opinions be expressed that are not in keeping with the loudmouth-de-jour on a political website.

Our Big-Tent strength is now being proferred as our biggest weakness – no room for centrists, conservative Democrats, pragmatists, incrementalists – or whatever other label certain people wish to apply to those whose world view is different from their own, whose approach to achieving commonly-held goals varies in any way from the lockstep demands – yes, lockstep – of those who “know” the only true path to political success.

The threads of our Party’s tapestry are many, each contributing their own luster and strength to the whole – the polished experience of the silk, the common sense of the cotton, the inherent fortitude of the hemp, the delicate nuance of the linen, the reliability of the wool.

There are those among us who delight in pointing to the weaknesses of fibers they deem as easily dispensed with, those of no importance to the final product – and their outcries in doing so should be not only be weighed and measured, but scrutinized for the true purpose of their motives.

A house divided against itself cannot stand – and when alleged Democrats go about doing all in their power to divide, you can’t help but wonder what end result they are hoping to achieve – and if that end result has anything at all to do with Democratic Party success, and the possibility of Democratic Party achievement.

When someone encourages you to embrace your fellow Party members who have their sights set on goals common with your own – despite their differences in the way such goals are best realized – you might want to consider that approach.

But when someone encourages you to dismiss out-of-hand any fellow Party members whose approach differs from your own, you might be well-advised to consider their intentions, along with the true purpose of their agenda.

I am a Big Tent Democrat – if such labels are now, as it seems, necessary to be applied. I embrace the caution of the conservative Democrat, the vision of the Liberal Democrat, the soft-of-voice Democrat, the throw-caution-to-the-wind outspoken Democrat, the careful-what-you-wish-for Democrat, the sky’s-the-limit Democrat – all have their place, and their contribution to make.

And I, for one, treasure each viewpoint, and recognize its contribution to the whole – each thread in its proper place, each texture valued for its unique quality, each voice heard and given its proper place in the overall harmony, each opinion considered and added to the mix.

The dismissal of any opinion or political position that doesn’t conform to the current self-proclaimed loom-master’s view of how the Democratic cloth should look in the end result is a lockstepper encouraging locksteppers, and calling themselves anything else is as inherently dishonest as it is laughable - and ultimately dangerous in its ability to divide and conquer those who would otherwise seek to march together on what is truly common ground.

Read entry | Discuss (142 comments) | Recommend (+32 votes)
Posted by NanceGreggs in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Sat Oct 16th 2010, 02:44 AM
I find some of the postings here of late absolutely mind-boggling. One DUer pitted against another – the most vile things being said, the worst vitriol being spewed.

And that’s just GD and GDP.

I decided to take a break from DU politics and check out the various forums, in search of calmer waters.

What I've learned is that the current vitriol in the political threads has wended its way, like a computer virus, through all aspects of this website.

Some examples (warning – graphic):

A contingent of regular posters in the Crafts Group have managed to rile up the knitters – to the point where those who prefer crochet are being bullied into giving up their hooks and adopting the two-needle method, or else. So far, the cross-stitch crowd are refusing to weigh in – while the tatters and the macramé-ers are taking opposite sides.
At this point, the beaders are the inevitable tie-breakers and are encouraging infighting between all factions. It’s a batik, tie-dyed, candle-making, scrap-booking mess – and the admins are sitting idly by while the bloodshed continues.

The Photography Group have clearly separated into two camps – the classic-black-and-white-no-frills-allowed (starkly unframed) purists versus the technically-liberal-computer-enhanced (and suitably framed) photo-progressives. I understand that, on average, ‘alerts’ in this forum are sent on a three-per-minute basis, and seven Mods have quit and had to be replaced in the last six weeks alone.

The Cooking & Baking Group is so awash in “virtual” blood, you’d think a crazed chef went postal after arming himself with a turkey-baster full of plasma. I don’t know how the current C&B Wars got started – but a quick search of DU archives leads back to a seemingly-innocent OP about coddled eggs. Several dozen granite cookies have been delivered since one poster challenged another to whisks at dawn. Mayhem ensued, and many were Magic Bulleted (aka TS’d) in the aftermath.

Little-known DU trivia fact: There have been more suspensions meted out to members of the Poetry Group than in any other forum on this website. The War of Words is played out in this forum with precision – and a sense of vengeance. After a poorly chosen two-word phrase was used by a single poster in a haiku thread, all hell broke loose – and then some. Members of the Writers Group quickly got into the fray – short-story specialists taking one side, while essayists took the other. The take-no-prisoners battle continues – as eloquently and well spoken as one can expect in the circumstances.

Sad to say, the Humor Group has disbanded due to the lack of humor to be found on DU.

The least noticed, but most influential DU group being …

LATE BREAKING NEWS: Headline: “Peace Reigns On DemocraticUndergound!”

No MSM link yet available, but sporadic Twitter comments support rumors that DU members have reached a peace accord, i.e. half of the website’s members will immediately place the other half on IGNORE.

What we have here is a failure to communicate. For many, this is communication at its finest – or, to be more succinct, mis-communication at its finest. Part of an agenda, part of a plan.

I don’t know who hatched the plot to separate DUers into warring factions – but the Birders Group have been strategically silent on the topic.

Just sayin’ is all.
Read entry | Discuss (82 comments) | Recommend (+52 votes)
Posted by NanceGreggs in General Discussion: Presidency
Sun Sep 26th 2010, 09:47 PM
Has it ever occurred to you that while you’re carrying on about the fact that you knocked on doors and supported Obama’s candidacy (and, by virtue thereof, you deserve to have your complaints addressed), there was someone else knocking on doors and supporting his candidacy whose agenda was completely different than your own – and feels that his complaints are just as valid, even though they may be in complete opposition to yours?

Has it ever occurred to you that when you say Obama has not gone far enough in his policies, or has not done enough to satisfy your desire for real change, you have a valid argument to present – but when you say “Obama has done NOTHING”, you’ve lost the argument already?

Has it ever occurred to you that while you’re claiming to be The Base, there are others, whose perspective may be totally at odds with yours, who can also legitimately lay claim to being The Base – having voted for, campaigned for, contributed to this Democratic presidency?

Has it ever occurred to you that incessant whining and complaining, without proferring any ideas, actions, or attitudes that would make things more to your liking, is nothing more than exactly that – incessant whining and complaining?

Has it ever occurred to you that some people would whine and complain no matter who had been elected – because that’s the only thing they know how to do?

Has it ever occurred to you that your fellow Democrats might see things differently than you do – by virtue of their profession, their personal circumstances, their financial situation – and they feel their concerns to be as much of a priority as yours?

Has it ever occurred to you that those who encourage discord between fellow Democrats might be pursuing an agenda that is thwarted by any sense of solidarity, any perception of common purpose - and, to that end, they are duty-bound to sow the seeds of discontent whenever possible?

Has it ever occurred to you that some people support this presidency out of satisfaction with its accomplishments thus far, and not out of ‘idol worship’, ignorance, or being easily misled?

Has it ever occurred to you that ‘compromise’ is a means of getting things accomplished, and not a total relinquishing of one’s principles – nor a distraction from one’s ultimate goals? Has it ever occurred to you that choosing one's battles is not always a sign of surrender, but an acknowledgment that some battles are indeed more important, when it comes to winning The War, than others?

Has it ever occurred to you that saying I’m not abandoning the Party, the Party has abandoned me is just another way of saying “If I don’t get everything I want, I’m out of here – and to hell with everyone else”?

Has it ever occurred to you that declaring you are not going to support a party of spineless idiots unwilling to fight is merely an indication that you are too spineless to fight for what you allegedly believe in – and lay your pitiful excuse for your non-participation at the feet of those you pretend to abhor, but inevitably emulate?

Has it ever occurred to you that constantly pointing out the flaws in the Party, without offering any viable solutions to countering or correcting those flaws, just might be a “flaw” in your own position?

Has it ever occurred to you that those who constantly bitch about “lock-stepping Democrats” have a penchant for lock-stepping when airing their complaints – right down to the same quotes, the same talking points, the same phrases? Has it ever occurred to you that lock-stepping is a two-lane highway, and there are as many coming as going?

Has it ever occurred to you that the people who naysay, complain, post nothing but negative articles, news stories, op-eds – day after day, without respite – might be promoting an agenda that has nothing to do with Democrats moving forward, but everything to do with promoting the notion that “the other side of the aisle” might be worth listening to ... in view of your dissatisfaction with your own party and all?

Has it ever occurred to you that many of us here have the same principles, the same goals, the same priorities – and differ only on how those goals are best achieved?

Has it ever occurred to you that those who insinuate that your vote doesn’t count, that your participation in the Party is pointless, that your support of a Democratic president (whether you love him or loathe him) is somehow a betrayal of your own ideals, sounds an awful lot like someone who doesn’t want you to ACT like a Democrat, or to vote accordingly?

Has it ever occurred to you that the change you seek is your responsibility to accomplish. And being encouraged to believe that it is solely up to someone else – from the President on down the line – makes for a great excuse to be disengaged from a process only YOU can alter by your participation therein?

Has it ever occurred to you that “The Party” is you – not the guy next to you, who never tires of reminding you that you don’t count. And if you listen to him, you, by default, don’t count at all. Has it ever occurred to you that that guy might see any pro-active move on your part as contrary to what he wants?

Has it ever occurred to you that those who continually post all that is negative, all that serves to be discouraging, all that seeks to pit one Democrat against another, might be pursuing an agenda that has nothing to do with progress or moving this country forward towards idealistic goals?

Has it ever occurred to you to question the motives of those who do so?

You might want to start thinking about it - because certain things might "occur to you" as a result.

Please proceed to REC or UNREC as is your wont. It is no longer of any consequence to me. But the truth of the matter remains a constant: you're either with this Party or against it. You're either up to the fight against the other side, or you're not. You're either in this battle to win - or you're in it to lose. There is nothing in between.
Read entry | Discuss (292 comments) | Recommend (+52 votes)
Posted by NanceGreggs in General Discussion: Presidency
Mon Sep 13th 2010, 11:18 PM
I have rarely posted here over the past four months – not due to lack of interest, but due to a desire to step back and analyze what is being posted here, and why.

I am known as a “cheerleader” for this Administration (and don’t taze me, Mod bros, for having invoked a term considered taboo). The truth is that I have chosen to opine on the positives of this president and his administration – a personal choice that in no way denotes the sense of “worship” that I, along with others, have been accused of.

I do not opine on this Administration’s position on education – because there are teachers here who are vastly more knowledgeable than I on the subject. And I defer to their better judgment on how such policies impact not only on their ability to teach, but the students they hope to educate.

I do not opine on the need for electoral reform, environmental issues, GBLT rights – and a myriad of other topics – because we have among us experts in the fields; i.e. people who have made such subjects a cause celebre, and know (far better than I) whereof they speak.

I believe we have often confused support for this Presidency as blind acquiescence – just as often as we’ve confused valid criticism of its policies as unsupported bashing. The sincere among us (on both “sides”, if you will) often raise our voices out of hot-headed passion rather than cooler heads being allowed to prevail. And vice-versa.

I have raised two children, and have supported them throughout. Although I may have disagreed (vehemently at times) with their choice of career, companions, lifestyle, education, career opportunities, etc., my support has been unwavering. Support does not always equal agreement with every choice – just as criticism does not always equal a complete withdrawal of support. It is a distinction with a difference – and I believe a lot of us (myself included) have failed miserably in discerning the difference between the two. Supporting the current Administration does not equate to agreement with its every decision; criticism of this Administration does not equate to bashing. We would all be wise to note the difference.

There are those among us (and I’m not naming names, but I think the vast majority of us know who they are) who have consistently posted only the most negative of comments, article excerpts, op-eds they can find on the internetz and the MSM, in order to quash optimism and dissuade voters from thinking that their vote matters.

There are those among us who have labelled themselves as representative of “true progressives’, “true leftists”, “true Democrats”, and have, in the doing, labelled all of those who disagree with their every agenda item as somehow being less worthy, less valid, less sincere in our efforts to see this country move forward rather than backward, as though such labels – self-proclaimed and self-affixed – are to be accepted without question, or factual support.

We are – and always have been, forever and ever, amen – the party of the Big Tent. Our strength has always been not our sameness, but our diversity; our sweeping inclusion of the centrists, the moderately-left, the extreme left, and everyone who falls within the scope of those who desire change for the better, immediate or painstakingly gradual, as the case may be.

“You’re either with us or against us.” It’s a phrase that, once uttered by one G.W. Bush, immediately fell into disrepute. Accepted as a RW talking point and nothing more, it lost its true meaning as a rallying cry for those of us who, on the left, pose it as a valid question. You are either with us or against us – you are either with the Democrats who, with all of their failings and flaws, are for progress – or you are with those who would see our nation move backwards in opposition to every step forward the Democrats have made, no matter how slight you might perceive such steps to be.

There are times when we must choose our battles – not only against the “other side”, but amongst ourselves. There are times when we must, as a widely diverse group, speak up as individuals – and there are times when we must speak with one voice.

The time to speak as one is now.

Speak up in November. Or forever hold your piece – for what it’s worth after-the-fact.

“I told you so” may warrant kudos on certain websites, populated by those who deem themselves to be (despite all numbers to the contrary), the “real voice” of the Party – as though there is some victory to be found in the defeat of those who purport to be the “base” thereof.

You’re either with the Democratic Party, or you’re against it.

Pick. A. Fuckin'. Side.

Read entry | Discuss (411 comments) | Recommend (+81 votes)
Posted by NanceGreggs in General Discussion: Presidency
Mon Aug 09th 2010, 09:20 PM
... for American citizen DUers who live outside the States:

Please ensure that you've registered for your absentee ballot, so that you can vote in the upcoming election.

I am reminded of the importance of same after reading some very misleading comments on other websites - including several stating that any US citizen who doesn't live in-country is actually "breaking the law" by voting in US elections from off shore.

I know, I know - you'd think (especially after the 2000 "election") most politically-savvy people would be familiar with the phrase "absentee ballot" - but alas, some people obviously aren't. And the fact that this kind of disinformation is being posted on alleged "Democratic" websites is especially appalling.

If you are a US citizen, regardless of where you currently reside, you can (and SHOULD!) still vote.

Information about where to obtain an absentee ballot can be found by Googling "Americans Abroad" in your country of residence, or by contacting your last US-state-of residence representatives.

And anyone who tells you that you cannot vote if you are a US citizen, but not a current US resident, is either lying - or insufferably stoopid.

Read entry | Discuss (28 comments) | Recommend (+62 votes)
Posted by NanceGreggs in General Discussion: Presidency
Wed May 26th 2010, 10:44 PM
Dear President Obama:

A lot of people are upset with you right now. Not me, but a lot of people.

And here’s why …

On your first day in office, you should have overhauled the entire legal system, financial system, education system, healthcare system, rooted-out and fired every incompetent person with a government job, repealed DADT, saved the country from the looming economic crisis, rebuilt the crumbling infrastructure, investigated every government department and made whatever changes were necessary, re-established respect for our nation with every foreign leader and their people, put every American back to work, solved the immigration problem, fixed the mortgage crisis, reversed global warming, lowered crime, housed the homeless, fed the hungry, cured the sick, raised the dead from their graves, righted every wrong – and just generally un-do every single thing that has ever been done incorrectly, unjustly, inefficiently or ill-advisedly by your immediate predecessor, as well as every administration going back to George Washington.

On your second day in office, you should have done even more.

The problems with you, personally, are pretty overwhelming. You talk too much, but not enough. You make too many public appearances – what are you hiding from? You’re all talk and no action – except when you act, and then one has to wonder exactly what it is you’re not talking about, and why.

And for God’s sake, don’t go blaming the MSM for your woes. We all know they were all up in W’s face, 24-7, for eight years. Hey, you think the birthers are on your last nerve? That was nothin’ compared to how the librul media wouldn’t shut up about Georgie’s missing military records, lying us into war, wiretapping without warrants, torture – hey, you name it, they were on his case. If it wasn’t for runaway brides, missing blond teenagers and Terry Schiavo, the man wouldn’t have had a minute’s peace from the relentless hounding of every newspaper and TV news outlet in the nation. So kwityerbitchin’.

You promised change – and as far as I can see, a year and a half into your first term, you still haven’t changed everything yet. The colour blue is still known as b-l-u-e, the Equator is still where it’s always been, and American Idol is still on the air – so much for your empty rhetoric.

As for hope – well, where do I begin? I’d hoped to wake up to world peace, the announcement of a cure for every disease, and lookin' twenty years younger while sportin' a rack that would make Pamela Anderson cry. I didn't. And it's all your fault.

But now we come to the latest bone of contention, your total ineptitude in handling the BP oil leak. Here’s where you run out of excuses.

You should have thrown BP off the job immediately, and sent in a bunch of really smart guys who know how to fix this problem. I know from reliable sources that this is easily done, that the appropriate personnel are at-the-ready. Why you are standing in their way is anybody’s guess. Or you could have simply turned to the internetz, where people on message boards with absolutely no experience, education, or expertise in the area of deep-well drilling have all kinds of solutions that you should be testing, analyzing and weighing as viable options that will be immediately successful – so just pick one, why don’t ya?

Why haven’t you just done the right thing – by breaking the law and seizing BP’s equipment and assets? The last president didn’t give a fuck about the law – why should you? Don’t worry about those who would yell and scream that you have no right to do so. They only say that when it’s the other guy who’s in the WH, not one of their own – which is kinda what they said when it was the other guy in office, and not theirs, and took the opposite position – but I digress.

It comes down to this, Obama: Why aren’t you in the Gulf, pluggin’ that hole? Why aren’t you in DC, tending to business? Why aren’t you on TV all day, every day, explaining what it is you’re doing – and why aren’t you holding everybody’s hand while you’re doing it? Why are you acting calm and controlled in the face of disaster – don’t you get how serious this is? Why are you not acting like a raving lunatic – don’t you know how reassuring that kind of behavior is? Why aren't you clearing brush somewhere, like a chosen-by-God president does?

It's being said that this is your Katrina, sir. And despite the differences in the circumstances, as well as the response, that must be the case - because Anderson Cooper said so, and he had his shirt-sleeves rolled up when he said it. For a lot of Americans, that's pretty much all it takes. Even those who claim that the MSM is not to be trusted will change their tune when AC's cufflinks rise above the wrist - or when Bobby Jindal yells for sandbags - and plenty of 'em, boys, keep 'em coming.

You are being perceived as too weak, too strong, too self-assertive, too self-effacing, too loud, too soft-spoken, too patient, too quick-to-anger, too analytical, too spontaneous, too fast on your feet, too slow to understand, too outspoken, too silent, too dumb to deal with this disaster of mammoth proportions – and way too smart for your own damned good.

So why don’t you just cut that out? Why don’t you just display some leadership*? (*definition may vary – but vague enough to mean, uh, whatever)

Like I said, Mr. President, some people are really upset with you right now. And not only are they willing to tell you that whatever you’re doing, it’s completely wrong, they’re also more than happy to tell you that __________ (their preferred candidate here) would have done a much better job.

And, like I also said, I’m not one of them.

Keep doing what you’re doin’, Mr. Prez – we’ve got your back.

Despite what you may read on the internetz about so-called real Democrats, real progressives, and real liberals, your real base is here to stay.

--- NanceGreggs

Read entry | Discuss (351 comments) | Recommend (+63 votes)
Posted by NanceGreggs in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Mon May 17th 2010, 08:59 PM
Within hours of Rima Fakih being crowned Miss USA, Debbie Schlussel took to her computer and started bitchin’ – because that’s what Debbie does best. More accurately, it's the only thing Debbie really does.

Ms. Schlussel begins her most recent tirade by saying of Ms. Fakih, “As I’ve noted before, her slutty behavior doesn’t mean she’s any less supportive of or supported by Hezbollah and Shi’ite Muslims everywhere. Just like the 9/11 hijackers drank alcohol at the Pink Pony and gambled in Vegas–both no-nos in Islam–Muslims are allowed to engage in taqiyyah . And that’s exactly what this is. Plus, this low-class pageant contestant is simply a sharmuta.”

Debbie’s real problem is the fact that she herself is ugly. It’s not the kind of ugly that comes of having a less-than-perfect nose, asymmetrical features, or a bad complexion. It’s the kind of ugly that emanates from within, and its ravages are all too obvious.

It starts with the eyes. They take on a vacuous look, reflective of self-imposed stupidity, years of not bothering to inform one’s self beyond RW talking points. The area around the eyes then starts to darken and bag, the result of too many sleepless nights spent trying to connect every Muslim to terrorism, poring over websites in hopes of finding some connection, no matter how tenuous or blatantly ridiculous, to rail about.

That’s when the lines start to appear, and deepen over time, caused by squinting at everyone you meet in order to determine their ethnic background, to better “see” the colour of their skin and evaluate their worth based on the whiteness thereof.

The mouth begins to droop downwards, and begins to take on the look of the permanent sneer, the better-than-you smirk, the lopsided grimace of the RW idiot we’ve all seen far too often. Eventually the mouth, overworked by the spewing of hatred and bigotry, becomes incapable of a sincere smile. Wrinkles form around the lips, etched by the sad realization that no one of any intelligence is interested in hearing what emanates there from.

The jaw becomes slack and weakened in appearance, not due to bad genes or a family trait, but due to a decided lack of character. The cheekbones lose the natural glow of youth, and take on the pallor of death – along with the unnatural colour of jealousy, the sickly hue of envy.

Eventually the Ugly seeps into the brain. It causes the victim to have delusions of relevance, and eventually leads to a complete break with reality. At this point, the Ugly sufferer begins to believe there is a conspiracy behind every event, every news story – even every beauty pageant.

Once in this state, the Ugly takes over completely. It cannot be reasoned with, nor diminished. It takes on a life of its own. It causes the afflicted to froth at the mouth in a way reminiscent of a rabid animal, and spit venomous accusations about the “fix being in”, and an atmosphere of political pandering to Muslims being the sole explanation for an exceptionally beautiful, dark-skinned, non-Christian Lebanese-American winning a beauty contest over her blond, blue-eyed, lily-white competitors.

I found it especially interesting that Ms. Schlussel used the word Sharmuta to describe Ms. Fakih, an Arabic word to describe “a whore, hooker, bitch or slut.” It reminds me that projection is also an early-stage symptom of The Ugly, often accompanied by a sense of outrage that the Ugly sufferer is not getting the attention she feels is her due.

While I’ve focused my opinion of The Ugly on Ms. Schlussel, she is by far not the only victim of this widespread disease. But the fact that she serves as an appropriate poster girl for its effects couldn’t be more obvious.

I remember the first time I heard it said that while beauty may be skin-deep, Ugly goes right down to the bone. At the time, I thought it was a phrase fraught with meanness, a comment intended to denote that the lack of physical comeliness was somehow worthy of being opined upon, as though those considered not to be beautiful was in some way a matter of choice on their part.

I am now prompted to somewhat revise my opinion on the matter. While beauty may not be a matter of choice, being Ugly, in the Debbie Schlussel sense of the word, is a matter of choice. And she IS about as ugly as it gets.

Read entry | Discuss (85 comments) | Recommend (+150 votes)
Posted by NanceGreggs in General Discussion: Presidency
Wed May 12th 2010, 08:30 PM
While you’re sitting there listening to Limbaugh, or watching Beck – while you’re carrying a mis-spelled placard around with words like No amnety! or Make English our Offical Language, or some other slogan that slaughters the language you allegedly hold so dear – while you go teabaggin’ with your equally ill-informed neighbors, leaving no doubt in anyone’s mind about how ignorant you are – while you’re railing against the immigrants who are ruining the community you live in – while you’re tossing around words and phrases you think denote your superiority over non-White, non-Christians that actually demonstrate your inferior intellect, it’s going to happen.

Your son is going to meet some slope-eyed gook in his high school science class, and think she’s the most beautiful, articulate young woman he’s ever met. He’s going to dream about taking her to the prom – and eventually, he will. And your ravings about it will fall on decidedly deaf ears. He’ll start wondering why you’re such a bloviating idiot, incapable of seeing in her everything that he sees, plain as day.

Your daughter is going to go away to college. She’s going to room with a dorm-mate she finds fascinating and witty. When she finds out her roommate is a lesbian, it’s not going to change her affection or admiration for her one iota. She’s going to question exactly what it is about this lovely friend, and people like her, that you find so offensive. She’s going to start finding you and your ideas to be more offensive than anything her roommate has ever said or done.

Your youngest brother is going to follow in the footsteps of his father, his grandfather, and his uncles, and join the military. He’s going to be stationed somewhere in the Middle East. He’s going to become best friends with an Iraqi translator who shares his love of the same books, the same music, the same art. He’s going to wonder why you think his new friend is so vastly “different” because they don’t practice the same religion – when, in fact, they are so similar in so many respects. He’s going to realize that you’re a narrow-minded jerk – and a lot less of a “good Christian” than you’ve always professed yourself to be.

Your favorite cousin is going to “come out” at a family reunion. He’s going to introduce his partner to everyone in attendance, and proudly so. Some of your family members will embrace the idea – some won’t. But those who do will start seeing you as a mindless homophobe, and will be grateful that their favorite cousin didn’t wind up with someone as blatantly narrow-minded as you take pride in being.

Your best bud at work is going to invite you to a meeting about joining a union. He’s going to explain to you why unions exist to protect workers’ rights, while you go on and on about socialism and communism (and all the other terms you don’t understand, but spew anyway by rote), and how the country is going down the toilet because workers are demanding safe working conditions and an honest wage. He’s going to realize you’re too deafened by talking points from the very people who don’t care whether you earn enough to look after your family to hear the facts that are in your own best interest.

Your wife is going to stop attending the church you and she have been members of for as long as anyone can remember, (at first with some sense of reluctance, and later with great enthusiasm), because she’s come to realize that the preaching of politics from the pulpit is as un-American as it is un-Christian.

She’ll remember that Jesus said to “render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s”. She’ll remember that Jesus admonished his followers to look after the poor, the homeless, the sick, and the helpless in His name – and she’ll recognize that these simple truths have been supplanted by political persuasion that preach the exact opposite behavior as being “Christian values” to be adhered to.

She’ll start wondering when the man she has shared a bed with for all of her adult life became too far removed from Christ’s teachings to recognize that they are being turned into something abhorrent, something so contrary to their purpose. She’ll recognize that the man she looked up to for years has turned out to be someone to be looked down upon – an easily-manipulated sheep, as opposed to the manly shepherd she once thought she’d married.

It is going to happen. And this is how.

The world, and the nation we live in, changes every day – sometimes by inches, often in movements too small to be detected in the great scheme of things.

But it is changing – one citizen at a time, one moment-of-truth at a time, one life-long friendship at a time, one realization at a time, one mixed-race baby at a time, one inter-faith marriage at a time, one welcome to the community regardless-of-where-you-came-from at a time, one I-love-you-no-matter-what-comes-our-way at a time, one I-will-stand-with-you-and-uphold-your-rights at a time, one Nation Indivisible by those who would divide us for their own purposes, whatever their purposes might be.

To say that it’s going to happen is to predict the inevitable. It is happening as we speak.

And it is as righteous and pre-destined as it is wondrous to behold.

This country has, from its inception, been shaped by those who refused to be identified with one religion, one ethnic background, one political persuasion, one opinion, one language, one culture, one perception, one way of thinking, being, or believing to the exclusion of all else.

The tapestry we have become is enhanced by its many colors, and strengthened by its many threads.

And so shall it always be. Amen.
Read entry | Discuss (94 comments) | Recommend (+195 votes)
Posted by NanceGreggs in General Discussion: Presidency
Tue May 11th 2010, 08:58 PM
It seems that every time I see footage of Teabaggers, or hear them interviewed, they seem bewildered that the vast majority of the citizenry is not listening to their message and swelling their ranks.

So I thought I’d end the befuddlement, and spell it out for them.

You chose the name Teabaggers. After the hilarity ensued, you finally figured out what the term meant. Instead of simply changing your moniker and moving on, you blamed the left-wing media (as though such a thing existed) for having coined the phrase in an attempt to embarrass you. Ergo, you are liars – and the vast majority of Americans do not wish to be associated with liars.

You gather together and rant incessantly about government spending currently being out of control. You were silent when the previous administration squandered the surplus they’d inherited, plundered the treasury, and ran up the nation’s debt to unprecedented heights. Most Americans recognize that closing the barn door after the horse is long gone is, to put it bluntly, an exercise in insanity, as well as futility.

You are adamant about the government keeping “their hands off” programs, like Medicare, that have always been government-run. Most Americans know the difference between programs that are run by the government and those that aren’t. Your position gives them the impression that you don’t know what the f*ck you’re whining about – and they’re right in their assessment.

You look ridiculous – no, really, you just do. You show up at your poorly-attended events dressed like idiots, and believe in your own self-importance because the mainstream media covers your gatherings. Did it ever occur to you that part of the reason you get wide coverage is because you look like idiots – and oogling a bunch of teabag-festooned jerks will draw a TV audience anxious to guffaw at the end of a workday? Most Americans don’t want their allotted fifteen minutes of fame to be a YouTube video showing them wearing a few dozen teabags on their hat, or Size 6 American-flag stretch-pants trying to contain a Size 18 ass.

You can’t spell, punctuate, or put together a coherent sentence on your protest placards. Ignorance of proper English is not the problem here; the problem is the fact that you take pride in such ignorance, and castigate those who can grasp the language for being snobbish “elitists”. Most Americans don’t want to be seen as stupid – much fewer of them want to be seen as wallowing in stupidity as though it were a badge of honor.

You are bigots and homophobes, and your words and actions prove it on a daily basis. Most Americans (I know this comes as a shock, so steady yourselves) are NOT.

You rail against the intrusion of government into the everyday lives of citizens. And yet when Arizona recently passed a law that encourages the enforcement thereof to be predicated on intrusion into the lives of citizens – by insisting they be able to “prove” their citizenship at any given moment, in even the most casual of circumstances – you were nowhere to be found. Most Americans against government over-reaching DON’T mean “unless your skin color is darker than mine, in which case you are to be considered ‘less American’ than the next guy.”

You are obsessed with the message that you are being over-taxed – despite the fact that your taxes have been lowered under the Obama administration. Most Americans choose to inform themselves before decrying a situation which doesn’t even exist.

And last, but certainly not least – on top of your abject stupidity, your ignorance of how the government works and what it funds, your propensity to argue “facts” not in evidence, and your inability to speak/think coherently – you don’t even have the intellectual wherewithal to discern the difference between participating in a “grassroots movement” and being played by those with a political agenda that is diametrically opposed to your own best interests.

Despite what may sometimes appear to be the case, most Americans just aren’t as dumb as you are.

I hope that clears things up.

Read entry | Discuss (99 comments) | Recommend (+197 votes)
Posted by NanceGreggs in General Discussion: Presidency
Fri May 07th 2010, 09:17 PM
It would almost seem appropriate to label this the week the GOP jumped the shark – and I say “almost”, because as things are unfolding, every week is now jump-the-shark week where our friends are concerned.

I wonder if they realize how difficult it is to reach across the aisle, when the aisle is continually littered with people rolling in it, doubled-over with laughter.

With so much you’ve got to be fuckin’ kidding me eye-rolling going on among the saner among us, it’s hard to imagine that our dumber-than-dumb GOP counterparts were once in control of a nation – unless, of course, you look at the state of the nation, and realize that we are where we are due to that not-so-long-ago fact.

Hmmm, where to begin …

Well, when in doubt, I always like to start with the topic of Hypocrisy, Thy Name is Republican Christian Values, a subject that never seems to go out of style – or run out of suitable material.

This week’s contestant (Come on down!) is Straighter-Than-Thee, Thou, or Anyone Else George Rekker, co-founder of the Family Research Council, anti-gay spokesman, and self-appointed saviour of those who require savin’ from the evils of the homosexual lifestyle. Since being caught by witnesses, and in photos, returning from a ten-day European jaunt with a “traveling companion” he found on the Rentboy website, Mr. Rekker’s story has changed more times than the Bible has been rewritten.

Honestly, I can understand Mr. Rekker’s confusion. I’m sure that millions of vacationers who require someone to “haul their luggage” wind up on websites that advertise the smoothness of their eager-to-please luggage-haulers’ asses, not to mention their cut/uncut status. It’s a dangerous world out there – and one wouldn’t want to be stuck in Europe for ten days with someone who didn’t fit the bill, so to speak.

Then there’s Karl Rove’s latest remarks about the GOP comin’ back – and comin’ back strong! Yeah, a ha, whatever.

It’s all pretty much in-the-bag now. All the GOP has to do to win big in November is (a) raise money from the middle-class who are holding on to every dime (because the Republicans have told them their taxes have gone UP, and will go up even more under Obama), (b) convince the saner elements of the heretofore party loyalists that they have better “go slow, start over” healthcare reform ideas that they simply forgot to implement during their years in power, (c) explain how you can barter your way to bypass surgery even if you don’t raise chickens in your backyard, (d) can safely place the nation in the hands of intelligent, well-informed people with names like Palin, Bachman, and BUSH (oh my!), (e) get all of those illegal-looking Hispanic voters on board, and the appropriately designated (f-as-in fuck) admonishment to look to the political leanings of good Christian leaders, who have championed right-wing causes for years as shining examples of Republican moral standards - which clearly set them apart from homosexual predators who peruse websites like Rentboy when in need of a traveling companion who will “haul luggage”, undoubtedly with Christ in their hearts.

If one is looking for the jump-the-sharkiest move in a jump-the-shark week, one need only know that Michael Brown has now been repeatedly tapped to opine on Obama’s handling of the current oil spill disaster in the Gulf. FOX-News defended their choice of Heckjovajob as the appropriate spokesperson on the topic because he knows whereof he speaks when it comes to disaster response being FUBAR. Well, no argument there – Brownie’s your guy. Just wonderin’ how his reminding the nation of how fucked up things can become when a Republican so-called president appoints a know-nothing/do-nothing idiot to head a vital organization like FEMA is going to help with that aforementioned GOTV initiative Rove is so confident about – but hey, what do I know?

Then there’s Joe “The Ho” Lieberman – and anyone who buys that not a Republican, but an Independent label isn’t reading this; they’re too busy trying to figure out why they haven’t received their fifteen million dollars from that nice man in Algeria who contacted them via email, or how they can move the Brooklyn Bridge – which they bought outright, fair-and-square – to their trailer park.

Joe-Ho is advocating the Terrorist Expatriation Act (TEA), which would amend current law to allow the State Department to revoke the citizenship of Americans they deem to be members of foreign terrorist organizations.

We all know Joe – we went to high school with him, or his counterpart. He was the guy who decided that “here come da judge” was the sure-fire phrase of the moment years after Laugh In went off the air – in the same way Joe has decided that the Teabagger movement is the wave of the future and he’s goin’ to catch it before it fades into obscurity – or weeks after it already has, whichever comes last.

Of course, no shark-jumpery would be complete without another boneheaded statement from John Boehner Bonehead himself, who recently opined that the Times Square wannabe bomber incident showed that “we got lucky, but luck is not an effective strategy for fighting terrorism.”

He’s so right. Too bad we didn’t “get lucky” when Dubya was in office pre-911. Had he heeded the warnings of the intelligence people around him about “increased chatter”, or the wording of the August 2001 briefing (obscurely entitled with something about Bin Laden being determined to strike in the US), who knows how “lucky” we would have been?

From the You Can’t Make This Shit Up desk here at one of the many Stuff You’ll Never Hear About On MSM News Broadcasts websites, I am over – but never out.
Read entry | Discuss (13 comments) | Recommend (+29 votes)
Posted by NanceGreggs in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Wed May 05th 2010, 11:04 PM
... in The Vast Wasteland of MSM News

I am interested in hearing about the events of the day. I am not interested in the opinions of those who read accounts of those events off a teleprompter, as though doing so somehow qualifies them to speak with authority on any issue. In fact, as has been proven time and again, these people usually know absolutely nothing about those topics on which they somehow feel compelled to opine.

I am interested in facts. I am not interested in a version of the facts, a selection of the facts, nor anyone’s interpretation of the facts, any more than I am interested in hearing some of the facts while others are edited, skewed, or omitted in their entirety as is convenient.

I am interested in hearing facts that have been vetted and verified before they are stated as facts. I am not interested in hearing outright lies being stated by anyone, especially an elected representative, while a bobble-headed “news person” sits there idly, unwilling or unable to challenge the veracity of what is being presented as the truth.

I am interested in knowing the sources behind purported facts, and the reliability thereof. I am not interested in knowing what some people, those in a position to know, someone close to the situation, or an unconfirmed source have been allegedly heard to have anonymously stated.

There are certain things in which I will never have any interest, under any circumstances whatsoever. These include (but are not limited to) Dick Cheney’s assessment of Obama’s policies, Michael Brown’s evaluation of Obama’s handling of the current BP oil spill disaster, or Sarah Palins’s opinion about anything.

As a qualification of the aforementioned, I would only be interested in what those people have to say should they decide to take responsibility for their lies, deceit, hypocrisy, and constant dissemination of misinformation, or to apologize for their crimes against humanity and their country. As for some people still being discussed incessantly by the current crop of newscasters, my only interest in hearing about them would be in the form of an obituary notice.

I am interested in the people who actually contribute to the direction of my country, and the shaping of world events. I am not interested in people whose fifteen minutes of fame were exhausted months, or even years ago – and whose only current claim to fame is the fact that the mainstream media continues to give them airtime as though they are somehow relevant.

I am interested in the accurate coverage of events reflective of the thoughts and attitudes of my fellow Americans, as well as my global neighbors, to whit: I am interested in knowing that hundreds of thousands of people worldwide protested the invasion of Iraq; I am not interested in knowing that three dozen people showed up for a Teabagger event.

Further to that idea, I am interested in real news about real events. I am not interested in events that are initiated by those who are supposed to be reporting the news, not creating it.

There was a time when I was interested in what those on “the other side of the aisle” had to say about the party in power. However, being as it’s the same side of the aisle who gets the lion’s share of the airtime, regardless of who is in power, such interest has become pointless.

For these reasons, I no longer watch the “news” as it is presented (distorted) by journalists (teleprompter readers), sold as a commodity that requires tweaking to satisfy corporate owners/sponsors, jazzed-up with sci-fi-inspired graphics, and packaged for consumers like a reality show – that somehow lacks the component of actual reality.

The opinions I have expressed are my own. But I doubt that I am the only one who holds them.

Read entry | Discuss (68 comments) | Recommend (+142 votes)
Posted by NanceGreggs in General Discussion: Presidency
Tue May 04th 2010, 07:48 PM
We’ve been treated to it all week by the news media, folks – a never-ending attempt to label the BP oil spill disaster as Obama’s Katrina. And I’ve got to give the right-wingnuts credit where it’s due: they have been relentless on the topic.

Never before have so many “newscasters” twisted themselves into a pretzel in order to compare a natural disaster (a hurricane, the probable impact of which was forewarned) to the spewing of millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico – due not to nature, but the greed of British Petroleum (which greed, I grant you, has come to be accepted as “natural” in and of itself) in not putting safety measures in place that would have mitigated the damage now being caused.

But that’s a pretzel that won’t choke this president – because the idea is so patently ridiculous, it is downright laughable. And the alleged journalists who are promoting this meme are looking more and more like a game of "Twister" gone terribly awry.

While Katrina and its aftermath will go down in history as proof positive of George W. Bush’s unprecedented failure as a leader (and unprecendentin’ is hard work, heh, heh), it is former FEMA head Michael Brown, a.k.a Blunder-Puss who will be remembered as the face of a tragedy that left a city in ruins, its inhabitants devastated, and many of its citizens dead.

So what better way to try and connect one event with the other than for Neil Cavuto (FAUX-News) to have Michael “Heck of a Job, Brownie” guest on his show the other night – in an A-for-Effort attempt to get his brain-dead audience to think to themselves, “Yeah, he’s rite – the too eventz are egsactly the same.” (I suspect Cavuto’s fans think in mis-spellings because – well, why wouldn’t they?)

And this is where the hilarity begins.

Prompted by Cavuto asking him where he sees the similarities between Katrina and the oil spill disaster, Brown states: “First of all, you have a disaster occur, and the Coast Guard shows up immediately. That’s their job. In Katrina, FEMA showed up immediately. The president is off in San Diego strumming the guitar. Obama is back East going to the White House Correspondents Dinner. You’re now nine days into the storm — into the disaster, and actually now, only now is the president appearing to be engaged.”

The fact is that Obama didn’t appear to be engaged; he has been engaged from day one. I suppose that kind of presidentin’ is so foreign to Brownie, he can’t wrap his head around the concept.

Of course, we all know that Brownie and his ilk firmly believe that Obama should have been in the gulf from the outset, armed with a mop and pail, shufflin’ and cleanin’ up the mess made by someone else, ‘cause that’s what his kind of people do, right? That’s their job.

“You’re nine days into the storm – into the disaster …” Looks like Brownie’s Freudian slip is showing beneath his too-little-too-late “FEMA showed up” skirt.

Yes, Mikey, we all remember how you, as head of FEMA, “showed up”.

Two days after Katrina hit, Marty Bahamonde, a FEMA employee in NOLA, told Brown that "the situation is past critical", citing a litany of on-the-ground problems – including the fact that many people were near death, and food and water were running out at the Superdome.

Brown's response, in its entirety, was: “Thanks for the update. Anything specific I need to do or tweak?” .

Nope. Nuthin’ at all, Mikey – or maybe you could use the down time to “correct” your on-line FEMA resume – you know, the part where you claimed to have worked for the city of Edmond, Okla., from 1975 to 1978 overseeing the emergency services division. According to Claudia Deakins, head of public relations for the city of Edmond, you were an assistant to the city manager from 1977 to 1980, and had no authority over other employees. "The assistant is more like an intern,” said Deakins. So much for truth in Mikey Brown advertising.

But Cavuto soldiers on: “So, Michael, you don’t take him (Obama) at face value when he says a temporary halt in offshore drilling is just that, a temporary halt?”

Well, given an opening like that, you’ve got to know Mikey is going to put his foot in his Mississippi mud-like mouth: “No, no. Look, Bill Nelson — and, you know, they don’t say these things without it being coordinated. And so now you’re looking at this oil slick approaching, you know, the Louisiana shore, according to certain — NOAA and other places, if the winds are right, it will go up the East Coast. This is exactly what they want, because now he can pander to the environmentalists and say, ‘I’m going to shut it down because it’s too dangerous …’”

So this is exactly what “they” want, is it? Oh, Mikey, you really should think before you speak – or, more to the point, you should let someone else think for you, being as you are so bad at it.

You, Michael Fuck-it-up Brown, are telling the American people, on a nationally-televised pretend-news outlet, that the President, his staff and supporters “want” the worst case scenario to unfold for political purposes? And that purpose is to heed the warnings of environmentalists who “want” to save the planet (which our nation is situated upon, in case you haven’t noticed), and “want” to see to it that regulations (ooops – naughty word in your world) are not only put in place, but are enforced so that this type of “accident” doesn’t happen again?

Jesus Hussein Christ, Brownie – we always knew you were a dimwit; you didn’t have to spell it out for us.

As for the statement that “they don’t say these things without it being coordinated”, I couldn’t agree with you more. We all know who “they” are – and we’re seeing, ad nauseaum, the way they’re “co-ordinating” their tiresome little talking point that Katrina and the present situation are exactly alike.

Cavuto: “But leaving aside what our future exploration plans are, he said early on he relied on reports coming out of BP, remember, when all those guys were injured and eleven went missing, that BP said that it had it relatively contained, and that those were the early reports he relied on. How is that different than the argument your former boss made that local authorities on the ground felt that, ahead of the disaster, things were relatively contained?”

Brown: “Here’s what is different, because we were actually on the ground also. We knew what was going on and how bad it was and kept reaching back to the White House, saying, we need these things. We need X, Y, and Z.”

Yeppurs, Brownie, we all saw you on the ground, “knowing” how bad it was and what was needed. Guess someone should have explained to you how to “tweak” things so that lives weren’t lost. Guess someone shouldn’t have appointed a dipshit who had spent the previous decade as the stewards and judges commissioner of the International Arabian Horse Association as the head of FEMA in the first place.

But, hey, that’s all water under the bridge now – or water over the heads of those who drowned as a result of your amazing ineptitude.

I don’t know what enticement Blunder-Puss was offered to appear in public and berate the current President – but whatever it was, it will undoubtedly prove to be small compensation for proving himself to be even more of a self-absorbed idiot than we’ve already come to know and loathe.

Perhaps Dick Cheney has invited Heckofajob to join him at his undisclosed location, where he can kick himself in the ass for having reminded the public that he still exists, as dumb a fuckhead as he ever was - only more so.

Read entry | Discuss (46 comments) | Recommend (+102 votes)
Posted by NanceGreggs in General Discussion: Presidency
Wed Apr 28th 2010, 10:11 PM
(by NanceGreggs AND JeffR - a coalition of the reluctant but willing)

“When I grow up, I hope to be a hypocritical bastard, who lectures others on the importance of good Christian family values in between brothel visits where I can indulge my fetish for wearing diapers.” David Vitter, 8

“When I am an adult, I plan on bein’ an irresponsible idiot who quits anything and everything that doesn’t put money in my pocket – but all for the good of the Alaskan people, you betcha!” Sarah Palin, 7

“God willin’, my adult life will be spent spreading the word of the Lord and living large off contributions from people dumb enough to believe devastating natural disasters are the result of gay pride parades.” Pat Robertson, 10

“When I reach maturity, I want to be as immature as possible – and have a poorly sponsored TV show where, armed with nothing more than a blackboard, I can prove how lucrative acting like an immature buffoon can be.” Glenn Beck, 13

“As a grown-up, I will continue to behave as I do now – including playing dress-up as a soldier, an Indian chief, a firefighter, a rancher, an air force guy, and a president.” George W. Bush, 9

“If I don’t lose my wide-eyed, caught-in-the-headlights good looks as a nonsense-spouting idiot by the time I am an adult, I intend to be a wide-eyed, caught-in-the-headlights, nonsense-spouting politician.” Michele Bachman, 5

“In the hope that all goes as planned, I will become a ‘journalist’ on a once-respected news network, and will go on to be the butt of every joke about how ‘journalism’ has gone down the toilet.” Wolf Blitzer, 11

“After a brilliant career as a military man, I will hopefully live to see my credibility torn to shreds after a seemingly small faux pas presentation at the UN.” Colin Powell, 15

“With any luck, I will get to shoot a friend in the face, make millions from my shareholdings in a disreputable war-profiteering corporation, and live in an ‘undisclosed location’ while being president vice-president of the United States.” Dick Cheney, 6

“My adult ambitions? Well, they could last a few weeks – six months at the most. But I’ll get to direct torture – AND get off on it. Ya know, when you’re a grown-up, you’ve gotta deal with the torture directives your president allows, and not the ones you wish you had.” Donald Rumsfeld, 12

“I hope to marry well – or, in the alternative, marry an internationally-despised jerk, so I can cash-in by writing a book about it.” Laura Bush, 12

“My adult-life goal is to be a hate-spewing harridan who will ‘guest’ regularly on TV talk shows, or who will be featured in the Guinness Book of World Records as the skinniest, most scarecrow-looking hatemonger on the planet – whichever comes first!” Ann Coulter, 14

"When I grow up, I'm going to become an American citizen, a dentist, a lawyer, a real-estate agent, a birther, and a laughingstock." Orly Taitz, 7

"As an adult, I'm going to be the same know-nothing brat I am now – but with a dazzling tan." John Boehner, 9

"After a career in film, I hope to become a loud-mouthed idiot – and I am confident that I won't know what the fuck I'm talking about." Jon Voight, 8

"The truth is, that's about it. I've peaked already." Newt Gingrich, 7

"I'm going to grow up to be a plane-wrecking maverick war hero. Then I'm going to make America watch as I slide into senility. Loudly. And everyone better stay off my lawn while I’m doing it – and that's ALL of my lawns." John McCain, 6

"Someday, I'm going to be an excuse-making, self-serving, manipulative fuck who doesn’t - sorry, what was the question again?" Lloyd C. Blankfein, 12

“As a child, I can tell you that school sucks. And when I am an adult, I predict that governing will suck, too." Jan Brewer, 10

“Now that I’m just a kid, no one understands what I’m talking about. I plan on being a grown-up who no one understands either – but are willing to pretend they do.” George Will, 7

“My ambition is to be a neocon Nostradamus-in-reverse, who is never right in his predictions, but gets plenty of airtime to demonstrate how wrong I can be – over, and over, and over again.” Bill Kristol, 14

“My fondest wish is to be a tub-o’-lard with a big mouth – and I dare any commie-lovin’, pinko leftist to predict I won’t be.” Rush Limbaugh, 9

“I am, as a child, inspired by the teachings of Jesus. As an adult, I plan to twist those teachings into something abhorrent.” Fred Phelps, 9

“In view of the fact that I am already considered to be a doddering old fool among my kindergarten classmates, I intend to continue on this career path.” Mitch McConnell, 5

“Being a childruns as I kurently am, I caniut rite or spull. My ambishun iz to bee a pultikal cunsultashunist what can helb wif sines and wat-nut in future.” (name withheld by request) Teabagger Activitist, 47

Personal prediction: this post will wind up on Snopes before the end of the week: “Did they really say that as kids?”

No, of course not – but they could have.

Did these people, as children, intend to become adults who lie, cheat, steal, mislead, misinform, promote hatred, espouse violence, fabricate, obfuscate, deny the truth, defy the rule of law, wage war, kill, torture, discriminate, segregate, fold-staple-spindle-and-mutilate the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence on a daily basis?

Probably not – but they do so, just the same.

The bad news is we are stuck listening to them, as long as the MSM is willing – no, eager – to broadcast their views.

The good news is we can change the channel, or shut off the TV completely.

I would humbly suggest doing the latter – while making your decision known to the powers-that-be who control the alleged current “news” broadcasting.

“If I wanted Americans to be completely ignorant, I wouldn’t have invented the internetz.” God (age unknown)

Read entry | Discuss (22 comments) | Recommend (+32 votes)
Posted by NanceGreggs in General Discussion: Presidency
Sat Apr 24th 2010, 09:38 PM
Despite what may seem to be overwhelming evidence to the contrary, not all of my countrymen are bigoted, homophobic, whackjobs. Really.

The vast majority of us are decent, hard-working people – who don’t spend our time protesting government programs that we ourselves benefit from (and we actually know which programs are funded by tax dollars, and which aren’t). The vast majority of us don’t wear two-sizes-too-small American-flag stretch pants, or teabag-festooned hats – no, not even in the privacy of our own homes for laughs.

Most of us don’t look down our noses at immigrants. We remember the fact that our forebears were once immigrants here, too – and, truth be told, a lot of them weren’t “legal” when they arrived either. Most of us don’t use the term “them” when speaking of someone whose skin colour or accent is different from our own; we tend to think in terms of “us”.

The vast majority of us don’t live in constant fear that if the gay couple down the street is able to marry, our own heterosexual marriages will implode within seconds. In fact, the vast majority of us wonder who came up with such a lame-brained idea, and why anyone would believe it in the first place.

The overwhelming majority of us do not show up at the funerals of fallen soldiers armed with God hates Fags! placards. In fact, the overwhelming majority of us probably wish that God would “arrange” some funerals for those who do.

Most of us can speak coherently – in complete and grammatically-correct sentences. Most of us can actually spell.

Most of us think Rush Limbaugh is a tub-o’-lard with a mouth, and Glenn Beck is buffoon with a blackboard. Most of us think that Sarah Palin is a fifteen-minutes-of-fame punchline to an incredibly bad practical joke gone terribly awry.

Most of us don’t engage in histrionic displays of hysteria at the thought of our tax dollars being used to feed the hungry, or house the homeless. Most of us don’t believe that those who sometimes need a helping hand are just lazy no-accounts looking for a handout.

Most of us are pro-choice and anti-war; pro-separation of church-and-state, anti-torture; pro-live-and-let-live, anti-government in-anyone’s-bedroom. That doesn’t make us baby-killers, heathens, adulterers or wusses – that makes us who we are. And for the most part, we’re pretty decent people all around.

All of the above being said, I know what you’re thinking – those of you who only know us from what you see on your TV screens, brought to you by our beloved mainstream media. Having witnessed what you have, day-in and day-out, you are convinced that the crazy people are representative of my country – because they’re on TV, 24/7, spewing their nonsense into the cameras (between commercials for pharmaceuticals that may or may not be right for you, so please call your doctor and ask him, ‘cause why the fuck not?)

But here’s the thing. Remember I said up top that the vast majority of my fellow citizens are not bigoted, homophobic, whackjobs? Well, most of them aren’t. But those who are have control of the media. Hence (just threw that in there because I love using that word), we all look like on-screen idiots, because the lunatics who are running the MSM asylum tend to seek out their own, and give them as much air-time as possible.

Think about it. Do you honestly believe that we could maintain our nation’s position as a super-power if Wolf Blitzer was the best “journalist” we could come up with? Do you think the vast majority of us could hold down jobs, raise families, and contribute to society if we were all actually like the bat-shit crazy people you hear on FOX-News? Do you imagine we could dress ourselves, feed ourselves, and manage to function on a day-to-day basis if the best little political team on TV (aka the perpetually clueless) was representative of what we think, and who we really are?

I’m beggin’ you – please don’t judge my countrymen by what you see/hear being passed off as “news” on the boob-tube. Admittedly, we have some loonies runnin’ around – probably the same as wherever you live. But, unfortunately, most of our loonies have jobs as “news correspondents” – and them that don’t are politicians with an “R” after their names, busy promoting the bartering of live chickens as the definitive answer to our healthcare woes.

So the next time you tune in to any of our alleged “news networks” and see thirty people gathered together to scream about Inglish being our offical langage, no amnety, and the pubic option, I ask you to remember that this particular lunatic fringe is only half of a small (and exceedingly trying) portion of our citizenry. And those who broadcast their antics are the other half.
Read entry | Discuss (96 comments) | Recommend (+73 votes)
Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals  |  Campaigns  |  Links  |  Store  |  Donate
About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.