That in the same way, Obama now, by continuing the broad outlines of the various surveillance and detention and counter-terrorism programs, is draining them of plausible partisan controversy, and so they are going to become entrenched and consolidated as permanent features of American government as well, going forward.

You were warned - several times over. What? The only "serious" people are those who can see things after the fact? You should have known this going in. We told you this would happen and yet you still pushed Obama. Why don't you acknowledge that fact? Why hasn't "notveryhappy" received a "hat tip?" I find this all very disturbing. Being wrong is one thing. Being wrong and refusing to acknowledge that you were warned is entirely different. I don't know how your readership can continue to trust you and take you seriously when you can't own up.

Democrats Must Lose In November

[Read the article: Jay Rockefeller's unintentionally revealing comments]

It's very important that we defeat any Democratic candidate for president in November. The Democratic leadership's support for telecom immunity and basket warrants shows that they, as a party, are not ready for the presidency. Another four years of Republican rule will give the Democrats a chance to re-define themselves and become a true opposition party. By contrast, if they win the presidency, this will be the end of the U.S. as a lawful democracy, because authoritarianism would have become the consensus among both major parties, and the American people would have given their stamp of approval to it.

The Republicans are beyond hope. The best chance the country has is to defeat the Democrats in November and send them back to the drawing board until they become a party worth voting for. --notveryhappy

Permalink Thursday, January 24, 2008 12:44 PM

---------------------------------------------------

By the way, it's not "a conspiracy to support John McCain." It's based on a cost-benefit analysis. If the Democrats embrace authoritarian policies and we support them in this by rallying around them in the election (even if only reluctantly), we'll thereby ensure that there will be a long-lasting bipartisan authoritarian consensus in the U.S. Support for torture, warrantless surveillance, and a presidency that regards itself as above the law will simply be the accepted norm if the Democrats win the presidency in spite of their current support for this nonsense. By supporting a Democratic presidential contender even after the Democrats immunize the telecoms, we'd obliterate any meaningful opposition to Republicans on civil liberties. This outcome would be, I think, much worse than the risk of four years of McCain. --notveryhappy

Permalink Monday, March 3, 2008 01:10 PM

http://letters.salon.com/3138bf76e07b15f61f443dfd324f826d/author/index1.html

Perhaps you've missed it, Sinnard. I've been calling for Obama's impeachment for quite some time now and I sincerely doubt if you or any other nutcase out there will cause me to change that position. You really should try to keep up. -- Jebbie

Who did you vote for again Jebbie? Wasn't it Obama?

If so, yeah, I can guarantee that none of us "nutcases" (who didn't vote for the stooge in the first place and begged people like you not to either) will ever be able to cause any change in your genius.

-- bystander

I would like to thank you for your consistently excellent contributions to the conversations at Unclaimed Territory.

That's all. -- qnirxngm

Excellent contributions. Just so. Like the following for instance.

October of last year...

At the risk of snark, do you want Obama to have one term, or two? The threat of a serious crash will get him into office, and an actual crash might not derail that (what I see as an) eventuality. But, a go-for-broke crash, without anything to slow our descent, will IMHO doom a second term for Obama and a first term for any other Democrat. -- bystander

Bernbart is attacked for one reason and one reason only - She is stupid.

And regarding Dr. Gates? I think that once the officer didn't immediately comply with his request for Name and Badge Number, that Gates should have tazed, beaten and/or perhaps even shot the officer.

Fuck the police.

And we didn't support Obama because he was a progressive. As I said before, we supported him because he was, we thought (or at least many of us, including me) that he was the best of the lot, which I continue to believe. What was the alternative? Nader? Puhhhhhhhhhhhhhleeeeeeeease!-- kovie

Moronic douchebag to the absolute fucking end.

It's fine to have ideals; that's why we fight. We're here to discuss how. -- coram nobis

Who is this "we" you are referring to and where are all these discussions on how to "fight?"

skywagon

I wonder ...

... where the representatives of the people are on this.

Mostly pushing for even worse policies than the ones the Obama administration wants. -- GlennGreenwald

No. There is no worse. At some point one has to draw a line. This is a situation where there are only different variations on the worst. By saying there is a worse you are in effect saying you are willing to ultimately live with this. "It could always be worse" is for those who are accepting of this and will be accepting of something "worse."

-- adnoto

"So....

Are we winning the war of words today? Was today an increment in the right direction? How is everyone feeling?"

Maybe you would be better served by reading the thread yourself instead of wanting others to do your heavy lifting (and interpreting) like you do on every other issue around this place.

Get off your ass, adnoto and try doing something positive for a change. -- qnirxngm

I'll take that as a no then?

I will by golly! I will do something "positive." I will engage with you in a battle within the war of words! I will get off my ass ...oh..er.. wait... I really don't have to get off my ass for that.