Under fire, Obama’s chief of staff calls liberal strategy ‘f*cking retarded’

Source: RawStory




Read more: http://rawstory.com/2010/01/fire-obamas-chief-staff-calls-liberal-strategy-fucking-retarded/

---

Yeah, it was so fucking retarded that it got Obama elected in 2008.

Go ahead and piss on us, Rahm. You and your DLC corporate whores will be out on your asses in a couple of years and you'll end up a K-Street whore along with the rest of the other fucking assholes.


BTW, Rahm? Way to go in using a grade-school derogatory term that has long been used to attack people with mental handicaps.


Fucking prick.

Sure the neo-cons are awful, but at least they are on the other side.

Our side is split, chopped, divided.

:banghead: :banghead:

The democratic base cannot stand Rahm. Obama is insane for keeping that turd and all of his DLC bullshit in such a position of power.

Obama, by appointing him and retaining him, unfortunately, either shows his true colors (not a racist remark) or his lack of understanding. Personally, I think he approves of Rahms words and actions. We desperately need already elected (D) Progressives to switch from Democrats to registered Progressives. Then we could create a viable party alternative to what we now have...

if he keeps this up.

BushCo lite...

:puke:

'useful' Rahm is as an advisor.

oops. heh.

Especially with inflammatory language that says nothing in substance.

How utterly charming of him.... NOT

...and that's bad?

Because he's one of them.

D amned
L ying
C orporatists

They are not Democrats.

from a Republican why should their seat be protected? This isn't college football where we root for guys with the right uniform. Their position on specific legislation is the primary reason for supporting a candidate. Fuck a bunch of DINOs.

IF the best person for that is not a blue dog, corporate lick spittle then so be it.

All politics are local.


translation: fucking retarded = not good for MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE. (snif - I'm taking my ball and leaving. Wahhhhhhhh)

Arlen Specter calls himself a Democrat. So do lots of ex-republicans. They may have changed their party but not their ideologies.

So answer me this bhikkhu, are you with the DINO's, Arlen Specter, the DLC, Rahm or with us? You have to decide. We want health care reform they do not.

that might be a good topic for a separate thread. "Just what does it mean to be a Democrat these days?"

And just does what "being a Democrat" mean? All I know is my Dad was a Democrat all his life and, though he's no longer around, I can say without doubt he'd be absolutely appalled at what passes for the so-called "Democratic" party these days. He would have voted third party without hesitation. He's not alone.

at the expense of the liberals. He either doesnt need the liberals or is taking them for granted.

piece of fruit and then speed away. You dont stick around for discussion.

WOW now that's really smart. We may need their votes on healthcare. LOL

There is no reason for Obama to listen to his base - Where are they going to go? Bernie Sanders responded that they will stay home. Then the segment was over.

I think it is sad that a respected U.S. Senator is forced to appear opposite a douche bag.

same story in a lot of places.

Your days are numbered Rahm, but you keep the air of superiority, because arrogance is all you ever really had.

Had to bribe 'em all, though.

were worth all the votes lost in Massachusetts and those that may be lost this November.

That's offensive to pricks.

Rahm would be lucky to be a prick.

And Roland, your language is as gutterish as his is.

So we work to kick out all those conservative Dems and to what end? Replace them with crazy-right wing Repubs?

What in your right mind makes you think that the people in those districts- who all lean center or center-right, are going to elect a liberal representative?

What FACTS support that supposition?

So what happens? We lose our majority and the Repubs in Congress rule.

Is that what you want? Oh no, I hear it coming - 'well, at least we stood up for our principles!'

Yeah, as usual you did. And so.... the country races further down the black hole.

But then, when we are really in deep do-do, yas got yas principles.

Losing a these few contested seats in these districts doesn't lose us the majority... however it does make the BASE stronger in all the other places.

I would much rather have 54 STRONG democrats who stand for similar principles and stick together than 60 weak as water democrats who are constantly capitulating to a few bad apples. It winds up making the whole party look weak and confused.

Further, we don't know what would happen if a strong liberal candidate ran in these districts, because everyone keeps assuming they won't get the votes... so the democrats who run take conservative positions hoping to siphon off some GOP votes. I wonder how many people with liberal beliefs stay home on election day because no one is representing their values.

A democratic victory is meaningless when you wind up with corporate politicians who bow to special interests.

... it was to run real democrats at EVERY LEVEL and compete in EVERY contest.

on their pickup trucks?

You're saying that THAT HOWARD DEAN didn't understand that competing everywhere would result in electing some Blue Dogs? Yeah right, I'm believing that.

What Howard Dean said, and you completely misunderstood, is that we should be presenting progressive ideas not selling out.

Here is the ACTUAL quote, "White folks in the South who drive pickup trucks with Confederate flag decals on the back ought to be voting with us, and not , because their kids don't have health insurance either, and their kids need better schools too."

This isn't talking about electing blue dogs.. this is about showing people that the policies we champion are BETTER FOR THEM!

Howard Dean also said, ""I still want to be the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks," the former Vermont governor... "We can't beat George Bush unless we appeal to a broad cross-section of Democrats."

He received all kinds of criticism from his primary opponents for saying it. Seems like Howard Dean perhaps understood that they were likely to elect Blue Dogs at best in such places as Mississippi, Alabama, when he insisting on giving money to Democrats in those places.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Is the context in which those statements were said.

He was NEVER suggesting changes his principles, but always about making the case to the people the democratic party had abandonded. If you had followed the Dean campaign, you would understand this and not take quotes out of context.

Dean is a longtime politician. And any good politician is aware that there are conservative districts, even in blue states, that will elect more conservative officials.

To say that Governor lacked an understanding of that basic fact of politics is insulting in the extreme to the man. And to the effort which he led while head of the DNC.

Besides, the POINT is, are you a Democrat if you are against real Health Care initiatives and for continuing wars? These are not "Blue Dog Dem" views. They are REPUG views. If Blue Dogs were indeed doing what their constituents want, then we'd have a strong public option. Both Dems and Repugs in southern and midwestern states want a PO! These Blue Dogs should do what their constituents and the Party want, not what their corporate masters want. They should hold their nose and vote with the Party if the bill is not exactly what they want but what a majority of the base wants.

All I can see is they are afraid of the press, and not getting reelected. So why did they go into politics in the 1st place if they're so afraid of being on the public stage?

Let's see...

Guantanamo still open (and "enemy combatants" continued to be held w/o trial)
Afghanistan escalated (twice)
PATRIOT Act still supported
Wall St. still coddled (Obama's top economic positions are all Bank of America fucks)
Healthcare lobbyists helping to form White House policy
Obama reneging on campaign promise to not include mandates
Lip service spent on climate change
Little to no movement on Gay/Lesbian rights (and Obama glad-handing homophobic religious assholes)



Gee....Can't imagine why a real liberal/progressive would be even the LEAST bit upset!


:eyes:

yeah..those principles of ours suck..it sucks when the repigs are in charge of congress, the senate and the White Houseee...ohhh...wait..wait a minute..ohhh...never mind..

lets not let the repigs back in control..they might act like...

like...

like...

Democrats!

Let's keep going right (and takinng the country with us) so the Republicans don't win. Great strategy!

When people vote anti-choice and anti-human rights, let's make sure they have (D)'s after their names, instead of (R)'s. That'll really show the Republicans! Great strategy!

Keeping Democratic ideals and principles is an epithet, now? Great strategy!

Not hanging on to your principles - unprincipled.


"Adj. 1. unprincipled - lacking principles or moral scruples; "freedom from coarse unprincipled calumny"- A.E.Stevenson
unscrupulous - without scruples or principles; "unscrupulous politicos who would be happy to sell...their country in order to gain power"
principled - based on or manifesting objectively defined standards of rightness or morality; "principled pragmatism and unprincipled expediency"; "a principled person"
2. unprincipled - having little or no integrity
dishonorable, dishonourable - lacking honor or integrity; deserving dishonor; "dishonorable in thought and deed"

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/unprincipled

Great strategy!

I would have preferred him, but if the primary can't produce a candidate that can beat the Republican, then more work needs to be done with the electorate for next time. You can go left, but if you do it in a way that doesn't work, you end up going right. Rahm isn't criticizing policy here, he's criticizing strategy.

Lieberman ran on name recognition alone. He sure shafted the good folk of CT after he got re-elected, though.

It was perfectly within his rights to do so, and I don't think any of the polls ever showed him losing in a three-way race. There was nothing stopping a senator with a 60%+ approval rating from running as an independant and winning. This is why Rahm says what he says; because people are not thinking of the consequences of their actions. You have to think about what your opponent will do. If Lieberman would have won the primary, he wouldn't have to depend on Republican votes to get elected, but Democratic ones, and he would have incentive to maintain what was up to that point a decently Democratic voting record (something like 70%-90% on the votes where the two parties disagree).

CT is one of only 4 states the Lieberman/Lamont situation could have occurred in. The others are IA, NY, and VT. So, whereas, Rahm's philosophy may be correct for those 4 states, it is not for the other 46.

edited for spelling in headline

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that people are stuck on makig isolated acts that seem brave or courageous, but aren't really seeing them through to the end, or settling with the best possible gain at the moment to avoid further loss. There is a revolution every two years in this country and sometimes the best you can do is position yourselves to do better in the next election by working the populace; you just have to gain consensus in a democracy, there aren't many substitutes for it.

The is no question that Rahmbo favors CorpAmerica over the working class.

Or tell me how he has shown support for the middle class. He seems to favor CorpAmerica.

Why should they be treated any different? Rahmbo chooses Lieberman, Nelson, and the rest of the turn-coat bastards to liberals.

Fucking assholes.

Lieberman. It was Democrats like Rahmbo that killed Lamont.

Lamont wasn't the only progressive dem that was beat out by a DLC "dem" with "DLC" dem money.

Fu*king corporate pigs is what they are, Rahm is bottom of the barrel, and Obama is right there with them, he supported LIEberman lock stock and barrel.


I know what DLC stands for

D ammed
L ying
C orporatists.

What part of Rahm's strategy has worked?

He gave Lincoln, Nelson and Landrieux everything they wanted and we lost MASS.

When you can't tell the difference, what is the difference? When you can't count on your own to vote for your own, again I ask you what is the difference? When the supposed one with the 'D' by their name is indistinguishable from the 'R', it doesn't matter if we have 98 Democrats in the Senate, it won't matter.

What matters is party discipline on the issues that are important to our country. Health care is important. If you fix the astronomical cost of health care, you will fix the lack of jobs in this country because people might be able to start businesses that can hire people instead of paying ridiculous health insurance costs. But we can't have that because Rahm's corporate masters in the health insurance industry might only make $4 billion in profits instead of $6 billion.

Rahm's assertion is fucking asinine and anyone who agrees with him can go join the GOP. They'd be more comfortable with the corporatists there.

of the time he's no democrat and doesn't belong in the democratic party. If he votes against you at every turn how is that different from having a republican in the seat? Being large and in charge is GREAT but not when you don't know which member of your party is going to stab you in the back.

Does it mean that democrats loose the majority? Maybe, but they aren't getting anything done with a bunch of DINOS anyway.

Q3JR4
Two cents.

districts didn't have much of a choice. Perhaps they're only alternative was the Republican.... Maybe, they were being "reasonable."

a pretty universal catch-22 if you ask me.

The same group of liberals that were screaming "kill the bill" and working against eventual passage of ANY health care reform bill through their tactical ineptitude are too stupid to understand the date on a story. They are fucking retarded.

Yeah, Rahm is right, a right wing POS.

A
D-amned
L-ying
C-orporatist
ER

I wasn't aware there was ANY health bill worth passing while the fascist corporatists were lobbying against, as soon as the health insurance greed pigs ended their lobbying you had to know, they got what they wanted. So then Obama came out and said, "this is the bill we need signed"

was Rahm the one that had closed door meetings with the drug company greed pigs? I can't remember.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Who hired Rahm?

Well????

in top economic posts instead of the pro-regulation people that surrounded him during his campaign.

All according to plan.

America is a walking obituary.

If so, what in the world are you doing here?

Please re-read the quote.

Eh is a REALLY cool guy! :party:

he could probably scare the conservadems into supporting HCR?

:grr:

I am done with the Democrats. I'll continue to post here unless I'm banned but I am done. You can only be betrayed so much, and for so long, before you draw your line in the sand. To be honest my line has been drawn for a long time, but now Rahm has crossed it. I've learned too much over the last 6 years here to just allow myself to be sucked in by corporate Democrats anymore! Don't get me wrong, I'll still support the good ones like Kucinich, Grayson, Dean, but for races like president, the only way the Dems will get my vote is by running a true liberal. And we all know true liberals will never have a chance - they'll be shot down by the corporate media a'la the "Dean Scream". Sigh. This country is sad and depressing. :(

I want a f-ing apology.

and the elephant you rode in on, you fucking prick.

Asshole!

NOT holding my breath.

don't get it. It's a horrible word. Especially coming from the White House Chief of Staff.

I've taught my daughters to never use that. There's just no need in it.

None.

K&R!

Hie comments were made in August! There has to be something more productive to do than call for an apology for something that was said in August.

Since we are stuck on something said in August, what did we call the idea when the teabag repubs did it in the NY-23 race? sane or insane?

We need to do it on a case by case basis. Let me explain, I would love to replace the king of conservadems Evan Bayh, but if you think that a more liberal Senate candidate would win his seat in Indiana, I would disagree. I can agree with those who will comment that having a repub would be no different than having Bayh, but that is a different argument all together. Are we trying to get Dems elected or are we try to cleans the Democratic party of conservadems?

What good does it do us if there's a (D) or an (R) behind the name if they vote in lock-step with their corporate/lobbyist masters?

When did the American people become an afterthought to special interests?

Royals simply morphed into capitalists/corporatists --

the same battle for control of the nation and its wealth and resources!!

Doing what we've been doing for the past 40 years -- "voting for the lesser evil"

-- has simply moved us further down the rabbit hole!

x(

And, yes, Rahm is Obama's Rove, only not as astute regarding the Party's base as Rove was and that will be the end of the Democratic Party! Thanks, Rahm! Thanks, Obama! Neither of you deserves to be a part of the Party of Johnson and FDR!

... arrange for this asshole to go hunting with Darth Cheney?

Fewer and fewer people are willing to accept the precept that to beat the Republicans we have to become them.

Fewer and fewer people are buying into the less-malignant-of-two-tumors voting model.

You're making it easier and easier to wave goodbye while people like you take the Democratic Party where no person of democratic principles is willing to follow.

Republicans are awful. How can we be more like them?

is to move so far Right that democratically principled citizens have no choice but to abandon the party. This way, the party, on average, becomes indistinguishable from Republicans.

I'm serious; I'm not falling for the less-malignant-of-two-tumors voting model. Both parties are taking us in the same dystopian direction. Why postpone it by voting Republican Lite? Let's just vote Republican, drive the country into the ground sooner, rather than the Democratic preference for later, and see what comes out on the other side.

This spending cut nonsense, on top of the Chief of Staff arrogance I recognize so well from eight years of Bush/Cheney, on top of a continuation of Bush/Cheney's "security" and "war on terror" strategies have me laughing every time I hear that stupid meme: "Vote Democrat. Don't forget how bad things were under Bush!" Frankly, I don't see the big difference.

And now Obama is attempting to save face by saying he'd rather be a good one-term president than a mediocre two-term president. Well I have news for him: He is, so far, a mediocre one-term president.

I'm doing some business travel for a few days, and I'm sitting in my hotel room with MSNBC going in the background. The more I hear, the angrier I'm getting.

But a solution occurs to me: Coin-toss voting. Every American ignores party, ignores adds, and ignores political philosophy; we just walk into the voting booth and toss a coin--Heads = Democrat and Tails = Republican. With voting results completely randomized, only a fool would make a campaign contribution to a politician, they'd have to call it what it really is--graft. And the beauty is, like a chimpanzee typing until "War and Peace" eventually emerges merely by chance, we might, eventually, get the government we need by a random process, since the directed process hasn't been working so well for us.

Sorry. Just had my fill today.

computer programmed with the platform make the decisions.

Can I come grovel at your feet now that you've made me realize the utter stupidity of my liberalism?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Why the heck is that freaking loser of a traitor even in our party? He should be kicked out.

I suggest something instead: advertisements targeting Rahm.

FIRE RAHM!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Detestably imbecilic to the core.

and the DLC booted out of the Democratic Party -- !!!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

for Rahm to talk to other Democrats that way....then people we got a bigger problem than we thought.

and this just makes me sick. No responsible person uses such language.

...FUCKING PRICK!!!

- K&R

Of course, this was months ago. I guess it wasn't as "cool" to post this stuff back in August

Those of us who are well informed have known about this for many months. :shrug:

Personally, I first read this on FDL back in August. But I'm a 'firebagger', you see.

Somebody remind me.

He's part of that "We Are Change" fake *ss TV show brought to you by the corporations.

with the Blue Dogs is more about how Obama did not fight behind the scenes. FDR and LBJ, they ever needed
to go public with their arm swisting? I doubt that.

I've already half forgotten who that is. He's done. Fuck that guy, he's going back to wherever the fuck he came from with
'fail' tattooed on his forehead.

Rahm, we barely knew ya. Happy trails, motherfucker.

PS: From me to you: Fuck you. You're an idiot.

He thought your could deliver rhetoric to a nation full of citizens on the ropes and
get everybody to say, "Wow, this is just great." Well Rahm, you cynical failure,
you will go down in history as the lousiest chief of staff ever. Every bully has his
day and yours has come.

unless someone can come up with something that will actually work to swing these con-dems over, and it better be enough to overcome all that campaign cash the pharma companies are coming up with.

And blame the dirty fucking hippies when it fails.

:eyes:

Fuck you, asshole.

We working poor. :eyes:

Mmmkay? Not that FAIL means anything to you, judging by your Hasty Freeze plan of late. Dufus.

:sarcasm:

In fact, when he opens his piehole to castigate us, it's because he's scared the golden goose has decided to close up the golden egg shop. And you know what? He's right. That shop closed up tight in the last few weeks. It's been slowly closing for the last six months or so but that door is shut tight now.

We are going to support in primaries who ever we decide is the most liberal and were going to network on sites just like this and were cutting Rahm completely out of the process. He won't get a dime of our hard earned money or a minute of our time for any of his DLC candidates. Indeed, it is my life work and the life work of many other activists to destroy the DLC. People like Karl Rove and Rahm Emanuel need to be shunned. Yes, I consider those two people to be cut of the same cloth and they both need to be removed from public life forever.

word retarded bandied about. I have taught two Down Syndrome students who were mainstreamed into the regular classroom. Over the years I have taught students who actually are on the lower spectrum of the IQ. It has been my experience that these young people tend to be very social, loving and caring.

Hey wait, that's part of the description is just like a lot of people here on the DU. We actually care that people have health insurance. We love our fellow humans and want them to have their civil rights, you know being able to marry the person they love regardless of gender.

While those students weren't the ones who will go on to become doctors or lawyers they are loved by their families. They have friends and they will forge a life of their own, albiet different than your and mine. I truly wish people would stop using the word "Retard" as a weapon against others. I HATE when people call an idea Retarded because they don't agree with it. For me it's like saying something is Gay because you think it's stupid or you don't agree with it. Using retarded or gay in those terms show the ignorance of the person who is using the term.

Really Rahm does calling people RETARDED help your cause? I'd like to know what Obama said to him when he said this?

to write when I am very tired and rushed getting ready for work. My grammar sucks. Sorry.

:)

some nights I don't get much sleep. I work all day and then I come home and help my husband take care of his father. It wasn't that it was a bad night the night before but he woke me up in the middle of the night looking for his wife Alice. Alice has been dead for about five years now. As time goes on he has forgotten this and often asks us if we saw her or if we know what time she will be coming come. I'm afraid we're going to have to start bolting the front door with a lock of some sort so he doesn't wind up roaming the neighborhood or worse yet trying to get into his car to drive. He's not really bad off yet because there are still periods of time he is lucid and that's difficult too. It fools us into believing that he might turn things around.

There are many mornings I begin the day on brain dead and I try to hit ditsy by the time I arrive at school in the mornings.

is strategy. Pretty much ever since '94 they're been in the mode of "How do we gain seats?" Once they gained seats, they stayed in that mode instead of making any sort of use of those seats.

When you're off the hill, your focus is knocking down the king, but when you're on the hill, you lose your primary target and any allies you may have had before. Being king of the hill is always temporary, no matter who you are. Make good use of your time and accept any kind of duration as a bonus.

Since they've regained power the democrats have really spent way too much time trying to scapegoat voters under the guise of "compromise." But they do it passive-aggressively, "We want to make you all happy, but we just don't have the votes. Perhaps if you elected more democrats...." After several cycles of electing more democrats we've really got nothing to show for it.

You gain power, you do your goddamned job, chances are you'll get reelected. If you don't, you've laid the groundwork for the next guy interested in doing the right thing. OTOH. if you get into office, and you pussy foot around, chances are you will not get reelected and even if you do, you've weakened your position. That's how democracy works: good leaders gain strength over time, poor leaders lose it.

In a twisted sense, the republicans have had better leaders for a while now. Sure, they're mostly bad people campaigning on bad ideas, but when they get in, they do most of the bad things they promised to do. OTOH, democrats campaign on good ideas, and then don't do a fucking thing.

in the dictionary and guess what? you got it, there's Rahm's fucking retarded looking picture. This POS has got to go if Obama thinks he has an even remote shot at a 2nd term. Which at this stage of the game is highly unlikely. It's time to begin searching for a primary candidate to challenge Obama in 2012, or risk losing the white house to the right-wing jihadists once again.

If Obama doesn't acknowledge tonight that Oregonians last night spoke for many Americans that we want the rich corporatists that have been stealing and redistributing the nation's wealth into their hands to PAY THEIR F'IN BILL for that now, he deserves to be a one term president.

Rahm, both Massachusetts and Oregon are a warning to you to STOP the DLC and Rethuglican BS that's been inflicted on us for WAY too long. Step out of the way or get stepped on!

for hiring that mess of a strategist who is a highly successful alienator.

in his State of the Union speech.

Otherwise, nobody wil believe he is changing things for the better.

All I see quoted are "participants". Anybody with an actual name confirm this report?

not the persons. Not that I agree necessarily with that assessment either but I think it is a key distinction.

I knew from the moment Obama named Emmanuel as his COS that we progressives were going to get "f'd in the A."