Althouse: "He was petulant; he was childish; he was a community organizer..."

September 10, 2009

"He was petulant; he was childish; he was a community organizer..."

"... he lied; he was divisive; he attacked me; he attacked Sarah Palin; he attacked conservative Republicans in Congress who dare to challenge government-run health care. He continued to attack tens of millions of Americans who spent the summer attending town hall meetings. It was crude. It was disgusting. The most crude and disgusting performance by any president I have seen."

232 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 232 of 232

John said...: Further, the media refuse to cover the GOP alternatives. Lest we disturb HD House's and his ilk's prejudice and ignorance.

A search of the LexisNexis database of newspapers, magazines, television programs and major blogs finds about 3,000 mentions of the major House Democratic bill, H.R. 3200, in the past six months. (Those are just the stories that refer to the bill by its House number; there have been thousands more stories referring generally to the Democratic legislation.) A similar search found 60 mentions of H.R. 3400, the Price bill.

Another Republican bill, H.R. 2520, the Patients' Choice Act, by Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan, received 12 mentions in the same time period. And two other bills, H.R. 3217 and H.R. 3218, the Health Care Choice Act and the Improving Health Care for All Americans Act, by Rep. John Shadegg, together received 20 mentions.

The virtual embargo on reporting Republican legislation has allowed Democrats and their allies in the media to keep up the "Republicans have no plan" attack. Just hours after the president's speech, for example, the Democratic National Committee released a new commercial claiming that Republicans "refuse to offer a plan" to reform the health care system.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Democrats-stifle-Republican-health-care-plans-8224780-58644807.html; 9/11/09, 9:47 AM
Peter Hoh said...: Speaking of decent conservative proposals about health care, Sullivan posted this snip along with a few links to some ideas that seem pretty sensible to me.

WV: saglev. What happens when the maglev train runs out of electricity.; 9/11/09, 9:47 AM
Paul said...: "Obama speaks like a Senator from a safe seat who has no need to reach out and convince or communicate with anyone other than his own side. That works well when you are junior Senator from a blue state. It is an absolute disaster if you are President."

That is an apt analogy.; 9/11/09, 9:49 AM
mrs whatsit said...: At a time when he should have stepped up to his Presidential role by reassuring his fellow Americans that he was listening to their concerns and taking them seriously, the President reverted to Chicago-thug type and chose instead to call us liars, bickerers, and game-players. He is plainly outraged that we have the temerity to have concerns at all, rather than just falling into line behind him and obeying without question. And even now, he continues to talk about a nonexistent, undefined "plan" while pinning himself down to nothing so that he can be held accountable for nothing.

As others have been pointing out everywhere, the speech can be summed up as follows:

"Shut up," he explained.; 9/11/09, 9:53 AM
mrs whatsit said...: hd, are you really that ignorant of the many Republican ideas that have been offered -- and rejected? If yours is true ignorance and not a pose, you really shouldn't be advertising it.; 9/11/09, 9:57 AM
former law student said...: a radio entertainer

Like Father Coughlin.

the media refuse to cover the GOP alternatives

True that I haven't heard about them -- other than tort reform and interstate portability. But the msm are not the be-all and end-all any more. Are the alternative bills summarized on the web somewhere, in bullet point form?

the President reverted to Chicago-thug type and chose instead to call us liars, bickerers, and game-players.

When health care opponents chose to carry pictures of Obama with Hitler mustaches to town halls, they perhaps forfeited the right to be taken seriously.; 9/11/09, 10:33 AM
John said...: "When health care opponents chose to carry pictures of Obama with Hitler mustaches to town halls, they perhaps forfeited the right to be taken seriously."

Just like the anti-war people who signed truther petitions, carried signs with Bush painted as Hitler, wrote newspaper collumns openly hoping for Bush to be assasinated gave up their right to be taken seriously?

I think the side that ran around screaming "Bushmcchimpenhitler" for 8 straight years, gave up its right to complain about the tactics and tone of the opposition; 9/11/09, 10:40 AM
Anonymous said...: Like Father Coughlin.

Are you accusing Rush of being left-wing?

Because Coughlin, very much, was REALLY Left-wing.

True that I haven't heard about them -- other than tort reform and interstate portability. But the msm are not the be-all and end-all any more. Are the alternative bills summarized on the web somewhere, in bullet point form?

He did display the actual bill numbers and names. I'm betting they're available.

When health care opponents chose to carry pictures of Obama with Hitler mustaches to town halls, they perhaps forfeited the right to be taken seriously.

Only Democrats can compare the President to Hitler?

Hardly seems fair.; 9/11/09, 10:40 AM
Phil 314 said...: This has been a great discussion. I do miss the cheerleaders and the marching band. I am imaging that some of you have your faces painted red and some blue.

So when is the kickoff?; 9/11/09, 10:47 AM
LouisAntoine said...: Joan, thanks for that! Brightened my day. I've been on a kick lately where I want to repeat short phrases using synonyms, paired in funny ways.

The day of Obama's speech, I wrote that the Prez made me want to indemnify the venturesome, subsidize the precarious, bulwark the ticklish, assuage the iffy, gird the susceptible...

Maybe I've been possessed by the ghost of Mr. Roget. Is he dead?; 9/11/09, 11:07 AM
mrs whatsit said...: Yes, FLS, certainly, the fact that a few health care protestors showed up with Hitler pictures in August absolutely justifies the President in insulting half of the nation's citizens as liars and game-players. It also makes it a really, really smart political move.

Presumably, then, Democrats have also forfeited the right to be taken seriously as a result of the several violent Town Hall incidents perpetrated by lefties over the summer, such as the case in which a black man was beaten up and kicked and called a n*****r by a guy from SIEU for supporting a conservative position.

Oops, because there are some violent loons out there, and all of them must be on one side or another, all sides have forfeited all right to be taken seriously, nobody can talk at all any more and everybody just has to do what the President says! Gee, that works out nicely, now doesn't it.; 9/11/09, 11:12 AM
Salamandyr said...: If the reports are true -- that he threatened to fire any staffer for talking about the need to plan for an occupation -- well, then he is to be damned.

I don't know if this is true or not, but I can see how it could be defensively said, in a moment of passion while he's trying to succeed at the first objective, somebody keeps bugging him about the third or fourth, when it's not entirely certain we'll even get to those objectives, if we don't focus all of our attention on the first one right now!.

People forget that our amazingly fast roll into Baghdad was as much a surprise to us as it was to the world. Rumsfeld was trying to win a war with the least loss of life in the quickest way possible. I do believe if they had, instead of planning the invasion, had spent all their time planning their occupation, leaving our troops stranded in the desert for 6 months fighting the Republican Guard, we'd have equally harsh criticisms of Rumsfeld and Bush, though different ones than we have now.; 9/11/09, 11:23 AM
Simon Kenton said...: Joan said,

"Montagne, I admit without any feeling of shame that I had to look up "horripilating." What a great word!"

He is a true lexiphanes come to judgment.; 9/11/09, 11:34 AM
A.W. said...: FLS

> When health care opponents chose to carry pictures of Obama with Hitler mustaches to town halls, they perhaps forfeited the right to be taken seriously.

1) it hasn't been established that any of them did.

2) then what does that say about dem criticism of George W. Bush?; 9/11/09, 11:53 AM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: When health care opponents chose to carry pictures of Obama with Hitler mustaches to town halls, they perhaps forfeited the right to be taken seriously.

HA HA HA HA.....oh stop my sides are hurting.

This from the side that coined the term Bushitler.

Irony is so funny especially when it is from the unconscious.; 9/11/09, 12:03 PM
A.W. said...: DBQ

Great minds think alike. And frankly your comment is better than mine on the subject.; 9/11/09, 12:15 PM
Hector Owen said...: FLS, you might have missed this earlier Althouse thread on which it's shown that the people with the Obama-with-Hitler-moustache signs are Lyndon LaRouche supporters.

I'll go along with not taking them seriously. But there are not many of them. Is LaRouche, nominally a Democrat, directing his supporters to do this in the hope of discrediting ObamaCare opponents? Seems to be working on you.; 9/11/09, 1:02 PM
Gabriel Hanna said...: "In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed."

Just like those disgusting speeches by Churchill and Truman, declaring the war over in 1945 when the Occupation went on for OVER TEN YEARS!

The "war" in Iraq, against Saddam's military forces, was indeed over then. Saddam was not in a palace then, but hiding in a hole.

Was EVERY POSSIBLE THING PERFECT in Iraq from that point on? Obviously not. Rebuilding a country as trashed as Iraq was takes time.

But do continue to play word games and refight political battles from 2004.

It doesn't help Obama and it amuses me.; 9/11/09, 1:24 PM
Gabriel Hanna said...: "In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed."

As disgusting as when Churchill and Truman declared the war "over" in 1945, when the Occupation went on another ten years.

Do continue to play word games and refight the election of 2004. It won't help Obama and it amuses me.

"Mission Accomplished", by the way, referred to the CARRIER's mission, genius.

And since Saddam was in a hole, and not a presidential palace, in 2003 I think the sentence "In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed", was perfectly justified.

"Battle" != "war" != "occupation" != "counterinsurgency"

Open up a dictionary sometime, you might learn something.; 9/11/09, 1:29 PM
Gabriel Hanna said...: sorry for the double post; 9/11/09, 1:30 PM
Sofa King said...: Now if the GOP will only come up with something - anything - any ideas, just one then we wouldn't have to listen to this fat asshole dripping grease out of ever pore and have some real discussion.

We are not responsible for your own ignorance. Why not have a look at H.R. 77, H.R. 109, H.R. 198, H.R. 270, H.R. 321, H.R. 464, H.R. 502, H.R. 544, H.R. 917, H.R. 1086, H.R. 1118, H.R. 1441, H.R. 1458, H.R. 1468, H.R. 1658, H.R. 1891, H.R. 2520, H.R. 2607, H.R. 2692, H.R. 2784, H.R. 2785, H.R. 2786, H.R. 2787, H.R. 3141, H.R. 3217, H.R. 3218, H.R. 3356, H.R. 3372, H.R. 3400, H.R. 3438, H.R. 3454, and/or H.R. 3478. Then we can have a discussion, just like you say you want.; 9/11/09, 2:39 PM
former law student said...: Just like the anti-war people who signed truther petitions, carried signs with Bush painted as Hitler, wrote newspaper collumns openly hoping for Bush to be assasinated gave up their right to be taken seriously?

Did W. incorporate their positions (e.g. "No blood for oil") into his invasion and occupation plans?

I'd say W. didn't take them seriously.; 9/11/09, 2:54 PM
former law student said...: We are not responsible for your own ignorance.

Remember when Republicans had The Great Communicator as their leader? What the hell happened to the GOP?; 9/11/09, 2:57 PM
Anonymous said...: Remember when Republicans had The Great Communicator as their leader? What the hell happened to the GOP?

When a group tries to remain ignorant, you can't do much to fix that.; 9/11/09, 3:08 PM
A.W. said...: > Did W. incorporate their positions (e.g. "No blood for oil") into his invasion and occupation plans?

Who are "they?" "They" are you. if you are going to group all conservatives or republicans with a fringe, then we'll group you in with the people who considered Bush "Chimpy McHitlerburton."

Orrrrr... we could recognize that a fringe is just that, and not indicative of the entire side. pick one. But you are not going to get away with a hypocritical double standard whereby the right is tarred by the behavior of the looniest among them, while the left is not.; 9/11/09, 3:31 PM
Mom said...: "Did W. incorporate their positions (e.g. "No blood for oil") into his invasion and occupation plans?

I'd say W. didn't take them seriously."

FLS, you aren't even trying to make sense. Whether W took protestors into account in making his plans or not has absolutely nothing to do with your claim that the existence of lunatic fringe protestors on one side of an issue delegitimizes the ideas of everybody else on that side of the issue. That was what you claimed initially. The reason you're meandering away from that now and trying to pretend you were talking about something else is that you were destroyed by one commenter after another, and you know you can't respond.

I begin to understand exactly why you are a "former" law student.; 9/11/09, 3:40 PM
former law student said...: the existence of lunatic fringe protestors on one side of an issue delegitimizes the ideas of everybody else on that side of the issue.

In the case of the townhall protestors, the fringe was more like a lunatic blanket. Those who came merely to shout down the Congressmen were of a piece with Joe Wilson. Those who associated Obama' health care with Naziism, or who brought assault rifles to the talks, differed more in degree than in kind.

To the degree that people who legitimately have concerns were disregarded, I am sympathetic.; 9/11/09, 4:27 PM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: I have nothing more to add but the verification word was too good not to append to FLS last post.

vw - prick

LOL; 9/11/09, 4:38 PM
JAL said...: I wonder how big the demonstrations are going to be tomorrow -- Sept 12.

To the degree that people who legitimately have concerns were disregarded, I am sympathetic.

You can be so patronizing -- not to mention out of touch with a real grass roots movement.

We do not want the federal government controlling our health care choices. The IRS monitoring our qualifications. (But NOT illegals!)

And do not tell me that is not what this involves.

CIRCUMCISION for crying out loud!!!

wv turryt
free spelling for top of tank; 9/11/09, 5:04 PM
mrs whatsit said...: FLS, I'm sorry, but what have you been smoking?; 9/11/09, 5:25 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: Oh, that Rush! He sure is a creative little drama queen!; 9/12/09, 9:22 AM
Nichevo said...: Blogger former law student said...

Did W. incorporate their positions (e.g. "No blood for oil") into his invasion and occupation plans?

Can you formulate "no blood for oil" as a policy position? What would this mean? For oil we shall only pay cash?

Try it in English. For a challenge, use grammar.

I'd say W. didn't take them seriously.

Why would you say this? Because he didn't Yezhovshchina all your asses?

TW: lambr. Like lambr to the slaughter you are.; 9/14/09, 6:07 PM