JHC, this is starting to feel like the primary season all over again.  Did Rove & Co. once again start doling out checks?

I hope Sarah Palin is placed at the helm of Hofstra’s political science department in 2012.

*

I hope Sarah Palin is placed at the helm of Hofstra’s political science department in 2012.

the farmer FTW!

...at least eighty lightyears to the right of Bill Clinton…

He’s got a point there, what with Obama boinking interns, executing developmentally disabled people and bombing aspirin factories and all. Oh wait…

The problem with these teaproggers is that they don’t even think one step ahead when they write shit like this. What happens when Obama resigns? You get that great progressive Joe Biden as prez.  What happens after the Palin presidency? Will Amy Goodman or Stirling Newberry magically get elected? After two terms of Reagan and one term of Bush Sr., we just barely got a very moderate Dem elected. And you could easily make the argument even that wouldn’t have happened without Perot.

Yeah, and with the way that Obama instituted welfare reform that kicked poor kids off Medicaid, rather than encouraging healthcare reform to expand Medicaid.

This is nothing more than inadequate Boomer white males who are pissed that they don’t get to be the center of attention anymore. That’s why they lionize fellow Boomer White Boy Narcissist Bill Clinton. Bill played the sax on tee vee like a rock star! He got a lot of pussy—just like they did at Woodstock (if they actually had gone). He was an in-your-face par-tay animal, which a lot of dumbass white boys equate with “radical” or “progressive.” Shit, no wonder they think he’s “worse than Bush.” At least Bush USED to get wasted a lot and he smirked about how he and his dad, when they weren’t talking about politics, discussed “pussy.”

Oh goody. More str8 white guys calling down vengance on everyone in the country who’d actually get screwed because it will show everyone what happens when they don’t listen to their wise proclamations.

No wait. Maybe that should be: More WATBs being WATBs because everything isn’t perfect and wishing things were MUCH worse so they’d have even more to whine about.

Couldn’t be both at the same time. Could it?

A lot of male libs I know are really starting to miss creaky, liniment-scented there’s-nothing-on-TV-so-WTH sex with their ex-Dem live-ins, who’ve been doing the Lysistrata thing since Denver.

Guys like Logan are obviously tired of finding Ted Nugent press photos and Jon Voight’s socks under their beds.

HTP, right on. Really easy to call for “things to get worse” out of petty-minded pique when you’re a tenured and overprivileged POS in academia who has never had to face real hardship. But then, white people’s fee-fees (at least the Boomer male academic ones) should always be the highest order of business and concern for all “true progressives.” It makes them feel bad to have to compete against women and black people! Isn’t it enough that they give lip service to equality? They supported equal rights for chicks and blacks (h/t Daniel Clowes), but that wasn’t because they expected to actually have to be CONTROLLED by them! I mean, maybe after every Boomer white boy of privilege gets exactly what he wants (corner office, undergrad pussy, the presidency), then we can make room for some of those other less-deserving people.

It makes them feel bad to realize that their generation only got to have TWO presidents, and “the greatest generation”* produced a buttload. Wah! It’s not FAIR! It hurts their fee-fees!

*I can no longer reference “the greatest generation” without thinking of the fantastic Amy Morton as Barbara Weston, the tormented daughter of two tormenting Depression babies in Tracy Letts’ brilliant August: Osage County, who delivered the following speech:

“Greatest Generation,” my ass. Are they really considering all the generations? Maybe there are some generations from The Iron Age that could compete. And what makes them so great anyway? Because they were poor and hated Nazis? Who doesn’t fucking hate Nazis?

And I’m sure somewhere some disgruntled white male Boomer playwright is pissing and moaning that it’s not fair that a “little prick” like Letts has had two Broadway productions in recent years and has won a Pulitzer and a Tony, while said Boomer’s self-revelatory epic about “whatever happened to the sixties dream, man! languishes unproduced.

There are in fact many Boomers that I like (and by some metrics, I am one—barely—since I was born two months before the end of 1964). But I honestly think that what got lost in the race and gender stuff from the 2008 primaries was the fact that we no longer had to choose between the Greatest Generation and the Boomers—and a lot of the latter saw Hillary as their last shot to be at the center of national politics and are pissed off and feel “cheated,” so have to project their own failures on Obama—who, after all, didn’t start extraordinary rendition, or repeal Glass-Steagall, or fail on healthcare reform, or institute DADT, or push for NAFTA.

This is of course overly broad and of course there were plenty of Boomers who supported Obama over Clinton. But the stuff about how he isn’t “qualified” and is “worse than Clinton” just doesn’t stand up to the sniff test, and to say that he’s worse than Bush is something only a very, very stupid or very, very feckless person would come up with.

I’m no longer listening to the WATBs, particularly the ones who have to keep making online threats about not voting. Vote, don’t vote—nobody gives a green shit what you think. And that’s the part that really bugs you, isn’t it, Perfessor Nobodies?

Calling Obama a little prick?  OMGWTFBBQ, that’s like…like…like…GANG RAPE!

That is one of the most painful things that I have never finished watching!  I thought the conservatives were the ones with the shitty sense of humors.  Now who exactly did some of these peeps think that we elected - Kucinich?  I know that we have had a dictatorial administration in the past, but #1, keeping that same ideology is not very progressive at all; #2 the president isn’t really, or shouldn’t be “all powerful”; #3 and would Clinton, Biden, Edwards, Richardson really have been SO much more progressive?; #4 and to say that Obama has done nothing progressive is simply not true.  Perhaps everyone hasn’t gotten what they wanted yet, and yes there have been frustrations and disappointments, but entertaining Sarah Palin as a payback?  Ridiculous - and not progressive at all.  It’s like the PUMA logic.  Just because Hillary didn’t get the nomination, you’re going to throw everything that you believe in out the window?
You CAN make your point in an intelligent manner instead of reverting to the Glenn Beck and Michelle - I won’t fill in the census - Bachmann mentality. This is politics people - get real!

Gahg!
Yeah, Obama’s more of a moderate than a progressive. Yeah, he hasn’t magically solved all the problems he inherited.
What he has been is steadily competent in the face of absolute republican obstructionism. Not great, but certainly not a total failure.
I’m not an “Obama-bot”; I recognize that American politics is a dysfunctional mess, and end up supporting the “least bad” option almost every time.
These “teaproggers” need to ask themselves:
Would McCain be better?
Will Palin be better?
Because those are the options we face in reality.

What is that saying?  Those that can, do and those that can’t, teach?  (No, I DON’T actually believe that so teacher readers please don’t hate on me - I have nothing but respect for good teachers.)  These guys are not good teachers - they are wanking assholes in love with the sound of their own voices.  Green, in particular, just works himself up into a wanking asshole fury as he goes along.  Fortunately I do not believe most thinking people would give these tools much credence.

Wow,I used to check Smirking Chimp about once a month during the Bush years.  They were usually a decent source of political humor.  When did they go crazy? 
‘Obama’s Brain’ reminds me of the weak “comedy” videos produced by the Breitbots at Big Hollywood.

Marin, I know what you mean—and I do teach from time to time and was raised by teachers, but it’s impossible to spend any time in academia without coming across self-involved whiny wankers like these guys, who have never gotten over not getting the department chair or having their paper presented at the MLA conference or whatever-the-fuck constitutes ultimate validation for them in their little world. And I’m sure they had to kick against “greatest generation” types in order to get whatever they had, so fine.

At the same time, most Boomers I know came out of college in the sixties with very little debt, unlike, say,  Michelle and Barack Obama. And they didn’t graduate into a Reagan/Bush eighties recession. Unlike, say, Michelle and Barack Obama. And some of them had family money to draw upon to help them get established—unlike, say, Michelle and Barack Obama. (I do recognize—and credit—Bill Clinton for being a guy who did pull himself out of economic disadvantage through sheer grit and smarts—but I think it would be nice if some of Obama’s detractors could recognize that he did the same instead of casting aspersions about “affirmative action” all over the damn place.)

There’s a theater-professor guy I occasionally suffer myself to read who runs a theater blog, where he yammers on constantly about the need to build “community” and takes shots at how awful those elites in NY, LA, and Chicago are (what he calls NyLaChi, because he’s clever—they don’t give tenure to morons!) Because, he claims (absent proof), big cities lack “community” in the arts (I cover theater in Chicago and can safely say he’s talking through his asshat on this), and what we really need are more people staying in smaller cities and creating art there.

And my reaction to him is almost always “Well, fine. Then DO it, Perfessor Scoldy-Pants! You live in a smallish college community with many small rural towns not that far away from your home. What the fuck is stopping you from starting a theater yourself? Why the fuck do you think there are hundreds of small companies in those cities you disdain? Because people decided to get off their asses, stop talking about it and theorizing about it, and fucking do it!”

And really, that’s the crux of the biscuit for me (to quote Osage County again). There are all these backseat drivers screaming about “what I would do if I were Obama.” Yeah, well, you’re not. You wouldn’t have the stones to run, or the smarts to win, if you had started as far back in the pack as he did (no Daddy and Friends Network pulling for your ass, for example).

I don’t give a shit at this point if what Obama does is labeled centrist, or corporatist, or moderate, or progressive. I just want somebody in office who wants to make things WORK more often than not. After the Cheney/Bush nightmare (and the 12 years before Clinton, and some of the Clinton years as well), that would in fact feel like radical change. Imagine—a president who thinks “big government” might have a role to play in helping people out. Far out, man!

“And that what I most want from 2012 is for him to be utterly humiliated, even if that means President Palin at the helm. That much rage.”

I’m so sick if this bullshit.  During my college activist days(during Clinton’s first term),there was always someone bitching about how “we’d have more radicals in this country if Ronald Reagan was president for 100 years”.  Usually the person saying this was white,male and rich.  Never mind the fact that the goal of any radical leftist should be to eliminate or limit the need for more activist & activism.  It was bullshit then and now.

That is one of the most painful things that I have never finished watching!

You should have seen some of the ones he was spitting out during the primaries when he was in full-blown PUMA mode. I think he’s deleted a lot of them.

Well, that settles it. Obama’s going to have win re-election in 2012 with zero help from the Aging Street-Mime demo.

the Aging Street-Mime demo

Zing!

Really easy to call for “things to get worse” out of petty-minded pique when you’re a tenured and overprivileged POS in academia who has never had to face real hardship.

Y’know, it was bad enough when that magic-bullet bullshit was theoretical, but Katrina was the thing these assholes keep hoping for, and it kinda-sorta worked the way they’d like, but since it only amounted to a minor shift in public sentiment and didn’t transform the populace into collectivists overnight, that gives the lie to the notion that what they want is to teach America a lesson or what the fuck ever. They want to punish us for not being as smart and good as they are, simple as that.

Not that this wasn’t patently obvious back when Nader made explicit his goal to throw 2000 to Bush, but now at least there’s a test case I can point to.

It makes them feel bad to have to compete against women and black people! Isn’t it enough that they give lip service to equality?

That’s pretty unfair to boomers, actually, but I figure a generation that’s overrepresented in the media and can’t shut the fuck up about itself doesn’t really need me to stick up for it.

By the way—and keep in mind this is coming from a (the?) guy who defended the NY Post dead monkey cartoon—smirkingchimp.com, though aptly named for its intended time and target, is perhaps not the ideal url from which to launch attacks on a black man.

Obama’s going to have win re-election in 2012 with zero help from the Aging Street-Mime demo.

Strange, my belly thanks you for the laugh! My monitor, on the other hand…

Go ahead and laugh, Oblo. But if Logan’s disaffection extends to the broader population of buskers, Obama supporters won’t be safe within 50 feet of a bus terminal, street fair or subway entrance anywhere.

Eh, Gil, I’m painting with a very broad brush, but then again, when talking about guys who think Obama is “eighty lightyears to the right of Clinton,” broad seems the way to go. And yeah, I know that Obama is technically a Boomer, too, but there is a big difference between those who were born right after World War II and those who came in with Kennedy and weren’t really part of the sixties scene (despite the attempts to make Obama and Bill Ayers brothers-in-bombmaking).

And though I also know anecdotal evidence is generally for shit, in my experience, every time I’ve had to work closely on a project with white boomer progressive males, they have been very intransigent about “my way is the right way because I have the battle scars, man!” I worked in a media advocacy nonprofit for a while in the Bay Area, and the older board members couldn’t get their heads around any alternative media that wasn’t the local NPR station or the alt-weekly or Mother Jones. They actually sneered when we talked about having a conference on zines (rememer those?)—until our registration hit the highest numbers for any conference we’d ever produced in the history of the organization.

I write for a weekly paper that was originally started by white boomer guys and I salute the vision they had, but at least these guys were smart enough to know that in order to keep it fresh, they had to move over every so often and let new voices in. And though I’m just as prone to grousing about “kids today” as any other grumpy 40something woman, I don’t think my generation had any kind of special birthright or leg up on progressive truth.

Or put it another way: absent the draft (not even the Vietnam War), would “The Sixties” have played out the same way?

Oh crap, do I sound like this these days?  I’ve been busting on Obama for strategic ineptness and failing to ream Wall Street or focus on jobs, but Christ, the Palin/Dobbs administration is going to put a fucking waterboard on Mount Rushmore.

I’d be concerned if any of these twits actually did more than express their impotent rage on the innertoobs. Fuck them - let them wet their pants, take their imagnary ball and go home, etc.

Oh crap, do I sound like this these days?

No, you don’t at all.  Honestly, I agree with you, but the rhetoric is so white hot and irrational coming from the some quarters of the left I can’t bring myself to do even the lightest kvetching. Crap like the stuff I posted above is making it extremely difficult for lefties to have rational discussions about what Obama is doing wrong/right.

I’d be concerned if any of these twits actually did more than express their impotent rage on the innertoobs.

The problem is that the “progressives hate Obama” meme has flowed out of the innertubes and into cable news and the MSM punditry. It’s also energizing the teabaggers as you can see from my “useful tool” link above.  BTW, that isn’t the only wingnut blog that’s republished Green’s screed. A bunch of them have.  I haven’t been checking out Instapundit much, but I’d be shocked if he hadn’t linked to it yet.

The problem is that the “progressives hate Obama” meme has flowed out of the innertubes and into cable news and the MSM punditry. It’s also energizing the teabaggers as you can see from my “useful tool” link above.

Fair point, but they’re preaching to the converted…so far

Great link, Betty. And the writer even took into account the fact that black people count as part of “the base,” too! Miracle of miracles.

Interesting discussion over at New Papa BooMan’s place today about whether or not immigration reform could help or hurt the Dems in 2010—the White House seems determined to move forward on it in keeping with their promises. (When will the betrayals end, o Lord? WHEN!?!?)

I can see how immigration reform that includes amnesty could hurt some Blue Dogs—but long-term, I think the Dems do well when they build their connections with the fastest-growing segment of the U.S. population (hint: it’s not disaffected WATB profs).

Go ahead and laugh, Oblo. But if Logan’s disaffection extends to the broader population of buskers, Obama supporters won’t be safe within 50 feet of a bus terminal, street fair or subway entrance anywhere.

Or as a wise man once said, “As the Ren Faire goes, so goes the nation.”

Hard to believe some progressives actually fought dirty for this guy.

And by “some progressives,” I assume The Lil Unfunny Prick means “ACORN.”

the rhetoric is so white hot and irrational coming from the some quarters of the left I can’t bring myself to do even the lightest kvetching.

There’s a fine line between “defending Obama” and “teeing off on dickheads who want to relive Altamont.” Well, actually, it’s not all that fine, it’s a pretty wide gulf, but all’s I know is, whenever I work up a good head of steam about how Bam’s letting a handful of once-in-a-century opportunities slip away, some assface comes along to tell me how stupid I am to’ve voted for a Manchurian Club-for-Growther, and I’m right back on the Hope Train.

I knew Obama wouldn’t make me happy, but I didn’t think he’d make these people so goddamned miserable—color me pleasantly surprised.

What’s that you say? The tears of holier-than-thou pinko fuckfaces are no substitute for affordable pharmaceuticals? Technically true, but y’see, that’s where the placebo effect comes in.

(Oblomova, I was just saying boomerthink is relatively unobjectionable when it comes to race and gender. Beyond that, weapons free)

What’s that you say? The tears of holier-than-thou pinko fuckfaces are no substitute for affordable pharmaceuticals? Technically true, but y’see, that’s where the placebo effect comes in.

Heh.

You little Gen-Xers are so cute when you’re mad!
;-)

Mar, I think I’m just confused and that feeds my rage. Some say I’m X, some call me Boomer, and a few even tried to put “Tweener” on me until they decided to reserve that term for fans of Hannah Montana. No wonder I am disgruntled! And I will punish them all by not voting! Because I own my vote! I’ll show you all!

(Oblomova, I was just saying boomerthink is relatively unobjectionable when it comes to race and gender. Beyond that, weapons free)

Mostly true, but again, my beefs are mostly with the guys (mostly white) who used “the sixties” as their yardstick, and forget that a lot of great civil rights advancements for women and gays actually took place post-Woodstock. So while they may have thought the seventies were a time to turn on and tune out because that whole “dump the Hump” thing didn’t quite work out as well as planned, a lot of non-white and non-male progressives got busy making changes.

Wow.  They let Perry Logan out of the rubber room finally?  I remember when his psychPUMA crapola got him booted from Democratic Underground.

Of course, anyone who spends more than 90 seconds clicking around Smirking Chimp will also find much pro-Obama commentary, but hey—don’t let that stop you from cherrypicking blog posts and comments to “prove” a presupposition. It’s an ugly job but someone’s got to do it.

Some cheese with your whine, Mr. Tiedrich?

Of course, anyone who spends more than 90 seconds clicking around Smirking Chimp will also find much pro-Obama commentary

Did that. Found maybe one such article among the 30 or so I checked out, which took a bit more than 90 seconds. But hey, if your bloggers are allowed to chuck “little prick” around, I guess we’re allowed to laugh out loud at crass stupidity from people who live in glass houses.

Wow. The concept of “whining” finds a pretty low bar here. How is that “anyone who doesn’t agree with me 100% deserves my withering scorn” working out for you in the real world?

Anyone who wants to be a voice of opposition to anything they read at my site is welcome to register at the Chimp and post their own blog entries and comments.

Any takers?

Jeff, this post wasn’t really intended as a stab at The Smirking Chimp. I had originally seen a few anti-Obama progs/PUMAs linking to Green’s rant at impeachobamacampaign.com. I then saw that Green was a regular blogger at The Smirking Chimp when I searched to see what other sites re/published him.  From there I saw the Perry Logan comment referencing his own Smirking Chimp post where Obama was called a “little prick” again. I had no intention of proving a presupposition. Just getting a little sick of progressives taking the anti-Obama shit too far and those two posts were perfect examples of it. In my mind, referring to him as a “little prick” is taking it too far.

Jeff, I’d post/comment on your blog, but your title leads me to believe that you’re a corporatist. ;)

Everyone, really don’t want to get in a pissing match with Jeff or The Smirking Chimp.  As I noted, this post wasn’t really intended to slam his blog, just the writers (Green cross-posts on several prog blogs).

Everyone, really don’t want to get in a pissing match with Jeff or The Smirking Chimp.

I was a fan of TSC for years - it was a lifeline during the depths of the Bush/Cheney years. I just spoke as I found on this occasion, at Jeff’s prompting. As for “withering scorn” and the question of agreement, are you really defending the “little prick” jibes, Jeff (let alone any of what passes for substance in those two entries)?

Nor was there anything in your post suggesting that you were slamming TSC, Kevin, so I’m not sure where the original feather-ruffling started.

And though I can’t speak for anyone else here, my life in the real world is going quite well. Thanks for your sincere concern on that score, Jeff. Much appreciated. Cheers.

I read TSC daily for years until—IIRC—it seemed to go on hiatus for a while after the Dems retook Congress, or I got a new computer, or the drugs kicked in (I can’t remember which). It was always reliably funny and ant-Bush/ pro-Dem, but I haven’t checked in since late 2006.

Looking at the current front page, it’s certainly not the same source of snarky uplift it used to be, but I’m putting it back into the regular reading rotation. In a world where even Ted Rall hates Obama, editorial realignments are expected and probably inevitable, especially when you’re an aggregator.

I think KK has a legitimate beef with the writers he cited. I’m sorry Jeff thinks we were attacking TSC as an entity, but that’s just not the case. If we were, there’d be a big photo on the front page of Jeff Tiedrich fucking Ronald Reagan with a strap-on. I mean, we aren’t exactly subtle about who we target. If you have to infer it from the body text, it probably didn’t happen. ;->

In a world where even Ted Rall hates Obama

*Snork*

Fair enough, Kevin. Your points are taken.

As for being a corporatist—hey, did you know I’m also a paid agent of the Israeli government? I read it on the Internet, so it must be true!

YAFB: I grant the posters/commenters on my site wide latitude regarding how they express themselves. As long as one’s arguments are fact-based, free of any racism/sexism/etc, do not threaten anyone with violence, and do not promote a right-wing agenda, pretty much everything is fair game.

Far worse epithets were hurled at GW Bush during his reign of error. Goose/gander, I say. While I was never one of those who bought into the idea that Obama was going to be the great progressive savior (all you had to do was look at his Senate voting record), you can’t tell me that he has been anything less than a profound disappointment to anyone [I include myself here] who at the very least expected an end to the most egregious Bush-era policies.

Personally, I find David Michael Green’s posts full of substance. They wouldn’t end up on my site’s front page if I didn’t. And I can certainly understand his anger. Green was a member of the “Obama will be our savior” crowd (ever read any of his posts preceding the 2008 election?). Hell hath no fury like a blogger scorned, eh?

Now, whether or not salty anti-Obama language plays into the hands of the teabaggers is indeed a worthwhile discussion, and one that has taken place many times at my site—not unsurprisingly, usually in the comment threads below David Michael Green’s posts.

As for Perry Logan ... well, all I will say is that his posts do NOT find their way onto my front page. But when it comes to ripping apart the defective thinking of the tin foil hat crowd, he’s one of the best. I find that “don’t blame me, I supported Hillary” is at this point a fairly useless thing to taunt people with, but hey, nobody’s perfect.

And, again, I’m being sincere when I say that anyone reading this comment thread who wants to post or comment on my site is welcome to register there.

Oh sorry—one final point that I meant to bring up earlier, and then we can put this discussion to bed.

I’m not sure at what point I ever claimed I was anyone’s “progressive better.” That’s a pretty cheap shot, wouldn’t you admit?

William Rivers Pitt had a great line and I hope I’m not getting it too wrong as I quote it from memory: “If you decide that someone with whom you agree with 97% of the time is your enemy, then you are a zealot and of no use to anyone.”

“I’m sorry Jeff thinks we were attacking TSC as an entity, but that’s just not the case.”

It was the “progressive betters” crack that set me off. But that’s what I get for ego-surfing instead of getting productive work done.

Sorry, Jeff, I can’t be bothered signing up at your site to point what a pile of self-indulgent pointless and mindless shit this passage is (I’m sure you’ll do just fine without me):

I find myself thinking that the thing I want most from the 2010 elections is for his party to get absolutely clobbered, even if that means a repeat of 1994. And that what I most want from 2012 is for him to be utterly humiliated, even if that means President Palin at the helm.

I’ve lived through enough of the neocons’ times in power to know one when I see one. Whatever expectations you had of Obama (mine were modest and mainly from an international perspective, and I don’t buy into the memes being peddled here), that’s not what he is and it’s bullshit to make such an equation.

I took the “progressive betters” gibe to refer to the bloggers, not the site.

you can’t tell me that he has been anything less than a profound disappointment to anyone [I include myself here] who at the very least expected an end to the most egregious Bush-era policies.

I can and I am telling you—“profound disappointment” is hyperbolic and not reflective of what all progressives believe. What I think we’re seeing is a reminder that governing is actually difficult, and moreso when you have someone in the chief executive’s post who actually believes that government—Big Goverment, even—can actually play a significant and salutary role. That in itself is a profound and radical shift from the Bush years, and even from Bill “The era of Big Government is over” Clinton.

Every damn president we’ve ever had has been a profound disappointment to progressives by some metric (FDR and Lincoln took giant craps all over civil liberties that make Bush and Cheney look like putty-tats by comparison).  Yet there are those who still somehow believe that there is this Perfect Progressive Prez out there somewhere who can make it all better, all by him/herself.

So no, I’m not “profoundly disappointed,” Jeff. But then, I’ve been paying attention for a long time.

Jeff, I think Oblo summed it up well. I’ve been disappointed with Democrats for years (my first prez vote was for Mondale). We’re just growing weary of being called naive or Obots or young (at my age I should love that). I wrote on this blog in January of ‘08 that I wasn’t impressed with the entire Dem field (when it was being billed as THE BEST EVER). I eventually decided to back Obama because a) I thought he was the most electable by far(see: voting since Mondale) b) he impressed me as being really smart and c) I grew to really like the guy. I wasn’t ever expecting magical ponies, which is why I’m having a hard time taking guff from folks (like Green) who apparently were.

Kevin, you lost your electoral cherry with Mondale too, huh? I was going door-to-door in Missouri. Good times!

And I’ve pretty much decided I can safely ignore a lot of “my progressive betters,” inasmuch as some of them were the same lot who sneered “There’s no difference between Gore and Bush.” Yes. That worked out so well for everyone.