Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: Prop 8 protests going strong Previous entry: Sarah Palin: Not ready on Day 1, and unwilling to ever be ready

Elected liberals, govern liberally

Democrats

The pressure is already building to get Obama to govern from the center or even, god forbid, the center-right.  We shouldn’t be surprised by this—-fish gotta swim, and pundits gotta stall our country’s progress with hand-wringing.  The Obama administration should not listen to these nags.  All real evidence points to the fact that this moment was when the country finally began to set aside the divisive politics of the right and move towards a more liberal country, with a little less “hate your neighbor” and a little more sharing.  Now, we have a long way to go—-Prop 8’s narrow win shows that.  (Though I have some theories that I’ll share with you in next week’s podcast about why I’m not so sure it’s a 100% proof that the voters of California are total bigots.)  Obama needs to be an unabashed liberal, because that was what he was elected to be.  I have my evidence. 

1) The amount of money the little guy gave to the campaign.  I myself am hostile to giving to campaigns, because I feel like it’s gambling.  But with the Obama campaign, he built a huge war chest with $25 here, $50 there.  People were motivated to give what they could not because they wanted the same old bullshit, but because they want something new.  Something liberal.


2) What gets demonized as “liberal” or even “socialist” is just reasonable, or even overly cautious at this point.  Take a gander at Obama’s health care plan.  You know the one that we keep hear is “socialism”?  A non-hysterical reading shows that it’s just common sense, based on the assumption that health care should go to people who need it.  It’s actually not spectacularly different from our understanding of health care now, which is that you pay in and take out as needed.  Just the difference is that everyone has a right to buy in, and you aren’t subject to the whims of health insurance companies. I just beg the idealists who refuse to support baby steps not to hold out support until we get national health care.  Why?  For purely selfish reasons.  I want to buy this health care.  National health care sounds nice, but impossible, and in the meantime, ordinary people like me who don’t have employer-provided health care could really use this alternative.

3) The diversity of the Obama coalition, and the fact that they voted for him believing that he was a huge liberal.
  By Election Day, there wasn’t an Obama voter who wasn’t familiar with the accusations that he was a leftist, and while few of us believed it, most of us believed he is a liberal.  And we voted for him anyway.  And it’s a diverse cross-section of the country, as John B. Judis notes here.  This is not about some small special interest, but a genuine show of the will of the people.

4) The dancing in the streets.
Americans haven’t done that since 1945, when the war ended.  (Ruth Rosen noted this, but I don’t have a link that works.)  People don’t do that for moderation or the same old business.  They do that because they think they’ve seen a dramatic change in the world they live in.  They do that because they believe things are about to dramatically change.

5) The huge sweep for Democrats. Even if you can convince yourself that a blowout election for a Democratic President somehow means the country is “centrist”, you can’t deny that the huge majorities in the House and the Senate are a big indicator that Americans want Democrats.  They don’t want a stalemate.  They want progress. 

Please don’t fail the public that elected you, Democrats.  Or else you will see yourselves tossed on your asses in 2010.

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Amanda Marcotte on 09:25 PM • (124) Comments

Well put, though I think you meant to say that Prop 8 was narrowly passed in California. If only it had been defeated, we’d be that much more ecstatic.

Comment #1: grolby  on  11/06  at  09:40 PM

I got a huge number of e-mails from the Obama campaign and they all said “Send me $5.00, if you can.”

I think that’s why he won, and not entirely paradoxically, why he raised do much money. Because those of us who are just normal folks, or who didn’t have much (because times have been tough, doncha know) felt like he really was talking to us.

Comment #2: older  on  11/06  at  09:42 PM

OK, what does this mean?  Assuming that our next president reads Pandagon—and with your popularity, who knows, he might—what exactly do you want him to do that you think he won’t do?  In what areas do you believe he will be pulled to the center?

Comment #3: Dana  on  11/06  at  09:42 PM

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/11/06/dancing_in_the_streets/

here it is

Comment #4: yonatan  on  11/06  at  09:57 PM

My fear is that his advisors start listening to the shouting blowhards and start telling him to move to the center. He needs to KEEP listening to the people and the people who donated to his campaign need to make sure they hold him and his administration accountable.

Comment #5: Mark  on  11/06  at  10:00 PM

(Though I have some theories that I’ll share with you in next week’s podcast about why I’m not so sure it’s a 100% proof that the voters of California are total bigots.)

Don’t forget the bald-faced lying.  (“Your kids will be taught about gay marriage in school!” “A teacher forced her class to go to her gay wedding!” “Churches will be sued if they don’t marry gay couples!” “Barack Obama supports Prop 8!”)

There were probably even more outright lies than that, but those are the four standouts for me.

Comment #6: Mnemosyne  on  11/06  at  10:06 PM

Of course, grolby.  And it’s fixed.  I hope that it was never in doubt, but my confusion actually goes a long way to explaining my pet theory about the small margin (that if people weren’t confused about what it meant, it might have narrowly lost).

Comment #7: Amanda Marcotte  on  11/06  at  10:09 PM

Grow up and move along now, Dana. I realize wingnuts aren’t too bright, but surely even morons like yourself understand the point of editorial pieces.  And I know you’re bitter, but pretending to be even stupider than you are won’t get you what you want.

Comment #8: Amanda Marcotte  on  11/06  at  10:10 PM

Number 3 is the big one for me. I mean, anyone with any sense knows that as long as there are people like Democratic Socialist Bernie Sanders and Barbara Boxer and Tom Harkin and Teddy Kennedy in the Senate, Obama’s not the most liberal, not by a long shot. But just under half the country is made up of mouth-breathing morons, apparently, and some of Obama’s voters voted for him while believing the claim because they just couldn’t deal with McCain/Palin. But even if they weren’t happy with the idea of voting for a liberal, they voted for one all the same, and Obama has a mandate unlike any President since who? Bush the Elder? Reagan’s addled second term? So yeah, he ought to govern like he has one, especially since there’s no guarantees he’ll get a second one, no matter how good a job he does.

Comment #9: Incertus, Nacho Daddy  on  11/06  at  10:13 PM

I like how David Brooks was saying “Obama should enact his policies slowly and focus on them one by one.” That makes it obvious that President Obama should work to bring about his best and most popular progressive policies through as quickly as possible. Get them through before the whining of the conservative pundits start to chip away at his public support.

Someone was asking if Obama should focus on his environmental initiatives or health care first. If I had one wish it would be that Obama pursued on Universal Health Care Reform as his first priority as president. Conservatives have shown that they’ll try to dismantle as many progressive reforms as possible when they get in to office as Bush has done with the EPA.

Something like health care reform would effect people’s every day lives and once Americans have it any dismantling of a Universal Health Care system would be incredibly unpopular and readily reported in the media. Much like how conservatives can’t talk about privatizing social security without losing considerable support. In other countries the founders of universal health care systems are regarded as national heroes and it could cement a populist goodwill for Obama that would allow him to enact even further progressive policies.

Comment #10: Michael Over Here  on  11/06  at  10:15 PM

That makes it obvious that President Obama should work to bring about his best and most popular progressive policies through as quickly as possible. Get them through before the whining of the conservative pundits start to chip away at his public support.

Our last President to have been a Senator, Lyndon Johnson, was great at doing this.

Comment #11: Ben D.  on  11/06  at  10:25 PM

Amanda, surely you’ve learned by now that insults really don’t bother me!  smile

I asked a serious question: in what ways do you think Mr Obama might move to the center, and in what ways do you believe he would somehow betray his liberal voters.  I assumed that you actually had something in mind when you wrote your post!

Comment #12: Dana  on  11/06  at  10:32 PM

Our last President to have been a Senator, Lyndon Johnson, was great at doing this.

Hopefully Obama will not feel equally compelled to continue and escalate a stupid, useless war so he can get conservative politicians to go along with his domestic plans.

Comment #13: Mnemosyne  on  11/06  at  10:32 PM

I hear the first thing he will do as President is get that S-CHIP bill Bush vetoed through Congress and signed by February.

Comment #14: Ben D.  on  11/06  at  10:33 PM

Hopefully Obama will not feel equally compelled to continue and escalate a stupid, useless war so he can get conservative politicians to go along with his domestic plans.

Yeah. I was speaking on domestic policy. Unlike Johnson, we know what the mistakes of Vietnam were now. He didn’t have the luxury of hindsight.

Comment #15: Ben D.  on  11/06  at  10:37 PM

Ben D., I know I’m probably shooting too high but I’d be disappointed if S-CHIP was the first thing that Obama did because it would mean that larger and more extensive health care reform wouldn’t be on it’s way for a long long time. S-CHIP would take a while to implement and I’d hope in that time a more universal alternative would already be in place.

Comment #16: Michael Over Here  on  11/06  at  10:39 PM

Yeah. I was speaking on domestic policy.

That’s my point—escalating Vietnam was the price that Johnson had to pay in order to get his domestic policies passed.  That’s why his domestic policies were discredited by his failure in Vietnam.

Comment #17: Mnemosyne  on  11/06  at  10:43 PM

LIEbral?  Ohdamnit is gonna rule as a Marxist with 5 year plans, nationalizing the means of production and making everyone carry Mao’s Little Red Book.  Within the first days of his administration yule see good people like Bill Bennett, John Fund and Robert Novak being hauled out of their offices by young Mao-jacketed Obamaites, being beated with the little red book, forced to wear dunce caps and make public apologies for their “crimes against the state”.  You Commies will probably think that’s pretty funny but that’s because your Socialists who like working on the Caliphate collective for the glory of the Motherland.

Comment #18: Rugged in Montana  on  11/06  at  11:11 PM

“Within the first days of his administration yule see good people like Bill Bennett, John Fund and Robert Novak being hauled out of their offices by young Mao-jacketed Obamaites, being beated with the little red book, forced to wear dunce caps and make public apologies for their “crimes against the state”.”

I’d pay money to see them paraded through the streets of a few major US cities, but only if Cheney and Bush were there too…oh I forgot Kristol!  Bill Kristol has to lead the dunce parade…

Comment #19: MikeEss  on  11/06  at  11:19 PM

I don’t think Obama is concerned with gay marriage, he said he believed marriage is between 1 man 1 women. He realizes traditional marriage is important for raising children and moral values, etc.

Comment #20: Larry  on  11/06  at  11:21 PM

...and Bill Kristol should seriously be one of Obama’s advisors.  He’d help weed out bad choices because anything he thinks is good turns out to be 100% FAIL…

Comment #21: MikeEss  on  11/06  at  11:24 PM

Mnemosyne wrote:

That’s my point—escalating Vietnam was the price that Johnson had to pay in order to get his domestic policies passed.  That’s why his domestic policies were discredited by his failure in Vietnam.

What makes you think that President Johnson didn’t believe in his Vietnam policies, or that he was somehow forced by others to escalate?  In 1960, John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson ran to the right of Richard Nixon on containment of Communism.  The “whiz kids” President Kennedy brought into government—McGeorge Bundy, Robert McNamara, William Bundy and the rest—saw Vietnam as a manageable and winnable problem.

Comment #22: Dana  on  11/06  at  11:29 PM

I suspect that Obama and congress will pass a lot of quite liberal legislation and regulation that doesn’t actually cost the federal treasury any money.

For anything that does though I suspect it may have to wait a while, just because the federal treasury doesn’t, you know, HAVE any money.

Comment #23: Andrew  on  11/06  at  11:31 PM

I don’t think Obama is concerned with gay marriage, he said he believed marriage is between 1 man 1 women

Because he’s one of the Islamo-mormons who supported Preperation 8, he knows that marriage is between a man and a woman and another woman and another woman.

Comment #24: Rugged in Montana  on  11/06  at  11:32 PM

“He realizes traditional marriage is important for raising children and moral values, etc. “

...thank you for the wingnut perspective. 

In reality, he knows he can’t fight all the battles out there up front.  I’m disappointed that this one is a lower priority, but I understand why.  I’m not happy about it, but I understand.  It wasn’t his fault, for example, that the Mormons and the fundies slapped Prop H8 down in retribution for California going to Obama…

For another example of the same thinking, see the FISA-dismantling & and get-out-of-jail-free-for-telecomms bill he voted for (along with most of the rest of them).  Which pissed me off, but…

I think the phrase is “realpolitik”...?

Comment #25: MikeEss  on  11/06  at  11:33 PM

MikeEss,

You don’t win elections by moving to the left, you win them by moving right. See Bill Clinton.

Comment #26: Larry  on  11/06  at  11:40 PM

I remember when Reagan took office and started slashing and burning so many different parts of the government at the same time that his oppoistion didn’t know where to turn. People would just be setting up to protest one atrocity when the next one would come down the pike, and the next and the next.

Something similar here, flooding the zone with everything that can be done by executive order and all the legislative proposals that can be put together coherently to pass without time for endless lobbying, might be a good idea.

Comment #27: paul  on  11/06  at  11:41 PM

Dana, you need to study up on your Vietnam War history. 

Johnson knew he didn’t have a real choice because of the poltical consequences.  In ‘64, Goldwater lost in part because he was seen as an insane war-monger.  But his hardass rhetoric helped shift the “center” to the right, which left Johnson unable to simply pull out the advisors we already had there.  (The advisors dated back to Eisenhower, plus we had helped the French regain control of Vietnam imediately after WWII, pretty much guaranteeing a bad end for ourselves, the French, and the Vietnamese…)

Escalation of the war in ‘65 was the mainstream viewpoint, and Johnson would have ignored it at his immediate political peril…

Comment #28: MikeEss  on  11/06  at  11:45 PM

I think that the wingnuts are terrified:  they have been exposed for the hateful radical un-American minority that they are, and they are grappling with the sheer numbers of people who not only voted for Obama, but gave money and worked on the campaigns.  It wasn’t just a superior finance situation - it was a superior people power situation from the get go that just built momentum like a boulder on a steep incline.

As for the “go slow”, well, bullshit.  This is just an attempt to sabotage the effort.  People want change, damnit.  Those who would frustrate that, who were in the minority, who fear that will of the people want it to not happen.  They might tolerate slow change, but this election wasn’t about a slow change.  People see how Canadians and Northern Europeans live and say HEY!  The wingnuts want nothing to happen, then want to complain that promises weren’t kept the next time around.  Bullshit.

Comment #29: Ms Kate  on  11/06  at  11:46 PM

Amanda, I wonder about that, too. I knew exactly what I wanted to vote on my Massachusetts ballot questions, but I still caught myself scratching my head for a moment when it came time to actually fill in the bubbles. Not that they were worded confusingly, just that moment of doubt as I cast my vote.

And I think that my nitpick came through more than my “agreed, strongly,” on this post, so let me correct that: agreed, strongly. I have a good feeling, and the plans laid out at http://www.change.gov are reassuringly progressive. That is of course no good reason to sit on our laurels (they have a form to send in your thoughts at the website, by the way), but Obama appears to have a very good habit of sticking to his principles and making the right decisions. As someone else said (maybe it was here), he has owned his liberal policy plans, like the higher tax rate on the upper income brackets and explained it, sold it, rather than run away from it when confronted about it. And people have gone for that. He appears to have some spine. A charming, hopeful spine. A charming, hopeful, changing-America spine. You know what I mean.

Comment #30: grolby  on  11/06  at  11:46 PM

“You don’t win elections by moving to the left, you win them by moving right. See Bill Clinton.”

...sez the guy whose political party has just had its ass handed to it on a plate. 

See Obama, Barack…

Comment #31: MikeEss  on  11/06  at  11:47 PM

You don’t win elections by moving to the left, you win them by moving right. See Bill Clinton.

Thank you Hillarry

Comment #32: Ms Kate  on  11/06  at  11:47 PM

The country is much further left now than it was in 1992, Larry.

Comment #33: Ben D.  on  11/06  at  11:50 PM

larry, the only problem with what you said about moving right to win an election is that the last 8 years were under right wing rule.  you are essentially saying that obama had to out-republican mccain and palin in order to win this election. 

another thing—what worked back in 92 and 96 won’t necessarily work in 2008.  political environments don’t stay frozen in time.

Comment #34: michelle  on  11/06  at  11:51 PM

Larry:

You don’t win elections by moving to the left, you win them by moving right. See Bill Clinton.

Bill Clinton moved to the center. John McCain moved to the right.

You do the math.

Comment #35: Dan, Grand High Emperor of Bananas Foster  on  11/06  at  11:53 PM

Larry, you idiot, you win elections by standing up for liberal policies, explaining them and selling them to the public. See Barack Obama.

Comment #36: grolby  on  11/06  at  11:54 PM

Political environments don’t stay frozen in time.

While political shifts are not always revolutionary, they are not generally evolutionary in the strictest sense - unless you believe in the punctuated equilibrium theory of evolution.  There is slow and gradual change in politics, but massive episodic changes in the political landscape are possible.  All you need is sufficient environmental stress and BOOM: Nov 4 2008!

Comment #37: Ms Kate  on  11/06  at  11:54 PM

“People see how Canadians and Northern Europeans live and say HEY!”

No Kate, I so NO WAY. We don’t want to live in a Godless county like Swedan, etc. We don’t want our country to be a follower, but a leader, like she always has been.

“The wingnuts want nothing to happen, then want to complain that promises weren’t kept the next time around. “


No Kate, we do want alot to change. Abortion- illegal, Marriage between 1 man 1 woman, No pornography, small government, prayer in schools, strong military, more women staying home, more babies, etc.

Comment #38: Larry  on  11/06  at  11:56 PM

Roe v. Wade a’int never getting overturned now, wingnuts. Live with it.

Comment #39: Ben D.  on  11/06  at  11:57 PM

George bush has led us straight into the toilet.  Obama could charm the pants off the world, already has actually.

Larry, I’m having a hard time believing that you really think all this “back to a past we never had” bullshit yourself.  Are you a real troll?  Or are you a Sears Troll?

Comment #40: Ms Kate  on  11/06  at  11:58 PM

Oh, and Larry ... my cat came downstairs to find the neighbor’s dog in our living room just after the announcement of the new century ... instead of hissing, instead of running away, he walked up and touched noses with the dog.

How’s that for a magical omen from God?

Comment #41: Ms Kate  on  11/07  at  12:00 AM

“Larry, you idiot, you win elections by standing up for liberal policies, explaining them and selling them to the public. See Barack Obama.”


-When the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the gun control law in the District of Columbia, Obama issued a statement that endorsed the Court’s decision

-withdrew from the public financing system and fund his own campaign with individual donations, allowing him to raise hundreds of millions of dollars against an $84 million ceiling

-Obama chaned his position on withdrawing troops from Iraq too fast

-Obama announced his intention to expand on President Bush’s controversial faith-based initiatives program

-expand the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)

-realized late-term abortion shoudn’t be allowd for headaches

Comment #42: Larry  on  11/07  at  12:04 AM

So in other words, all the right-wing talk about how Obama was a crazy communist was just bullshit? So surprised.

Comment #43: Auguste  on  11/07  at  12:09 AM

Every Frank Zappa reference on Pandagon makes baby Jesus smile, Ms Kate.

Comment #44: Auguste  on  11/07  at  12:10 AM

Yeah, what happened to Obama is a Liberal Fascist?

Comment #45: Ben D.  on  11/07  at  12:11 AM

“We don’t want to live in a Godless county like Swedan, etc. We don’t want our country to be a follower, but a leader, like she always has been.”

Fuck yeah!  America leads the world…

...by blindly following certain interpretations of some words of questionable provenance claimed to come from “god”, and translated from several languanges into 17th Century English, which tell us what we should do or else…

Suck on that, you Uropeons!!!...

Comment #46: MikeEss  on  11/07  at  12:12 AM

“Are you a real troll? “

No Kate, that is what I want and really believe in. Many Americans do, we’re not going away. Obama cannot move left, it would divide the country even more. People voted for Obama because of his race, it made them feel good (see white guilt). Once the fancy speeches, soaring rhetoric, the big celebrations are over-with, it will be time to get to work for him (btw: has he ever really worked?), it’s up to us to limit the damage he may cause.

Comment #47: Larry  on  11/07  at  12:15 AM

Larry, larry, larry. That list is a beautiful, beautiful medley of lies, legit facts that are good ideas, and straight up meaningless bullshit.

Bravo, sir, bravo.

Comment #48: Erl  on  11/07  at  12:17 AM

I like how David Brooks was saying “Obama should enact his policies slowly and focus on them one by one.” That makes it obvious that President Obama should work to bring about his best and most popular progressive policies through as quickly as possible. Get them through before the whining of the conservative pundits start to chip away at his public support.

Michael Over Here

I love the concept of media pundits as the ultimate political fades. By “fade”, I mean a person who, if you always do the exact opposite of what they say, will ensure your success in the long run.

Comment #49: atheist  on  11/07  at  12:17 AM

-realized late-term abortion shoudn’t be allowd for headaches

Headaches.

Headaches.

Oh fucking really.

By that you mean PREECLAMPSIA headaches?  Sure you do.

Death sentence to mother and baby HEADACHES.  Mother must be cut open so she will die or die from a sinister disease with the child insider her too, or die from a series of strokes from extreme high blood pressure that is causing the headaches.

Tell me true, Larry: if somebody bashes in your empty fucking skull with a ball-peen hammmer, can I deny you life-saving medical treatment because it is “just a headache”??? Oh, but you are a person, unlike a pregnant woman.

Comment #50: Ms Kate  on  11/07  at  12:17 AM

And larry?  Make that Dr. Kate, in case you intend to “inform” me with your extremely ill-informed misinformation gleaned from pamphlets, rather than from advanced pathophysiology lectures at Harvard Med.

Comment #51: Ms Kate  on  11/07  at  12:20 AM

Obama needs to make appointees who can show evidence-based ideas.

Evidence-based ideas will be more liberal by comparison with the radical right who brought us abstinence-based education, science ignoramuses heading NASA and the EPA, global warming denial, and an entire war based on fabricated evidence and wishful thinking.

Comment #52: sara  on  11/07  at  12:22 AM

Ms Kate,

Us pro-lifers do not want to risk the Mother’s life!. We want measures to be taken to save the mother and the baby. If she has to give birth early, then so be it. It doesn’t mean you have to kill the baby.

btw: 98% of abortions are for convienance.

Comment #53: Larry  on  11/07  at  12:25 AM

Larry, you’re boring…

Comment #54: MikeEss  on  11/07  at  12:27 AM

t doesn’t mean you have to kill the baby.

Again, that’s Dr. Kate. 

I’m not buying bullshit from your pamphlets.  It isn’t possible to “save the baby” in many cases because putting the woman through a full labor OR a cesarean section WILL KILL HER.

What part of LABOR OR C-SECTION WILL KILL HER do you not understand?  Other than, oh, the REALITY part?

Comment #55: Ms Kate  on  11/07  at  12:27 AM

Obama cannot move left, it would divide the country even more.

But when Bush jumped right, ohhhh… that was like the giving you a box of sweet bloody candies, and you couldn’t eat just one! Do me a favor and save the advice for someone who gives a rats ass what you think.

Comment #56: atheist  on  11/07  at  12:29 AM

Obama needs to make appointees who can show evidence-based ideas.

The appropriate science policy transition committee has been formed.

I can’t tell you the rest because ... well, I can’t tell you.

Comment #57: Ms Kate  on  11/07  at  12:30 AM

Dr. Kate,

Today it is possible for almost any patient to be brought through pregnancy alive, unless she suffers from a fatal disease such as cancer or leukemia, and if so, abortion would be unlikely to prolong, much less save the life of the mother.

-Alan Guttmacher, former Planned Parenthood president

Comment #58: Larry  on  11/07  at  12:34 AM

>You don’t win elections by moving to the left, you win them by moving right. See John Kerry and Al Gore, and not Barack Obama

fixed

Comment #59: Anon  on  11/07  at  12:38 AM

Well hell! 

Why didn’t tell us to begin with that Alan Guttmacher said it? 

Now that’s some totally unimpeachable opinion right there, you betcha…

Comment #60: MikeEss  on  11/07  at  12:44 AM

/r/ Stick Rule Ban (SRB): Larry.

Evidence for ban: Use of discredited anti-choicer lies.

Comment #61: Damian  on  11/07  at  12:45 AM

BTW, Larry, aren’t there any new bogus wingnut/fundnut talking points on abortion?  You guys have been using the same damn ones for the last 35-years and it’s really getting tiresome…

Comment #62: MikeEss  on  11/07  at  12:46 AM

Today it is possible for almost any patient to be brought through pregnancy alive

Note the word ALMOST.

For the rest, there is court-approved late-term abortion.

You know, your prostate is involved in your fertility ... perhaps you should have to get a court order to take a medication that alters it’s functions or to have a tumor resected?  Why should the state stop at intrusion into life/death medical decisions that affect women’s reproductive function?

Oh, and have you hugged your hydatidiform mole today?

Comment #63: Ms Kate  on  11/07  at  12:49 AM

Who cares what Larry thinks?

People like him are out of power!

You don’t matter, Larry!. Have fun in the political wilderness.

Comment #64: Ben D.  on  11/07  at  12:50 AM

BTW, Obama will get to make lots and lots of liberal appointments to the Supreme Court. Roe V. Wade will be the law of the land for the rest of your life, and likely forever! Get used to it.

Comment #65: Ben D.  on  11/07  at  12:51 AM

Crap.  here’s the url: http://embryology.med.unsw.edu.au/Notes/images/week2/hydatidiformmolelabel.jpg

Comment #66: Ms Kate  on  11/07  at  12:53 AM

Well, Larry is a particularly irritating troll. Does he have anything else to do with his time?

Comment #67: grolby  on  11/07  at  12:54 AM

Damian:

/r/ Stick Rule Ban (SRB): Larry.

Evidence for ban: Use of discredited anti-choicer lies.

Further evidence: Projection, racism, sexism, argument by assertion, argument by irrelevant quote-mining, implied threats of violence, general stupidity, comically deluded overestimation of own political and intellectual clout.

Comment #68: Dan, Grand High Emperor of Bananas Foster  on  11/07  at  12:54 AM

Ben, thanks.  It is very hard to break the habit that we actually have to argue with these fecal masses.

You are right.  We won.  They lost.  Time to move on to remantling the country that we love!

Comment #69: Ms Kate  on  11/07  at  12:55 AM

....and they are grappling with the sheer numbers of people who not only voted for Obama, but gave money and worked on the campaigns. [emphasis added]

I think this <u>particularly</u> will have an impact: wingnuts have their <strike>caverns</strike> churches to gather together in, but secular leftists were lacking a group forum and the campaign SUPPLIED that lack with a social opportunity for like-minded folk.  (OK, that wasn’t the most elegant sentence, but you get what I mean. I hope.)  Humans are social, pack creatures and like to get together and smell each others’ pheromones: the campaign effort gave them that opportunity and they will be loathe to give that up.

So the left will have a venue analogous to the <strike>hatefests</strike> church services the wingnutteria have to get proselytized in.

+++
And Larry, if those are your actual beliefs, I hope you have no children.

Comment #70: Eric, Rejector of Memez  on  11/07  at  12:58 AM

Yeah I have to remind myself too, Kate.

I still can’t belive I live in a blue state. Not only that, a deep blue state. Virginia has two Dem Senators, a Dem Governor, and as of today a Dem majority Congressional delegation.

Comment #71: Ben D.  on  11/07  at  12:59 AM

btw: 98% of abortions are for convienance.

And now it’s time to ban this asshole.

Comment #72: Eric, Rejector of Memez  on  11/07  at  01:01 AM

“Virginia has two Dem Senators, a Dem Governor, and as of today a Dem majority Congressional delegation.”

That’s good.  OTOH, Dana, The Pandagon House Troll, lives in Virginia too, as I recall.

So I guess you have to take the bad with the good…

smile

Comment #73: MikeEss  on  11/07  at  01:04 AM

Which one would that be, Mike?

Comment #74: Ben D.  on  11/07  at  01:05 AM

Oh nevermind. Dana.

Comment #75: Ben D.  on  11/07  at  01:07 AM

Ugh, Tzeentch help me.  I shouldn’t engage the troll.

Larry, please listen… really really listen.  I am not a christian and I am not subject to your religious beliefs or dogmas.  If you want to pray, you don’t need my permission.  If you are a woman you and have an unplanned or potentially unhealthy pregnancy, you don’t my permission to carry it to term.  If you are a woman who wants to stay at home and raise children you don’t need my permission.  If your church only wants to regognize marriage as between 1 man and 1 woman, you don’t need my permission. 

Now that being said, there are lots of people who make different choices than you.  Just because those are not the choices you would make doesn’t make them wrong or evil, it just makes them different.  People who make those different choices owe you no more of an explanation or justification for their choices than you owe for your choices.  Remember the golden rule, do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

By the way, exactly how can you have a small government with a strong military, active censorship, monitoring of women to ensure all pregnancies are carried to term, and a national church?

Comment #76: commissarjs  on  11/07  at  01:18 AM

This U2 song has been eating my brain for the last two or three days - I had to go look it up!

It is called Like a Song from their album War, and likely predates the term “Generation X”.

Like a song I have to sing
I sing it for you
Like the words I have to bring
I bring it for you

And in leather, lace, and chains
We stake our claim
Revolution once again
No I won’t…
I won’t wear it on my sleeve
I can see through this expression
And you know I don’t believe
Too young to be told
Exactly who are you
Tonight
Tomorrow’s
Too late

And we love to wear a badge, a uniform
And we love to fly a flag
But I won’t…let others live in hell
As we divide against each other
And we fight amongst ourselves
Too set in our ways to try to rearrange
Too right to be wrong, in this rebel song
Let the bells ring out
Let the bells ring out
Is there nothing left
Is there, is there nothing
Is there nothing left
Is honesty what you want

A generation without name, ripped and torn
Nothing to lose, nothing to gain
Nothing at all
And if you can’t help yourself
Well take a look around you
When others need your time
You say it’s time to go…it’s your time
Angry words won’t stop the fight
Two wrongs won’t make it right
A new heart is what I need
Oh God, make it bleed
Is there nothing left…

Comment #77: Ms Kate  on  11/07  at  01:21 AM

Us pro-lifers do not want to risk the Mother’s life!

Sure, but you’re so damn ignorant, you’ll kill her anyway.

Comment #78: gwangung  on  11/07  at  01:24 AM

Amanda, I wonder about that, too. I knew exactly what I wanted to vote on my Massachusetts ballot questions, but I still caught myself scratching my head for a moment when it came time to actually fill in the bubbles. Not that they were worded confusingly, just that moment of doubt as I cast my vote.

This is the best argument I’ve heard for vote-by-mail. When I filled out my ballot, I did it 2-3 measures at a time across a week, where I could take the time to read up on each of them before filling in the bubble. If I"d had to do all the research ahead of time and then go to the polls, I might have had a head-scratching moment, too.

Comment #79: Photopoppy  on  11/07  at  01:58 AM

Don’t you people know that life begins at conception? I give you a bunch of facts and you ignore them.

You liberals are so fearful, so anti-science.

Comment #80: Larry  on  11/07  at  02:18 AM

See, I worry about Barry when he makes Rahm his Chief of Staff b/c Rahm is Mr. DLC, old-school, Clinton, failed weak-spined Democratic plans.  Obama won thanks to ignoring Rahm’s political allies and focusing on the 50-state strategy and engaging tons of regular people for $5-25 and phones and canvassing.

Then I remember Axelrod, and I think maybe Rahm is appeasement to the Clintons and that Rahm is good at organizing a staff.  He already knows how the White House should be run, so no learning curve.  Plus, he’s OUT OF THE HOUSE and no longer in line for SPEAKER and more Congressional power.

I do not think Blackazoid will listen to Bill Kristol or Karl Rove or any of these other blowhards who were clueless.  He’s created his own machine (isn’t that enough of an accomplishment you trolls) and I don’t see him just giving it up to suck up to the old boy’s network in DC. 

He already has a super secret secure room at the FBI’s offices in town and has begun being briefed every a.m. by the CIA.  He’s going to hit the ground running, and I think he might just use some of the ‘extra’ powers Bush usurped for good before he gets rid of them forever.

I remember Bill Clinton’s first day—executive order lifting the gag rule among others.  It was awesome.  I expect even more from B. Hussein.

Comment #81: Caren-Sun-blocking Creator of Animorphic Pancakes  on  11/07  at  02:29 AM

Larry, you ignorant troll,

Life may begin at conception, but pregnancy begins at implantation.  There is no possible way to tell whether or not an egg has been fertilized without cutting open the mother or otherwise jeopardizing her health and the blastocyst’s life.

We’ve heard it all before.  The USA is not and has never been a Christian nation.  It was formed specifically to be a secular nation in order to allow people to exercise their right to worship what they please.  You cannot argue for a law based on Dominionist religious beliefs.  That isn’t civil law, and it never can be.

Now, if you want to argue for theocracy, go right ahead.  Just be aware that you’re being about as unAmerican as possible.

Comment #82: Caren-Sun-blocking Creator of Animorphic Pancakes  on  11/07  at  02:35 AM

Just Ignore Larry. 

His “facts” are printed on paper - Jack Chick tracts and pamphlets - put on paper they are the same as actual science!

Well, to him at least.  To those of us scientists they are “oft-repeated convenient fictions”.

Comment #83: Ms Kate  on  11/07  at  02:40 AM

Larry, a nation like the one you would like to live in does exist.  Prayer in school, etc.

I’m sure that you would find Iran much to your liking.  So move already!

Comment #84: Ms Kate  on  11/07  at  02:42 AM

Actually life does not begin at conception.  Life began once billions of years ago.  Sperm cells are alive, eggs cells are alive, fertilized eggs are alive, not-alive is only at the end of the life cycle.

Pregnancy definitely begins when a fertilized egg implants in the uterine wall.  But that hardly makes the fertilized egg a baby.

Comment #85: commissarjs  on  11/07  at  03:07 AM

Larry:

Don’t you people know that life begins at conception? I give you a bunch of facts and you ignore them.

No, Larry, you gave us assertions. Sadly, I fear that you don’t have the slightest clue what the difference is.

You liberals are so fearful, so anti-science.

No. Just no. Seriously, dude. Do you have no shame at all? No self-respect? This is such painfully obvious projection that I actually feel sorry for you.

Also, I bet you honestly think you’re the first person EVAR to come here and say what you’ve said.

Comment #86: Dan, Grand High Emperor of Bananas Foster  on  11/07  at  03:21 AM

I myself am hostile to giving to campaigns, because I feel like it’s gambling.

This doesn’t make any sense to me.  I can see how the outcomes are unpredictable, but that’s true of a lot of things.

Comment #87: Neil the Ethical Werewolf  on  11/07  at  03:30 AM

Is anyone else freaked out by the talk of Larry “women are just less good at math than women” Summers as treasury secretary?

Comment #88: leopold  on  11/07  at  03:36 AM

As a long-time protector of the undead, I’m with Larry.  What we’re really trying to say is that no one, most of all a woman, should ever have sex.  It’s against G*d’s Law, which is why Jesus’ mom was a virgin.  If you have sex, you should be put in prison so you can’t have it anymore.  If you somehow manage to have sex in prison (not possible, but whatever), then you should 4fit your life.  People, we’re just trying to keep the world pure so that Jesus will come back and apocalypse us, the way he promised he would.  How else are we supposed to experience the hot, hot, hot rapture?  Why cant you DEMONcraps be reasonable?

Comment #89: Rugged in Montana  on  11/07  at  03:41 AM

Many Americans do, we’re not going away.

Unfortunately for your side you are going away. As in, dying off. The young generation is more liberal now than it’s ever been, indicating that things will only get liberal-er and liberal-er - like they have throughout history, inexorably.

Comment #90: Chet  on  11/07  at  03:45 AM

Health care reform, well really, Universal Health care, would actually cut costs in half and free up HUGE HUGE amounts of money to be spent to stimulate the economy.

Also, as Americans are losing jobs right now, and thus health care insurance, and alarming rates, it would genuinely help not just working class folks like ME, but a much larger demographic.

Question: EVERYONE keeps on blathering about THE MIDDLE CLASS THE MIDDLE CLASS. What about THE WORKING CLASS?????  You know, the BIGGEST CLASS IN AMERICA?

I have had to pretend that when they all say middle class they MEAN working class, but that Americans ALL think they are middle class, even when making 18 G a year, which is actually, you know, WORKING CLASS.

Comment #91: KMTBERRY  on  11/07  at  04:14 AM

Is anyone else freaked out by the talk of Larry “women are just less good at math than women” Summers as treasury secretary?

He’s definitely not my first choice.  But I wonder how concerned I should be about people who have screwed up views on certain issues being appointed to positions that aren’t closely related to those issues. 

As an extreme example, Matt Yglesias was recently mentioning antigay bigot, Heritage foundation forefather, and theocratic villain Paul Weyrich for Secretary of Transportation.  Weyrich has a long history of supporting light rail as a mass transit measure, so Yglesias was thinking that he might be able to win some wingnuts over to environmentally sound transportation views while not really doing anything effective to beat up on gay people.  I doubt that this is the best way to go, but I don’t think it’s completely crazy. 

If we get a Treasury Secretary who can keep the credit markets from freezing up and make us a nice profit off of bank nationalization, I don’t care how many goats he has fucked.

Comment #92: Neil the Ethical Werewolf  on  11/07  at  05:38 AM

Larry:

We don’t want to live in a Godless county like Swedan, etc. [sic] 

Oddly enough, these northern European Godless countries typically have state churches, schools with religion classes and regularly morning prayers with hymns. And the classes are often taken to church services at the beginning/end of school year.

Still, we manage to be incredibly secular. Funny, that.

Comment #93: Ocellus  on  11/07  at  05:40 AM

OMG Larry!  I had sex recently, and NOW I’M ON MY PERIOD!  I’m a baby killer! A dirty baby killer!  There were possibly wee little formed humans that popped up inside of me from the magickal sperm monkeys and now my evil, evil woman parts are EXPELLING THEM! 

Somebody please outlaw menstruation, because I just can’t help myself.  Put me in menstrual jail!  STOP ME FROM KILLING THE BAYBEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!

Comment #94: speedbudget  on  11/07  at  09:20 AM

Back at the topic, this seems to me to be one of those areas where we need to make sure early in the conversation that the words we are using mean the same thing before we goo to far.

I agree with what I believe to be Amanda’s point. Firmly. Vehemently. The words, though get fuzzy, because what they point to is fuzzy, and people can agree with the words without agreeing on the substance, and vice versa.

I think one of the things that Obama and the new Democratic majority need to be careful of is not doing the mirror-image of what the Republicans just did. Bush and cronies took a functioning system, healthy economy, pretty solid international reputation, and fairly solid set of collective civil rights and protections, won (or at least took power) with the popular vote very close, and declared a mandate for conservatism, and trashed everything.

I agree that the current state of the country and the election constitute a mandate to run the country far to the left of BUSH, and far more liberally than the BUSH ADMINISTRATION. Even going to what used to be considered dead center, or right of center would constitute sweeping leftward reform - elimination of torture as public policy, for one.

I think one of Obama’s special gifts, and what will make him an amazing president, is what appears to be the ability to frame things in new ways that inspire people.

Trying to think of specifics of what I mean, basically, I don’t think he should in any way pander to the right, or try to straddle anything, but at the same time, he needs to pursue liberal goals in conservative ways. Right now the country is very right-leaning, and change doesn’t have to be slow, but it needs to feel organic.

To choose one example, religion in schools (keeping them secular) can be presented accurately as BOTH the need to allow individual freedom by not forcing people to participate in prayer or religious indoctrination and at the same time protecting religion and deeply held religious beliefs by not having your kids get taught someone else’s religion.

I think it is time for an administration that treats us all as grownups and pisses us all off or disappoints all of us equally while inspiring us all equally. As another example, stressing that abortion needs to be “safe, legal, and rare” needs to have liberals happy with safe and annoyed at rare, conservatives happy with rare and annoyed at legal, and everyone agreed on safe.

I saw a bumper sticker (on a parked car, thank God, or I would never have had time to read it) that conservatives need to learn that just because something is bad, it shouldn’t be automatically forbidden, and liberals need to learn that just because something is good, it shouldn’t be automatically compulsory. Even while I agreed, I noticed how true it stayed if you swapped the two.

I really won’t be surprised if Obama rarely if ever uses words like conservative, liberal, left or right. I also won’t be surprised if he pursues pragmatic and sensible policies that leave liberals feeling like we finally have a liberal president who knows what he is doing and conservatives feeling like we finally have a conservative president who knows what he is doing.

We’ll see.

Comment #95: Lymis  on  11/07  at  09:24 AM

Andrew wrote (well above):

I suspect that Obama and congress will pass a lot of quite liberal legislation and regulation that doesn’t actually cost the federal treasury any money.

Then who will it cost money?  And if it costs no one money, how would it have any impact?

Comment #96: Dana  on  11/07  at  09:43 AM

KMTBERRY wrote:

I have had to pretend that when they all say middle class they MEAN working class, but that Americans ALL think they are middle class, even when making 18 G a year, which is actually, you know, WORKING CLASS.

If you are middle class (broadly defined by income), then you are almost certainly also working for a living, which, to my way of thinking, also makes you working class.

Comment #97: Dana  on  11/07  at  10:07 AM

Mr Ess wrote:

That’s good.  OTOH, Dana, The Pandagon House Troll, lives in Virginia too, as I recall.

No, I used to live in Virginia, from December of 1984 to June of 2000.  I live in Jim Thorpe, Pennsylvania now.

But, if I’m The Pandagon House Troll, capitalization yours, why isn’t Amanda sending me a portion of site advertising revenues?  smile

Comment #98: Dana  on  11/07  at  10:16 AM

Or do I have to wait for the designation The Official Pandagon House Troll?

Comment #99: Dana  on  11/07  at  10:18 AM

If you are the house troll Dana, how come you didn’t bring any House Troll Cookies?

Comment #100: Ms Kate  on  11/07  at  11:02 AM

btw: 98% of abortions are for convienance.

So? Your point? Both of mine were TOTALLY for my convenience.

Comment #101: kac90b  on  11/07  at  11:54 AM

Ms Kate:  At the Pico household, instead of T(r)oll House cookies, we make pumpkin chocolate chip cookies; will that be good enough?

Comment #102: Dana  on  11/07  at  12:08 PM

I don’t think Dana is a troll, necessarily, because he’s actually respectful. But this Larry clown is indistinguishable from parody. Why are we engaging him?

Back to the topic at hand, I’m starting to transition from intense satisfaction to nervous anticipation of what Obama’s cabinet is going to end up looking like. I also hope that he doesn’t govern from the center in hopes of accomplishing more in a second term, because given what people expect of him, if he does that, he won’t get a second term.

Comment #103: Jenny Dreadful  on  11/07  at  12:34 PM

I never thought I’d give that much of a shit about what you have to say, Dana, but do you think you could post that recipe?

Comment #104: Rachel II  on  11/07  at  12:35 PM

Conditions have changed a bit in the last two months from what they were when Obama formulated his campaign program.  He may have to change his positions or delays some things more than he would like. Amanda’s essay is one of several versions of “we elected you so do what we want” refrains Obama will likely hear.  There are some folks who don’t embrace all of his proposals but voted for him anyway because some of them appealed more, were more important, or that Obama’s abilities were preferable to McCain’s.  I am against the ironically named Employee Free Choice Act and against the “refundable” feature of tax credits, but Obama’s vision for foreign affairs and his pro-choice stance (particularly regarding the Court) were more important to me.

Comment #105: MiddleageLiberal  on  11/07  at  01:10 PM

Rachel:  After I get home.

Comment #106: Dana  on  11/07  at  01:13 PM

It’s fascinating that Larry is in favor of banning organ transplants.  After all, each of your organs is alive even if the brain dies, so you’re taking a living thing and putting it into another body where it may not survive.

Why do you hate organ transplants, Larry?

Comment #107: Mnemosyne  on  11/07  at  01:20 PM

I am against the ironically named Employee Free Choice Act ...

I would be willing to give up the Employee Free Choice Act if employers were required to hold union elections within, say, 2 weeks of employees indicating they wanted one.  As it stands now, employers can drag their heels for as long as possible and spend a lot of time and money intimidating and lying to their employees to get them to vote against the union.  The reason a lot of people support “card check” is that the employees can do it under the radar and the employer doesn’t have time to fire everyone who supports the union before the union is formed.

In other words, if employers played fair, we wouldn’t need the Employee Free Choice Act.  Because they don’t, we need a way to level the playing field.

Comment #108: Mnemosyne  on  11/07  at  01:24 PM

But, if I’m The Pandagon House Troll, capitalization yours, why isn’t Amanda sending me a portion of site advertising revenues?

Revenues? She should be charging you admission. Who knows how many reasonable people have been turned off the site by your self-satisfied, inexplicably indulged presence.

Comment #109: junk science  on  11/07  at  01:31 PM

Dana -

There are plenty of things the federal government can do that don’t cost money, or at least more money. Take the Bush administration’s decision to stop funding any groups doing AIDS work in Africa that didn’t preach abstinence. Sadly, that took away funding from Marie Stopes international, one of the most effective AIDS-education groups going.

So even when you’re talking about the same amount of money, deciding where it goes can have a huge impact.

Comment #110: Andrew  on  11/07  at  02:06 PM

Of course Obama will go left.  Holy Jesus he couldn’t help but go somewhat left after living under neoconism for eight years.  But if anyone who thinks he’s going to be ‘very’ liberal is in for a shock.  He’s not going to let Congress push him around.  He’s going to, and must, govern from the center.  He has a few mandates like restructuring the tax code and national service.  Mostly he spoke about generalities.  Don’t expect him to pass a big gun control act or some such.  Clinton let Congress run him the first two years and lost Congress as a result.  That mistake will not be repeated.  Rahm wasn’t hired to kick Republican asses but rather Dem. asses that don’t want to play along.

For the first two years…. IT’S THE ECONOMY, STUPID!

Comment #111: Magis  on  11/07  at  02:09 PM

Don’t feed the trolls.

Comment #112: Taylor  on  11/07  at  02:36 PM

My fear is that his advisors start listening to the shouting blowhards and start telling him to move to the center. He needs to KEEP listening to the people and the people who donated to his campaign need to make sure they hold him and his administration accountable.

I really don’t agree.  Obama needs to do what he thinks is right.  He has a huge mess to clean up and the people might not like having to wait for red meat like universal health coverage.  I’m hoping he’ll throw a couple of small bones to the liberal base.  It sounds like he’s already planning to do that with SCHIP and I greatly hope he follows that up with extending unemployment insurance.  We have the worst unemployment insurance (i.e. the shortest) plan in the developed world and that is completely unacceptable during an extremely painful recession.

Nevertheless, for the most part, Obama will probably have to start out with a bunch of boring and unpopular shit, like reinstating regulations and raising taxes.

Comment #113: keshmeshi  on  11/07  at  02:44 PM

Then who will it cost money?  And if it costs no one money, how would it have any impact?

::puzzled:: surely you’re not that stupid, Dana.  While I know that “Loving v. Virginia” was not legislation, that judgment was very liberal (well, actually not liberal, since it was overthrowing a draconian piece of garbage, it was simply moderate) and cost the government nothing.  I’m sure an analogous piece of legislation can be cited.

Comment #114: Eric, Rejector of Memez  on  11/07  at  02:47 PM

I don’t see Dana as a troll. He’s a staunch conservative, but it does our side good to have *respectful* people make conservative arguments—it helps us sharpen our arguments. I’m actually glad Dana posts here, even though I almost never agree with him.

Larry, on the other hand, can FOAD.

Comment #115: Norsecats  on  11/07  at  02:56 PM

Dana sees himself as a troll.  He wants that mantle, although not what often goes with that labeling (banning).  He’s not really a troll, just often irritating.

So when I called him “Pandagon House Troll”, it was a joke on my part, and I’m sure Dana saw it as somewhat of a compliment…

Comment #116: MikeEss  on  11/07  at  03:10 PM

Larry,
“btw: 98% of abortions are for convienance. “

1) learn to spell.
2) both of mine were!
if you count “convenience” as not making the spouse go out & get a third job, and not have my kids (you know, the out-of-the-womb ones) go without clothes.
yeah, totally on the fly, for-fun abortions.

Comment #117: redwards  on  11/07  at  05:02 PM

Those of us on the Rite no that you Commies are into recreational abortions, so stop trying to pretend yer not.

Comment #118: Rugged in Montana  on  11/07  at  05:50 PM

By the way, exactly how can you have a small government with a strong military, active censorship, monitoring of women to ensure all pregnancies are carried to term, and a national church?

commissarjs on 11/06 at 11:18 PM

Tax Cuts!!

Comment #119: RobW  on  11/07  at  08:57 PM

When I filled out my ballot, I did it 2-3 measures at a time across a week, where I could take the time to read up on each of them before filling in the bubble. If I"d had to do all the research ahead of time and then go to the polls, I might have had a head-scratching moment, too.

I printed off the ballot from my state’s board of election site, then I filled it all in at home over the weekend. I got to look up everything on the Internet and make sure that the really-strangley-worded propositions were saying what I thought they were saying. So when I went to vote, I just copied my answers onto the ballet.

Something like health care reform would effect people’s every day lives and once Americans have it any dismantling of a Universal Health Care system would be incredibly unpopular and readily reported in the media. Much like how conservatives can’t talk about privatizing social security without losing considerable support. In other countries the founders of universal health care systems are regarded as national heroes and it could cement a populist goodwill for Obama that would allow him to enact even further progressive policies.

I agree with all of this and I agree that he should kick this plan into gear first because it would garner goodwill and support from “average Americans.”

Comment #120: brista  on  11/08  at  01:35 AM

No Kate, we do want alot to change. Abortion- illegal, Marriage between 1 man 1 woman, No pornography, small government, prayer in schools, strong military, more women staying home, more babies, etc.

“Church, children and kitchen”, in other words?

Comment #121: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  11/08  at  01:52 AM

Taylor wrote:

Don’t feed the trolls!

But the trolls feed you!  smile  As promised to Rachel, the Pumpkin Chocolate Chip Cookies recipe:

  * 2 cups canned pumpkin
  * 1 cup sugar
  * ½ cup cooking oil
  * 2 cups all-purpose flour
  * 2 tsp baking powder
  * 1 tsp cinnamon
  * ½ tsp salt
  * 1 tsp baking soda
  * 1 tsp milk
  * 2 tsp vanilla
  * 1 bag Nestle’s Toll House chocolate chips

Preheat oven to 350º F. Combine pumpkin, sugar and oil in a mixing bowl. Add flour, baking powder cinnamon and salt, mixing well. Mix soda and milk in a separate container, then add to cookie mixture. Stir in chocolate chips and vanilla.

Drop by spoonfuls onto an ungreased cookie sheet, and bake @ 350º F until done; about 15 to 20 minutes. Serve warm with lots and lots of ice-cold milk, and napkins, since you’ll get melted chocolate chips all over your fingers.

And these cookies can be enjoyed by Democrats and Republicans, moonbats and wingnuts, and even the occasional Ron Paul supporter.

By using oil instead of shortening, these cookies don’t dry out quickly.  For those who don’t like chocolate, just omit the chips, and you have pumpkin cookies.

Comment #122: Dana  on  11/08  at  10:12 AM

I had told Rachel that I would post that recipe last night, but events got in the way.  Just before I left work, my darling bride of 29 years, five months and 19 days called and said that the whole family was home—our older daughter being back from State College—and that everybody wanted to go out to dinner.

Well, I got home, and said older daughter, plus the spare daughter—our younger daughter’s best friend is over so much that she is referred to as the spare—were chanting, “Sushi! Sushi! Sushi!” as I pretty much expected.  Our favorite (and the least expensive) Japanese restaurant in Allentown had closed, so we went to Teppen Hibachi on Hamilton Boulevard.  The food is good, but going on a Friday night really is a mistake!

At any rate, I happen to love pumpkin: pumpkin cookies, pumpkin bread, pumpkin pie, you name it.  But there was a sigh inside the vestibule which advertised “pumpkin pie martinis” at the bar.  That’s just wrong, on so many levels.

Comment #123: Dana  on  11/08  at  10:21 AM

Mr Ess wrote:

Dana sees himself as a troll.  He wants that mantle, although not what often goes with that labeling (banning).  He’s not really a troll, just often irritating.

So when I called him “Pandagon House Troll”, it was a joke on my part, and I’m sure Dana saw it as somewhat of a compliment…

Well, I’m not offended by the term, and see it as rather amusing.  As for being banned, if our honored hostess were going to do that, she’d have done it by now.  It’s clear that she doesn’t think terribly highly of me, but it seems to take somewhat more than that to get banned from Pandagon.

Comment #124: Dana  on  11/08  at  10:31 AM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.