Comment from Josh Hammond
Time: July 3, 2008, 2:46 pm

In case you don’t go to the link, Lefty’s source for this conclusion is Alex Conant, a hack for the RNC.

Comment from Sasha
Time: July 3, 2008, 2:56 pm

My you just hate everybody, don’t you? Who do you think should run the show?

Comment from Leftcoast
Time: July 3, 2008, 5:02 pm

Wow Sasha. Clearly you don’t understand what this site is and how it functions. Maybe I don’t any more, because for the 5+ years I’ve posted here, only trolls wrote vapid, personal comments like this. This never happened, even when the writers, and there have been several strong writers here with strong opinions, went to the mat over the issues. We simultaneously praised and kicked the crap out of Howard Dean. We ripped the shit out of John Kerry along with stripping the bark off the DNC/DLC. This was never a cheerleading site with bloggers slinging shit like this at each other from the cheap seats.

If past is prologue, Obama is in trouble, big trouble. He’s being defined, right now. And he and his staff are falling into the reasonableness trap set by the same people that took down Gore and Kerry and caused the Dems to lose to the most blatantly inept, least articulate and dangerous president this nation has ever seen. Twice. If pointing that out is your definition of hatred, so be it.

Josh: Source verified by the NY Times…
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/03/obama-open-to-refine-iraq-withdrawal-timeline/index.html?hp

The point is that if Dems want to win, they can’t waffle, even if reassessing Iraq is a reasonable tactic to take once you’re president. There was no reason for this to be said now–it only feeds the beast at the wrong time.

Comment from Josh
Time: July 3, 2008, 5:42 pm

Lefty, we did kick the crap out of Kerry, but none of us predicted he would lose, we were all hopeful amid the criticism. You are now on record as seeing a McCain win by 5 percent, something no one has achieved since Papa Bush, a long time ago. That is all Sasha is saying.

And you have a “defeat wish” on Obama that is clear: you see him as the next Dukakis. Keep in mind, that Obama has done nothing of what you claim, all he has said is that he is open to listening to the commanders on the ground, something Bush says, but doesn’t do. Why not give him a chance to make a “fool” out of himself. Let him have his trip, talk with soldiers, Iraq government officials, others in the region, and US Commanders. The let’s see if he is going to sell out the country as you predict.

He is not reassessing, he is simply saying he will be listening. Gee, a president who listens?!

Comment from Leftcoast
Time: July 3, 2008, 6:19 pm

Point is simple Josh. I do not wish Obama to be defeated. I’ve said two things repeatedly: 1) It is critical to have a Dem in the White House in 08, any Dem. Obama’s the guy, I’m down with it. 2) Dems have proved to be gutless losers–as far as I’m concerned, we had a choice of two fatally flawed candidates in Hillary and Obama, we’re running with one of them hoping like hell he wins. From what I can tell, the Dems are making massive and perhaps irrevocable strat mistakes. Obama’s run to the middle is not an ideological problem, it’s inadvertently signaling weakness at a time when McCain and the Pugs are aggressively framing him. There’s certainly a strategy behind this run to the middle, but it doesn’t read like were setting ourselves up for becoming the “we” nation, it reads like weakness–aided and abetted by a corrupt MSM that is smitten with McCain. The timing sucks.

That Obama is being repositioned by the Pugs as Dukakis is not my original thought–commentators on MSNBC, NPR, and writers on many major news outlets have said as much (I’ll dig up the links if you like) and they’ve equated him with Jimmy Carter. Not my perception, the perception of others.

i’m remiss if I don’t write about what I see, which is a troubling replay of the same campaign tactics emerging once again. Dems step into the same trap every time and they’re doing it again. You have your opinions and have strongly supported them as always. That’s great. i have mine. That’s fine. We don’t have to agree to coexist at BoB. Or maybe that’s the new paradigm here…please advise.

What I will not tolerate and neither should you, are vapid nasty posts calling one another “haters.” That’s troll shit and beneath the level of this site. Or maybe that’s part of the new deal here. You tell me. I have made my difference opinion known, but never knowlngly or specifically called anyone a name or characterized them one way or the other personally. We’ve talked about it privately many times, it’s time to air it publicly because it debases the level of dialog and the attraction of this site to our readers. What’s it going to be?

Comment from bdr
Time: July 3, 2008, 6:42 pm

Obamapostasy’s a pita. Someone should write about it.

Comment from jabartlett
Time: July 3, 2008, 8:22 pm

Since I’m mentioned by name in the title, I feel like I should respond to this. And it’ll give me a break from the Favre mania up here.

I agree with Lefty’s concerns about definition. Whether or not Obama’s announcement makes sense as a practical matter (arguable either way, I suppose), this is the wrong time to be making it. This is the action of a campaign that either doesn’t recognize how the media playing field is tilted, or doesn’t think it matters—a deadly error either way. It’s the same species of error that led the Kerry campaign to misunderestimate the Swiftboaters, and the great-grandson of the error Dukakis made when he rode in the tank.

Comment from Josh Hammond
Time: July 4, 2008, 6:23 am

LC, where and when have I called you or anyone who posts here a “hater”? Now I have been called a Clinton hater by some readers, but not by you. So I don’t see your point. Nor is there anything to air since we talked months ago, as far as I am concerned. Blog on.

Comment from timr
Time: July 4, 2008, 9:57 am

LC, the sheeple will remember the “first impression” rather than the truth that follows, see my comment in Josh’s blog above. That is what counts. The MSM and st john are defining Obama, he has to get off his ass, get off defense, and get hard on offence. He looks and sounds tenative right now. Did Shrum and company somehow wiggle their way in and captivate him? If this is running towards the middle, he really needs to go back to what made him a winner in the primaries.
JAB-the question on everyones mind is of course- IS FARVE COMING BACK? Read the story in this weeks SI, boy that will really get things going. “first impressions” work in sports also.

Comment from Leftcoast
Time: July 4, 2008, 10:15 am

Not you Josh, even though we disagree, we’ve mixed it up well for the most part. I look forward to more…Read the latest of months of Sasha’s inane and useless comments. Is she a blogger here or a troll?

Comment from Josh Hammond
Time: July 4, 2008, 11:50 am

Sasha is a blogger, not a troll, nor is it fair to call her one. She posts less than you and I, but she does post. And she has a point of view and style that is part of the mix and match we have going here. And I for one hope it stays that way.

Comment from Leftcoast
Time: July 4, 2008, 7:30 pm

Thanks for clarifying.

Comment from timr
Time: July 5, 2008, 8:40 am

LC, remember the “Best and the Brightest who got us into the Vietnam quagmire? Well here are the “brave” souls who got us into Iraq. Should we label them “Dumb and Dumberer”?
http://thinkprogress.org/the-architects-where-are-they-now/

Comment from grits
Time: July 31, 2008, 10:55 am

Why we love Obama. http://www.whyweloveobama.com