Balls and Walnuts
more than you ever wanted to know
Topology timeout
I haven’t ranted political lately because it would all be “head butts wall, head butts wall, head butts desk (for variety).” Count me as one of the liberals so fed up with Obama that I’d like to see a successful primary challenge in 2010. But no ranting. NO. RANTING.
Instead, we’ll turn a sphere inside out.
Hey Obama! Ever read Langston Hughes’s poem Harlem?
What happens to a dream deferred?
Does it dry up
like a raisin in the sun?
Or fester like a sore—
And then run?
Does it stink like rotten meat?
Or crust and sugar over—
like a syrupy sweet?
Maybe it just sags
like a heavy load.
Or does it explode?
My favorite comment from that sphere viddy: I WANNAH TRY THIS TA MAH LEFT TESTICLE
There’s a part two, you know.
D.
That was weirdly fascinating.
Unril you change the people, you will no get a more liberal President than Obama looked to be. I keep having to explain to my mother how non liberal he really is.
noxcay
(stucj in the middle of red country. And TX isn’t as red as other places.)
Dean: yup, and it keeps changing over time. I think there must be multiple solutions to the problem, since I recall watching a movie of this during high school — and it was different.
Mary, I agree. Sadly.
I think the Dems would be more successful if instead of eating their own and wringing their hands over whether the annointed one is indeed liberal enough, they should be taking all that anger and angst and battling the Reps. There seems to be an unwillingness to engage the Republicans, as if taking their ideas/spin seriously and debating them is bad thing, sort of like they can’t imagine needing to, since they consider the ideas so crazy that any reasonable person would Ãmmediately reject them. The problem is that a very large part of voting Americans give these ideas a lot of credence and the Dem subtext – you must be crazy – isn’t going to attract converts. Letting the Reps define the debate and running campaigns that say vote for us because were not them doesn’t seem to me to be that inspiring. Obama, I think, managed to avoid this trip in his campaign. Kerry certainly didn’t, he ran as the anti-Bush. The mid-term elections didn’t.
Sorry for ranting on your non-rant post.
No apology needed. You’re right. There are a few congresscritters fighting the good fight, but they’re too few and far between. And come to think of it, one (Bernie Sanders) is a socialist, and one (Alan Grayson) was overwhelmed and defeated by Chamber of Commerce money. Still, we have people like Raul Grijalva, Anthony Wiener, Pete DeFazio (my congresscritter when I lived in Oregon), Maxine Waters. And then in the Senate we have two strong progressives in Jeff Merkley and Ron Wyden (two more Oregonians).
Having a White House that actively scorns the progressive caucus and progressive electorate does not help. I tend to agree with the POV that (A) Obama’s performance in the 2008 election demonstrates he is not a stupid politician, therefore (B) his present, apparent “clumsiness” is intentional. He wants corporate interests to prevail.
Or maybe he’s a good campaigner and a lousy administrator. I don’t know.