Skimble Closes Blog, Election Doesn't Matter

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Tue Aug 05, 2008 at 11:36:26 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Via Avedon at Sideshow, longtime political blogger Skimble is packing it in and closing up shop.

I have ceased to care about McStupid's Britney video and Obama's acting presidency. Or the New Yorker cover. Or Cindy McCain's 20 painkillers a day. Or the endless hand-wringing about the f**king narrative. The 24/7 minutiae of yet another artificial campaign horserace cannot captivate me. The big story is this....

Go read the rest, it's a well-deserved attack on the Dems, Harry and Nancy in particular.

This has been a lackluster, ho-hum election campaign since May when the primaries ended. I doubt it will pick up. Obama is just not as exciting to cover as he was when he had Democrats as competitors and McCain would put anyone to sleep.

It is what it is. From here on out, both candidates will play to the middle. The rest of us, right and left, will be marginalized. [More...]

All a Democrat can do is hope November comes quickly and our candidate wins, so we can get on with the business of fixing health care, ending the parade of right-wing ideologues as nominees for federal judgeships, preserve the independence of our Supreme Court, get out of one war (hopefully without getting back into another) and, fingers crossed, start to empty our prisons of non-violent offenders.

But for having those goals, and being excited that the convention is taking place in Denver, I might stop blogging about the election too. I'm not where Skimble is yet, but I certainly understand his thinking.

< Religion and the VP Choice | Jose Medellin Executed in Texas, No Reprieve from Supreme Court >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Skimble Closes Blog, Election Doesn't Matter | 71 comments (71 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

thank you thank you (5.00 / 1) (#2)
by bjorn on Tue Aug 05, 2008 at 11:43:47 PM EST

My feelings exactly!

What Skimble said... (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by kredwyn on Tue Aug 05, 2008 at 11:45:24 PM EST

Given the other stories out there (like the one I diaried about earlier today), I find the campaign outrage...fatiguing.

Especially since so much of that outrage (5.00 / 2) (#11)
by PssttCmere08 on Tue Aug 05, 2008 at 11:58:53 PM EST

is plain ole bogus....


In what sense is it bogus? (none / 0) (#28)
by weltec2 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:56:29 AM EST

Is it that the outrage and disgust has not resulted in daily demonstrations by tens and hundreds of thousands of people in front of the House and Senate? What is it that makes it bogus?


That might be part of it (5.00 / 1) (#42)
by Edgar08 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:16:51 AM EST

One would think there was enough in this world to be outraged about without having to make stuff up.

While I don't like movement activism, I have some admiration for those who marched about real issues and none at all for those who typed furiously about stuff they made up.


I demonstrated a lot (5.00 / 2) (#47)
by weltec2 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:50:30 AM EST

in the 60s. I still believe in demonstrations... but not neat and orderly demonstrations carried on by people wearing silly costumes. Demonstrations should not be turned into carnivals. If demonstrators wish to be taken seriously, they must take the demonstration seriously themselves.


: But back then (none / 0) (#63)
by Jjc2008 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 09:51:06 AM EST

did people seriously think about getting their "15 minutes of fame?" Maybe I was a clueless kid but I actually feared the cameras.......I knew the protests needed to be viewed by everyone to make a difference but that more than enough.
Now in the age of "reality" television, people famous for being famous, and the admiration people of all persuasion have for people with lots of bling and stuff, I don't fit in.
Why do people tune in to see the Donald (a man who inherited much of his wealth) be obnoxious to other people????????????
Why do people find pictures of celebrities a big deal?
Why do athletes get paid ridiculous sums of money?
Why do owners get even more money?
Why do people need to feel vicarious victories, vicarious fame?
I simply do not get it but I do get it why the primary seemed more like an American Idol series than political discourse

We have seen the enemy and it is us...Pogo

Seems the practice (none / 0) (#37)
by JavaCityPal on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:08:45 AM EST

of accusing people and opponents of character flaws they don't possess has been pretty bogus, don't you think?


: You're right (none / 0) (#46)
by weltec2 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:45:32 AM EST

I misread the post.

Can Obama win if he is not exciting? (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by MarkL on Tue Aug 05, 2008 at 11:46:12 PM EST

I don't think a new candidate creates the dogged loyalty that an established name like McCain's does.
What will keep the Obama voters in line? I'm not sure.

Don't be silly (5.00 / 1) (#36)
by gyrfalcon on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:06:35 AM EST

You know better than that! It's new candidates that usually are exciting, not the old ones. Fresh energy and fresh perspectives are what's normally exciting.

I leave it to you to conclude why this new candidate isn't exciting. I know what I think about it.


Paris Hilton has fresh energy and perspectives (5.00 / 6) (#57)
by lambertstrether on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:31:33 AM EST

And I am increasingly enthusiastic about her candidacy.

Her energy policy is better than McCains, and she's way more hopey-changey than Obama. Plus, she's not shoving her religion in my face, or Donnie McClurkin either.

Jeebus, I'm talking myself into this.


: ROFLMAO! (none / 0) (#76)
by gyrfalcon on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 02:43:33 PM EST

Man, you know we're going to h**l in a handbasket when Paris Hilton starts to look smart.

Not enthusiastic, but curious. (5.00 / 4) (#7)
by robrecht on Tue Aug 05, 2008 at 11:49:48 PM EST

I agree, pretty ho-hum. I started reading Obama's books at the beach this weekend to try and get some sense of who he is. Not enthusiastic, but curious. About half-way through the first book, he seems like a very lonely, rather lost guy, no passion, searching for an identity. I think I know the ending already.

: In fact, last weekend was the first time (5.00 / 2) (#10)
by BarnBabe on Tue Aug 05, 2008 at 11:57:05 PM EST

in a while where I could even rouse up any enthusiasm when the comments were going fast and furious. But in my heart I know it comes down to the lesser of two evils once again. It really really tires a political person.

Heh, not much to argue with (5.00 / 8) (#9)
by nycstray on Tue Aug 05, 2008 at 11:51:31 PM EST

I'm basically going into survival mode. The future ain't lookin' perdy. {sigh}

I had not heard of Skimble before (5.00 / 1) (#17)
by shoephone on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:15:57 AM EST

(so many blogs, so little time) but I totally commiserate with the sentiments expressed.

I rarely blog anymore and I notice a lot of others cutting back too. When I'd get sick of the politics I'd devote myself to jazz blogging. Lots more fun.

If things get much more annoying during this campaign season I can imagine TL becoming TP: Tom Petty Alla Time Blog!

yes, rock and roll (none / 0) (#48)
by Jeralyn on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:55:13 AM EST

and reality shows. When the news gets boring, I opt for shallow. At least I mostly keep the music to late night.


: possible music suggestion? (5.00 / 2) (#54)
by sleepingdogs on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:14:34 AM EST

Perhaps an appropriate song for Obama's long process of picking the VP would be Petty's "Stop Draggin' My Heart Around." Just a thought for another late night post.
Regarding the post, I understand the numbness and lack of enthusiasm for this vapid and lifeless election cycle. As the campaigns continue to devolve, I am losing hope that this will all work out for the best, and I am finding it harder and harder to muster any excitement. The faux outrage over things such as RFK remarks, Paris Hilton ad=racism, 'not to my knowledge...,' flag pins, etc. is truly numbing. However, I completely understand the passion behind the legitimate issues like healthcare, energy, war(s)/foreign policy and the economy. I just don't think I can tune in for any more threads or news stories not devoted to issues that matter to me and the future of my country.
I learn so much from the smart people who run and comment on this blog. I would prefer I am better versed in policies and issues for having spent time here to being current on politcal gossip or who's outraged now... That's one of the reasons I keep coming back to TL rather than other sites.

: I enjoyed your blogging on the shows you ... (5.00 / 1) (#65)
by Ellie on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 09:57:05 AM EST

... were following and the comments they generated even though the shows were off my TV-radar.
If the election is blah, rather than give space to the latest conjured-to-nitpick outrage -- aka WTF is Obama miffed about this half hour that ALL the poliblogs HAVE to weigh in on -- why not blog about broader election and campaign 'culture'? (I'm using air quotes on the word because movement conservatives have so totally sucked out the marrow of its meaning with the intent of normalizing extra judicial persecution of people they don't like. You know, it's not against the LAW to strip people of their human rights, it's a 'cultural' thing.)
Anyway, I noticed that a lot of regular commentators here have worked on campaigns in different capacities, contributing different skills and talents, and in different areas of "the tent".
I became more of a frequent visitor here because of the poll analyses, something I never paid much attention to in my past time on various campaigns.
That's mainly been because being in the middle of one means having barely enough time to get my bucket of water to the next pair of hands down the line, have a quick @ss scratch and/or phone home to see if I was still married, and grab the next bucket before it fell and brought the whole line down in a glorious cascade, like that 5-mile dominoes stock footage that closes the nightly news ~annually.
Without giving up any confidences, have you ever been a Wartime Consigliere (so to speak) or a fixer/handler? Vetted a speech looking for legal landmines or had oppo run past you?
I'm sympathetic to the blogger in the top post. I fervently believe this obscenely expensive, degrading and overly long election travesty needs an overhaul, and one way is for different areas to learn about each other independently of the Perma-Losers at the top.
(Oddly enough, the ones who make the worst decisions seem to be the most rewarded with tenure, ducats and increased veto powers.)

I can think of a Dem that's (5.00 / 6) (#20)
by nycstray on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:35:41 AM EST

willing to give it one heck of a try though . . .

It's simply a media environment (5.00 / 11) (#22)
by Edgar08 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:43:13 AM EST

that has taken on all the characteristics of a certain Obamablog.

If people are sick of things like this and the kinds of discussions it generates, then I can certainly agree but I can also point out that at some point we've all been complicit.

It's time to do a better job of speaking out against and rejecting the narrative gestapo. Those who have so internalized the idea that an election is about competing narratives -- NOT competing ideas -- NOT competing values -- NOT assessing results that they end up producing such dreck that one can only be infuriated, gag, depressed or just flabbergasted at the inanity of it all.

Now of course you can build narratives around ideas and such, maybe that's a good thing.

But this is different. What it comes down is taking moments that have destroyed certain people. The last actual REAL moment like that is George Allen's Macaca moment. That was real.

Everything else is someone's totally pathetic transparent attempt to manufacture moments like that. Which puts the rest of us in a position of either playing along with a lie or being smeared as someone who "doesn't get it" or someone who is "with the other side."

And that's when the real exasperation comes into play. That's when things start turning truly vile.

I'd "close up shop" myself. Maybe silence is the best thing, but I don't think it is.

I know what you mean. (5.00 / 3) (#51)
by Fabian on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 05:34:13 AM EST

I've come to trust SUSA. But I saw a DK diary doubting the latest SUSA FL poll because of "sampling errors".

What is more important - discussing what a reliable poll says about negative trends in FL or trying to discredit that poll?

There are some narratives that I believe are important like "Democrats are good for America.". What I don't believe are narratives that look for excuses for bad news or look for scapegoats. That's sticking your head in the sand. It's not productive and it's stupid and wasteful.

It's incredibly painful to watch people do those things and then congratulate themselves for "supporting Obama" or "defending Obama". It makes them feel good which is why they do it I suppose.


WWF election... (5.00 / 3) (#55)
by p lukasiak on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:16:42 AM EST

politics have turned into pro-wrestling.... the electioms themselves are simply part of narrative arcs created by the owners (in the case of politics, "The Village") for their own benefit.

The only problem is that at this year's pay-per-view extravaganza, the promoters have chosen two performers who should never gotten beyond "undercard" status for the featured bout. It a battle between jobbers, not genuine "superstars", despite the breathless efforts of the announcers to inject excitement into the match-up.


+1000, Edgar, +100000000000 (5.00 / 2) (#58)
by lambertstrether on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:33:53 AM EST

What you said:

It's time to do a better job of speaking out against and rejecting the narrative gestapo.

But one step further: Time to create our own narratives. Eh?

And I love "the narrative gestapo." I think I'll go propagate it right now!


I'm all for that. (5.00 / 2) (#60)
by Fabian on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:32:39 AM EST

"Is it issues yet?".


: And you know what's the kicker? (5.00 / 5) (#62)
by Ellie on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 09:04:36 AM EST

For all the obscene amount of megabux Obama has been spending ALL his time schmoozing, he wants to strip even more away from issues by telling people to stop giving them money at all.
Give even that remaining pittance to Obama's personal monument erection initiative and political food fight society ... and trust Him to decide which issues he'll allow to detract from Numero Uno*!
*Oh dear, I hope I haven't just racistly called this blimponic floating ego arrogant, which in Obama Golf (TM I wish were mine) is equiv. to an Eagle.

I don't have your faith in the Dem candidate to (5.00 / 6) (#23)
by bridget on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:44:34 AM EST

get on with the business of fixing the following because nothing he does or says tells me so.

"All a Democrat can do is hope November comes quickly and our candidate wins, so we can get on with the business of fixing health care, ending the parade of right-wing ideologues as nominees for federal judgeships, preserve the independence of our Supreme Court, get out of one war (hopefully without getting back into another) and, fingers crossed, start to empty our prisons of non-violent offenders"

Looks like those millions (5.00 / 1) (#24)
by Lahdee on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:48:33 AM EST

the right wing think tanks invested in demonizing the political process have claimed another victim. Okay, maybe this campaign has gone on way too long, but pshaw I say to those who cede their power that readily.

Inclusive of (5.00 / 1) (#25)
by Edgar08 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:52:20 AM EST

those on the left who have adopted the tactics employed by those right wing think tanks.


Maybe that's why it's so fatiguing (5.00 / 13) (#32)
by Valhalla on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:01:30 AM EST

Fighting the other side is hard, but you can draw energy from the rightness of the fight and others around you fighting for them same thing.

Until your side becomes what you've been fighting against. That's just a big ol' gravitational well of energy-s*cking with nothing coming back.


YES! (5.00 / 3) (#61)
by Mike H on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 08:48:51 AM EST

That's exactly what has me so turned off by the last few months. The way Rovian tactics were used to tear down both Clintons, and how this was mindlessly cheered on by supposed liberals and progressives, killed completely the enthusiasm I once had for this election cycle.

Their side is evil, my side is acting like them, what can I do?


: Rovian, it was (none / 0) (#73)
by JavaCityPal on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 11:44:16 AM EST

but, the Obama camp and the media tried to force people to think it was the Clinton's doing it. Now that the owners of Rove, and his tactics, are in the contest, they are making sure Obama knows they have ownership of those strategies and work them better. I don't think Obama's managers realized the only thing their use of the "winners" tactics would do was eliminate Hillary for them. They played nice with Obama as though they were going to actually cross-over, and, as they've done before, succeeded in getting ahold on enough people.
I was once hoping the democrats had a strategy, too. Keep the Republicans thinking Obama was the guy, and they'd do anything to make it so, but at the convention pull a last minute switch and put Hillary on the ticket. The R's would have had to scramble to come up with a successful enough strategy to beat her in just 2 months. But, the democratic party has no strategy. They borrowed the one they were using, and the owners have demanded it back.

These words are what have (5.00 / 3) (#66)
by Jjc2008 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 10:00:25 AM EST

so disappointed, discouraged and scared me.

Until your side becomes what you've been fighting against.

Certain blogs and bloggers on the left have become the exact thing I thought the left hated. And like many who used to post in those places, I check back to see if anything has changed since the primary ended and sadly, it has not. Bullying, gestapo narratives still reign supreme.

I think my time of caring is waning.


I'm not planning to watch the convention (5.00 / 2) (#27)
by Prabhata on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:56:19 AM EST

oh really? (5.00 / 3) (#30)
by cpinva on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:59:16 AM EST

if you seriously believe a pres. obama is going to do any of these things, i have shares for sale in a ny bridge, below par. i only take cash, gold bullion, or unset diamonds as payment.

Obama is just not as exciting to cover as he was when he had Democrats as competitors and McCain would put anyone to sleep.

he was never that exciting, period. unless you were drinking the well known semi-aphrodisiac, "obama love potion no. 9". most of us with a brain weren't.

I was impressed with the (5.00 / 4) (#45)
by Grace on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:36:32 AM EST

first few speeches I heard Obama give.

The first one, back in 2004, was really great. The next few were good. Unfortunately, somewhere in there I realized he really wasn't saying anything.

It's like reading a story written by a good wordsmith -- then getting to the end and realizing the story had no plot and no characters. A mood piece with no mood.

Obama is just a whole container full of empty for me. (And, you know, I just realized that this is what he thinks he is too. What was that famous quote from his books about being a blank slate for others to project their ideas on?)

: Indeed (none / 0) (#70)
by JavaCityPal on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 11:23:10 AM EST

Obama is a wordsmith, and his books are just stories with no plot, etc. It took him 5 days, he said, to write his best speech ever on racism. Many realized he hadn't really said anything.
I believe your path away from Obama is very much like many strong supporters of Hillary. I, too, was very impressed with his first few speeches. I'm sure I didn't hear a word, but he could create a stunning echo in those large arenas. I think he likes that part, as well, which is why he always tries for the largest crowds he can get. I can no longer stand the sound of his voice.

Sometimes I think (none / 0) (#31)
by Edgar08 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:00:54 AM EST

He will try.


Skimble's reaction (5.00 / 1) (#38)
by oldpro on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:11:00 AM EST

is understandable.

It's been a dreadful year and a half, up to our necks in clueless Democrats and no evidence of any change anybody can believe in.

Exhausting sometimes, tedious others.

: That fateful Sunday (5.00 / 2) (#74)
by JavaCityPal on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 11:50:20 AM EST

when all the once reputable talking heads started saying, "well, the democrats have chosen the weaker candidate." That was the pivot point when there were still the June primaries, but they felt safe enough to say Hillary could not pull out the win, and the truth of what the R's had been doing should have come crystal clear even to the Obama supporters.
He wasn't what was exciting about the primary, and even his supporters can't say they have the same passion for him today.

No, Obama was only exciting (5.00 / 6) (#40)
by gyrfalcon on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:12:36 AM EST

to cover when he was competing against the vile Clintons. What we have now, once again, is the triumph of mediocrity.

The primary was alive with excitement (5.00 / 5) (#44)
by JavaCityPal on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:20:42 AM EST

We got to see absolutely principled campaigning on the issues this country is most concerned about. The courage and determination in the face of such cruelty was something every citizen, young and old, stood to learn something valuable from.

Now, we're left with ...

Skimble is not alone... (5.00 / 2) (#56)
by stefystef on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:30:54 AM EST

I'm so disappointed in the way things have gone in the last month. Instead of a campaign on issues, it's all sound bits and photo-ops. I'm exhausted by it all and really have a hard time caring any more.

Too much hype on both sides, little substance and no real "change", just re-packaging.

But I hope TalkLeft stays around. This is a great blog with alot of good people who want to really be involved.

The candiadtes could change the narrative (5.00 / 3) (#59)
by TimNCGuy on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:40:52 AM EST

or at least attempt to. If they would like the media and the public to discuss the issues, how about getting the two together at something like town hall meeting where they could BOTH take questions from voters instead of from silly reporters?

Oh wait, McCain suggested that, didn't he? And, Obama said no.

Neither candidate is worthy; ... (5.00 / 1) (#75)
by RonK Seattle on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:21:38 PM EST

... neither is capable; neither party is functional.

Democracy in America has failed on a scale that staggers the imagination, and the Information Age has made us collectively dumber.

I held my breath for twelve years once ...

Sad, but seemingly true (none / 0) (#1)
by Key on Tue Aug 05, 2008 at 11:39:28 PM EST

Sad that it's turned out to be this way. I wish Obama would jump all over McCain's pimping of his wife today, but he won't.

I'm not a fan of dirty politics, but at the same time, I'm not a fan of watching Dems sit on their rears while the other side plays dirty against them....

I wish Obama would jump all over (5.00 / 4) (#43)
by Edgar08 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:20:40 AM EST

Mandates for Universal Health Care.


Own the issues. (5.00 / 2) (#52)
by Fabian on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 05:40:40 AM EST

That's the way for a Democrat to win.

Talking about a candidate and his wife is a tabloid distraction from actual issues. The Obama fans would love it, but the rest of the voters are more concerned about the price of gas.

Own
The
Issues

Do it and you win. Get distracted by every shiny object instead and you will lose.


Please don't use the "P" word.. (none / 0) (#6)
by MarkL on Tue Aug 05, 2008 at 11:47:02 PM EST

that is in really poor taste, given the history with Shuster.


It's Really Annoying (none / 0) (#12)
by flashman on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:02:38 AM EST

to be lectured about language. The post conforms to the posting rules. Leave it along.


It's even more annoying to see a (5.00 / 2) (#14)
by MarkL on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:07:11 AM EST

comment speaking about a candidate pimping a family member.
It's in horrible taste, and rubs my nerves raw, because of the Shuster incident.


McCain Proposed To Enter His Wife (3.00 / 1) (#15)
by flashman on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:12:09 AM EST

in a contest where the contestants show their bare breasts and derriere. It was a distasteful proposal on McCain's part, even though he was joking. This is clearly not the same as the Shuster remark.


Actually, people should read the links provided (5.00 / 5) (#26)
by Valhalla on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:53:33 AM EST

McCain joked about asking his wife to enter the contest, which the paper/source said was 'known for' often having topless competitors.

His actual statement said nothing about her takin' off her clothes.

As long as we're still in hyperparse mode, that it.


Ironic (5.00 / 3) (#33)
by ChrisM on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:05:09 AM EST

to see all the commenters at that DK post finding the whole thing disgustingly misogynystic.

I guess having used it so much themselves during the primary, they know it when they see it.


: yet another diary (3.00 / 1) (#53)
by Fabian on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 05:57:58 AM EST

up over at DK, howling with outrage over Sturgis in general with people predictably chiming in. Pushing buttons. Dangling shiny objects. "Look! It's Paris Hilton!"
Issues? Only when there's nothing else to talk about.

I Didn't Say He Made A Statement (none / 0) (#67)
by flashman on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 11:09:57 AM EST

about having her take her cloths off. Don't put words in my mouth. I said it was distasteful that he would joke about entering her in a contest where the contestants show their breasts and buttocks. I still think it's distasteful. Nobody has the right to tell me otherwise.


No (5.00 / 2) (#29)
by Edgar08 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:56:54 AM EST

This is precisely the kind of manufactured outrage everyone is just totally sick of.


: A good example of the bogus (5.00 / 1) (#39)
by JavaCityPal on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:11:14 AM EST

part weltec asked about at the top of the thread.

And regarding Shuster's remark (none / 0) (#34)
by Edgar08 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:05:37 AM EST

I don't think he was joking.


: Nobody's Defending Shuster. (none / 0) (#68)
by flashman on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 11:11:35 AM EST

You haven't read my post carefully.

I mean "alone" (none / 0) (#13)
by flashman on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:05:39 AM EST

Weak (none / 0) (#4)
by dualdiagnosis on Tue Aug 05, 2008 at 11:45:28 PM EST

That's it? It gets a little rough and the first reaction is to quit?

LOL!

It hasn't even begun to get (5.00 / 5) (#8)
by kredwyn on Tue Aug 05, 2008 at 11:50:31 PM EST

even a little bit rough.

But here's the thing that Skimble is talking about...

The day before Congress passed its new housing safety net, this woman kills herself. Her note, I think, says it all when it comes to the levels of despair that some folks are felling right now.

Skimble's got a point:

The Democrats have failed to hold the existing administration accountable for its flagrant and abundant crimes against Americans and Iraqis and Afghanis and all humanity.

That's really really sad (5.00 / 2) (#16)
by blogtopus on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:12:31 AM EST

Perhaps we can send faxes to the Dems saying 'by the time you leave office in 2010, this great experiment will have failed.'

I have just about given up, myself. There will be many more casualties of the Outrage Renaissance. And don't forget the Depression Reconstruction, which Obama will inherit and preside over magnificently wearing his shiny new President costume.


At this point I'm surprised (none / 0) (#18)
by shoephone on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:20:34 AM EST

the positive ratings for Congress are even as high as 9%. Maybe the polls were rigged. I don't know anyone who isn't disgusted with them.


: Well, there's (5.00 / 6) (#35)
by Valhalla on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:06:13 AM EST

themselves, their family members, their employees and the people who make money off them. Think that makes 9%?

What do you mean failed? (5.00 / 4) (#49)
by makana44 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 04:04:22 AM EST

You can't fail at something unless you try to succeed in the first place. It's become obvious that that their only goal was to to paint the Republicans as culpable so that they could get into power. It's all politics. That's why FISA turned it all for me, finally, irrevocably. Once they had the chance they grabbed the same unconstitutional powers for themselves, the same way they're going to grab the same K Street dollars for themselves and the same way they're going to sell us all out to the max. They were never inept. They just took us all for fools and unfortunately, they were right.


: Well said... (5.00 / 2) (#69)
by JavaCityPal on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 11:16:23 AM EST

What the DNC and the Obama campaign did during the primary to direct the outcome wasn't just wrong, they did it openly and didn't care what was said to expose that truth.
There is an awful lot of criticism being launched at the democrats who changed their registrations to Independent, who refuse to vote, and/or are stating they will vote outside the D list. But, those are the protesters who are trying to regain control over the government.

I stil have hope. I know, but hold the snark. (none / 0) (#41)
by Marco21 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:13:44 AM EST

I totally understand why this person closed up shop and I also totally disagree with the comment regarding Clinton being a janitor for Bush I - and here's where the hope comes in.

Although it's been a long time and the memory isn't sharp (I was in college - I can't even recall all the substances that helped cloud the memories) I recall being not sold on one William Jefferson Clinton. A lot of my friends weren't either. Tons of doubt abounded. No one knew him well, his wife was a power player and not a "just say no" type, Al Gore's wife was against filthy rock music, etc.

Well, Bill Clinton sure proved my doubts were unfounded. I hope Obama will do the same. I still think he will and at the very least will be a better President than his opponent will could ever be.

: I still have hope, too (none / 0) (#71)
by badger on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 11:28:03 AM EST

Just not any hope that any of the problems that have to be solved at the Federal level will be solved - in fact I expect they'll become considerably worse and more intractable.
I have the opposite opinion of Bill Clinton too. I was sold on his candidacy but very disappointed in his administration - infinitely better than either Bush before and after, but far short of what it could have been or needed to be.
But the essential difference between either Clinton and Obama (or McCain for that matter) is that the Clintons see the problems. They may not always solve them, but at least they move incrementally in the right direction.
Obama (or McCain) on the other hand, sees the only problem as getting elected. What he's proposing as solutions today (offshore drilling, subject to change as polling requires) and what actions he's actually taking (FISA)are steps in the wrong direction.
I was never a huge Hillary Clinton fan, but I think her Presidency would have left us better off. I firmly believe either of the current candidates will leave us considerably worse off - somewhat worse if all they practice is inaction, considerably worse if they act intentionally.
I have hope, but it's in the extremely local or personal arenas - certainly not any hope that the next Congress or President will do anything useful.