Comments: So Horrible So Fast

VOTE DIGBY-CLARK-2008---VOTE THE INTERNET three solid winners.

Posted by Mike Meyer at August 13, 2008 02:15 PM

"They're everywhere we thought Iraq was but wasn't."?

Really?

I'm glad that this blog now features not only a brilliant comic genius, but also a famous computer scientist. Because I sense some recursion coming up:

"Belgium. They're everywhere we thought Iraq was but wasn't but Iran was but wasn't."

Back to Flanders boys!

Posted by Aaron Datesman at August 13, 2008 02:35 PM

The Quakers are our misfortune.
They're everything we thought the Jews were, but weren't.

Posted by donescobar at August 13, 2008 05:56 PM

It would be a good time to be someone who hates the US of A; vote, don't vote, you can't really go wrong.

Posted by Monkay at August 13, 2008 06:13 PM

...Iran is a grave threat.

Oh, Evan, get with the program once already.
Nukular combat...toe to toe with the Ruskies...in the Caucasuses.
Someone, please, outen the lights; show him the magic lantern.

Posted by Pvt. Keepout at August 13, 2008 11:10 PM

I was going to comment on Evan Bayh yesterday at another blog but I couldn't. It hurts.

Posted by Bob In Pacifica at August 14, 2008 09:19 AM

"They're everything we thought Iraq was but wasn't."

I seem to recall Eddie Murphy using a similar line circa 1997, West Hollywood.

Posted by IOZ at August 14, 2008 11:48 AM

Sen Bayh---a neocon in democrat's clothing? If he did not know what kind of group he was joining, he should have known better with people like Perle, Kristol, Bernard Lewis!!! Haven't we had ENOUGH of those guys????

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/bayh_as_veep_he_cochaired_wing.php

http://utdocuments.blogspot.com/2008/04/committee-for-liberation-of-iraq-press.html

Posted by Rupa Shah at August 14, 2008 12:10 PM

must be the donk kool-aid . it turns i even a really decent liberal like you into thinking clinton ( and obama ) was ( is ) not bad to begin with .
please open the eyes , smell the coffee and simply follow the " rise " of chosen one and his choices along the path .
simple as that . there was no belief /principle ( if he has any ? ) " the change " did not throw under the bus when it came to making a deal with powerful and his advancement ..

Posted by badri at August 14, 2008 12:24 PM

Russia's invasion of Georgia means that we need to invade Iran! It makes perfect sense! Now pass me some more paint chips! Then some mercury to wash it down with!

Posted by Dan at August 14, 2008 12:51 PM

it turns i even a really decent liberal like you into thinking clinton ( and obama ) was ( is ) not bad to begin with

I believe the phrase I used was "not completely horrible." And in fact this was the case with Clinton. Just before his inauguration he was talking about reaching some kind of accommodation with Iraq. Then the commentariat went bonkers, and by the time he was in office he was yammering about keeping the sanctions on until Saddam was deposed, etc.

Posted by Jonathan Schwarz at August 14, 2008 01:28 PM

Mike, Digby's a perennially-disappointed Dem whose solution to all problems is more and better Dems, and Clark is a war criminal. Find a better ticket to support.

Posted by Save the Oocytes at August 14, 2008 01:35 PM

I'd bet anything that Bayh doesn't get the nod. Above all else, Obama's team understands branding. Selecting a white-bread, zealously pro-war DLC-humping scion would be a marketing disaster. They may be cynical, but they're not stupid.

Posted by Chris E. at August 14, 2008 05:42 PM

Bayh isn't needed for VP. He will be listened to. We're still fucked.

It's not the people, it's the establishment.

Posted by No One of Consequence at August 14, 2008 05:59 PM

Time for a commentariat pool?

I'll take Hillary for VP.

Go McCain!!!

Posted by Labiche at August 14, 2008 06:55 PM

StO: Whom would YOU suggest? How about SAVE THE OOCYTES-FRIEDENTHAL-2008?

Posted by Mike Meyer at August 15, 2008 02:26 AM

A. Actually Mike, you really should vote for me for president. (I haven't chosen a running mate just yet.)

Otherwise, how about asking for a write-in paper ballot and writing "no-confidence" for president, to indicate displeasure with the available choices?

Even though I think I'd make a much better president than Digby, obviously neither she nor I nor even Save the Oocytes have much of a chance. Besides-- in all seriousness-- if several million people vote "no confidence" and then pester the various news organizations to cover it, it would register, both nationally and internationally, as Americans expressing their frustration with the two-party system and our available choices.


B. Incidentally,do people really believe that Obama represents
"a new and different kind of global engagement strategy"??

Posted by Jonathan Versen at August 17, 2008 06:03 AM

Change you can believe in?
You got that right. The Dems have learned that guns and butter seems to be a winning strategy, that there is absolutely no downside to their wholehearted congressional support of the ongoing wars, as long as they occasionally throw some anti-war words to the adoring peaceniks in their midst. (After all, they have no other place to go.)

Check out the new Democratic Platform for increased belligerency:

More attempted American hegemony:
"The Democratic Party believes that there is no more important priority than renewing American leadership on the world stage. This will require diplomatic skill as capable as our military might."

The bogus "Iran nuclear weapons program" is a target:
"We will present Iran with a clear choice: if you abandon your nuclear weapons program, support for terror, and threats to Israel, you will receive meaningful incentives; so long as you refuse, the United States and the international community will further ratchet up the pressure, . . ."

The Afghanistan war will be expanded:
"The central front in the war on terror is not Iraq, and it never was. We will defeat Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan, where those who actually attacked us on 9-11 reside and are resurgent."

The phony "War on Terror" will be continued:
"We need a comprehensive strategy to defeat global terrorists–one that draws on the full range of American power, including but not limited to our military might."

And of course more Pentagon spending:
"We support plans to increase the size of the Army by 65,000 troops and the Marines by 27,000 troops. Increasing our end strength will help units retrain and re-equip properly between deployments and decrease the strain on military families. . . We will rebuild our armed forces to meet the full spectrum needs of the new century."
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/2008%20Democratic%20Platform%20by%20Cmte%2008-13-08.pdf

Posted by Don Bacon at August 17, 2008 12:51 PM

The Bilderberg group picked Sanford and Sebelius as vice president candidates.

Posted by Susan - NC at August 17, 2008 02:37 PM

Susan,
the first thing I'll do as president is not choose a Bilderberg nominee as vice president. I was thinking of Save the Oocytes or Dennis Kucinich, but haven't heard back from either. (I can't choose Ron Paul because he's from Texas like me.)

Posted by Jonathan Versen at August 17, 2008 06:33 PM

Jonathan Versen: AS ALWAYS I'm voting for Michael Meyer. I'm just stumping for Digby-Clark in the SINCERE hope that YOU folks will take the hint and support THE INTERNET POLITICAL PARTY. YOU have a chance to ACTUALLY make a difference in the world with this new tool, The Net. Opportunity is knocking, but YOU have to answer the door to seize that moment before its gone. YOUR TIME HAS COME, it won't be back soon, if ever. (Michael Meyer is a carnival game player, a barker, a shill, recognizing opportunity and seizing it IS what I do best. This is one of the biggest I've EVER seen, BUT YOU HAVE TO WORK IT TO TAKE IT.)

Posted by Mike Meyer at August 17, 2008 07:38 PM