dagblog - Comments for "What do we know so far about Wisconsin"

1. Trope. If you're going to

quinn esq — Thu, 07 Jun 2012 01:26:51 +0000

In reply to 1. you're like the guy who

1. Trope. If you're going to aim for metaphors, do try to connect at least one thought to at least one other thought.

Remember those dot to dot figures? Yeah. I'd recommend aiming to link up A to B, but hey - that's just me.

2. Paragraphs which contain the phrase "Really try to have a little level of basic reading comprehension" make English teachers everywhere feel bad.

Also, kittens.

3. I was in no way implying that you were an Obama operative, and I apologize if it read that way. My bad.

Rather, I was implying that - in terms of practical ends achieved - you might as well be a Romney operative.

4. Go Celtics.

1. you're like the guy who

Elusive Trope — Thu, 07 Jun 2012 01:15:42 +0000

In reply to 1. I like your war analogy.

1. you're like the guy who shows up from west point, tries to lead the guys on the their second tour and get fragged on day three. I do think you might enjoy my fellow hecklers engaged in some heckling maneuvers in preparation for the warm weather wave of occupy demonstrations

2. i am not making the claim their debating justifies my pwn attack on unity, first off, i say if you put unity above all else, which is what you are imply, then you need to attack the Wisconsinites. Really try to have a little level of basic reading comprehension. Or are you just trying to act like an idiot. Moreover, I did not attack the unity. You are claiming my criticisms are an attack - that does not make it a de facto attack on unity. I believe we can debate strategy and still remain unifed. Q is all for the group hug and never a discouraging word heard. You're one step away from a fanatic.

3. If what I say generates support, great. If not, oh well. I say what I believe needs to be said. I am not an Obama operative, nor is my primary objective in life to get Obama elected. And I don't think getting people to vote for Obama because i sugar coat something or get them all energized about some pie in the sky workers movement hitting the street is the way to go - they need to vote for him because it is the smart thing to do. Tricking them or smoozing them will only have negative consequences down the road, undermining the long-term objectives.

4. Go Sonics, er, i mean Thunder.

They are busy pooing on

trkingmomoe — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 23:28:39 +0000

In reply to Jeez I can't even say that I

They are busy pooing on Florida right now. 2.5 million dollars a week just in Florida. lol

1. I like your war analogy.

quinn esq — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 22:02:55 +0000

In reply to Wow, dude, am I up in your

1. I like your war analogy. It fits you. Your election-day attacks and your day-after search for scapegoats is, in fact, just like those of a soldier. A soldier who goes into battle telling his mates they're doomed to defeat... and who starts pointing fingers at the others while the bodies are still warm. Like I say, you're just that kinda soldier.

2. Your claim that Wisconsinites debating who should lead the recall justifies your own attack on unity is idiocy. It's the same as arguing that the Democratic Party spending any time choosing candidates through primaries somehow justifies anybody in the Party who wishes to split it.

3. If your aim is to generate support for President Obama, I would have to say I'm not sure you aren't doing the worst job that I've seen on the blogs in 4 years. That is, I find it almost impossible to believe that you aren't trying to drive people away.

I am sorry that you are

rmrd0000 — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 21:34:48 +0000

In reply to You said: The usual crowd

I am sorry that you are offended. If you read through the blog, you will find that Obama is being blamed (for what he didn't do).

People are depressed after the Scott Walker victory. My post angers you. The blame Obama posts depress me. We obviously disagree with who caused what in the defeat. I think the money was the factor. Others have opine that anti-union sentiment and poor timing for trying to oust Walker were the core issues.

The best that we can take from yesterday's vote is that the Democrats may be able to slow Walker's efforts if they have taken a one vote control of the state Senate. At least we can both be happy about that possiblity.

You are free to criticize "My man Obama", but I should be able to make a counterpoint.

If you go back through recent posts along the "Obama Bad-Obama Good" theme, you will note that some Obama supporters were called "unintelligent". I didn't think my use of the word "depressants" was out of line.

Again, all I can say is that I'm sorry that you were offended.

Let's hope that the Democrats have gained control of the Senate.

You said: The usual crowd

A Guy Called LULU — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 21:01:42 +0000

In reply to I don't know if we are

You said:

The usual crowd of blogging depressants will be by soon to gloat this is all Obama's fault.

Now:

I did not see my comment about some ready to lay blame on Obama for Scott Walker's victory as a vicious attack. I saw it as fact.

Your lame defense is that you stated 'facts'. It is a fact that you referenced some here as belonging to a crowd of depressants. You said you expected them to gloat about Walker's victory and gloat that Obama could be blamed. That is also a fact. You did not see your statement as a vicious attack. Neither do I. I see it as a snide, dickish way of saying tough shit, just don't blame my main man, to some people at a moment when they were expressing how very disappointed they were at the very recent news that some good people had lost a good fight. Nobody was gloating about anything Obama did, but more importantly did not, do.

Flavius notes in another blog

rmrd0000 — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 20:37:07 +0000

In reply to What do we know so far about Wisconsin

Flavius notes in another blog post that the Democrats may gain a one vote control od the Wisconsin state Senate.

I don't know if we are

rmrd0000 — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 20:27:37 +0000

In reply to Well summed, Trope. I was

I don't know if we are supposed to be communicating or not, but you did mention my name.

When I see consistently see posts that attack Obama suggesting that there is no difference between Obama and Romney or that Romney won't be that bad, I get the impression that that might not be a true ally. You might disagree.

I suggested that some would blame the failure on Obama and that has happened in this post as I expected..

Most people have made up their minds. For some the drones are a bridge too far. They cannot cast a vote for Obama. I get that. Others may have other reasons for not voting for Obama. I understand that as well.

Pretending that some wouldn't blame Obama for the Wisconsin loss was merely a statement of fact. Read the comments and you see that Obama is being blamed.

Some of us are more concerned about the turn that the GOP has taken as the more urgent matter.

I did not see my comment about some ready to lay blame on Obama for Scott Walker's victory as a vicious attack. I saw it as fact.

Wow, dude, am I up in your

Elusive Trope — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 20:18:52 +0000

In reply to Well summed, Trope. I was

Wow, dude, am I up in your craw or what?

And immediately you jump in with the dancing on the grave bit. So I take it when US soldiers started getting maimed and killed by the insurgents Iraq, and you pointed this out on some blog somewhere as evidence that maybe this wasn't a good idea to invade Iraq, you did so between bouts of rolling around on the floor in hysterical glee:

Q: "More soldiers without arms and legs! Yeah! So many bodybags! Hooray!

Using the war analogy (because everyone here knows I just take so much glee in all the wars going on in the world), I happen to view this Wisconsin event as one skirmish in a continuing struggle. I have a perspective and an opinion about whether it should have been done and whether it was done correctly. And right now, I'm just not going to link to the number of articles that brought up things like the conservatives getting more energized over this recall than the progressives. Frankly you're not worth the effort.

Because when you look at your "little" rant, you don't actually address any of the points I have made - and I know you've seen them on the other threads. So just going for the character assassination only shows that deep down you know I'm right. Bawahahaha.

If what you want from me is Rah Rah Rah crapola, you ain't going to get it.

If you can't hear criticisms, maybe you shouldn't get on the internet. Although there are some echo chambers out there I hear, so maybe these places can make you happy. And should Obama lose - by all means come onto a political blog and offer your assessment as to where the strategists went wrong. It doesn't you're dancing on the grave and heckling moderates, but just using it as learning moment.

Again, this is a political blog - not the Democratic Party blog, or some union blog, or even a specifically progressive or moderate blog. It is a political blog. And if I see something I believe creates a barrier to achieving the long-term objectives I'm going to point it out if the fancy hits me - regardless of whether that hurts your poor little feelings.

Dang man, cry me a freaking river. You're just coming off as pathetic, really.

And I never said the money aligned against the progressives doomed it from the beginning. It was just one factor from among many - such as I pointed out in this very blog thread, almost a third of the union households don't have a favorable opinion about unions.

If one is inclined to use the money as excuse for the loss, such as Sleepin' would like to do, then one has to accept the fact one had to know if one had any intelligence that this was going to happen.

And, and this is the kicker, if you have a struggle ahead to win - having such money thrown against you means it is highly highly highly unlikely you going to get the undecideds or those who start off leaning in the other direction.

So I agree with the appraiser of art that take the money out of the equation, one would be fooling oneself that a victory would have been easy as pie. Toss the money back into the equation and one would have had to run the perfect campaign to pull off the upset.

And you jump on me about unity - where is such outrage toward those in Wisconsin who could get unified around a single candidate and gave Walker all that time in the lead up while the pro-recall force fought it amongst themselves. Which kind of shows your principled stand for unity is just the thing you pulled out the air to come at me, trying to dislodge me from your craw.

So really take your accusations of resentment (I'm not sure what it is exactly that you believe I resent that would drive my words) and personal pettiness, and...well...ah forget it. I have to go find the next progressive thing to heckle.

la dee dah. la dee dah. la deeee dah.

How true Jolly "I need your

Resistance — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 20:12:17 +0000

In reply to I might extend understanding

How true Jolly

"I need your help," Obama said.

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-tells-blacks-stop-complainin-fight-015928905.html

"Getting help is a two way street; Mr. One Term President.

"They marched, but where were you?" MIA