The Whitehouse has the right to speak back to those that constantly trash it.

And thats something that should be understood by everyone, regardless of which party controls what. There is a segment among us on the left that have been on a neverending quest to visciously attack, in very personal terms, every single thing this administration has done that didn't measure up to certain standards. Those that have done so are within their rights to make those attacks. However, the administration and people that work for it and believe in what they are working for, also have the right to say something back to you.

For over a year now, many of the same people that are upset by Gibb's comments are the same people that have called the President a corporatist sellout, accusing him of not caring for people, calling him a war monger and have attacked him and his policies in highly profane terms. Many of these same people have made attempts to paint Barack Obama as nothing more than a political villain. And although I highly disagree with them, I still acknowledge that they have every right to say such things.

But when all is said and done, everyone should at least be able to accept that if you are going to trash someone, then you also run the risk of facing the justified possibility that the person who you are trashing is going to return the same in kind.

Gibb's entire point was that there is a vocal sect among the left, mainly referring to popular bloggers and a few tv personalities, that are expecting politically impossible accomplishments and then accusing President Obama of being like George Bush when those things don't get delivered. And he implies that these people are disconnected from reality.

Agree or disagree with that. But don't get mad at the guy for getting frustrated because of the inability to make certain people happy.
Many of you have said things that were a million times more harsh than that.

:shrug:

Of course. the critics of this administration have by far been giving a lot more than they have gotten back.

I find it funny to read comments that people on DU can't be told what to do or say and that no one should be inhibiting their right to criticize the President while there are simultaneously very visible threads bashing the President's latest inaction, failure, or mistake and plenty of people to co-sign it.

...without comment!?

(I guess applause is allowed, though?)

Where did I say that people shouldn't be allowed to criticize?

All I did was make an observation.

I pointed out the irony of people putting up posts a lot like yours alongside threads that critcize (or outright bash) the President or the Administration. While you seem to think there's a threat against your right to do so, the very existence of critical or bashing threads nullifies your concern.

The contradictions continue...

Proving, I guess, my point...

simply bolstering the points fot he OP and post #4.

And yet one more time we get to read another faked anlysis from a 'victim' that goes nowhere, resolves nothing.

What, did you skip every third word when you read the op or something?

And by "your" I mean the bashers. It's a two-way street baby.

:applause:

There is a small but extremely vocal minority of "liberals" who have been bitching and whining about Obama even before he was sworn in. They love to throw shit around but get upset when it winds up on them.

They never have supported the president and never will.

each other. Rethugs do one thing we never do and that is manage to get the infighting under control. But would Dems really like to be controlled?

Do you think every Repug has embraced the Tea-baggers?:evilgrin:

We didn't have DU back when Clinton was President.

how we look at it, instead of seeing a passionate debate about the direction of our nation, we see 'infighting'. That's spin that wants to see as many voiceless people as possible.

up with one who is running this November and has said anything negative about he teabaggers. Perhaps you have a link?

Obama to fail? That have put obstructions in front of everything that has been proposed?
How about standing up to the Repukes the way they "stand up" to the "left"?

At least we do not want him to fail We would love to see overwhelming success.....and some promises kept to those that got him into the White House..

I guess people only pay attention to what the White House does if they think its going to offend them personally.

And put up posters of the President with a bone through his nose? Why is their most virulent anger always reserved for the people who got Obama elected?

Here it is again: Why is their most virulent anger always reserved for the people who got Obama elected?

I don't need to show you shit. You visit DU everyday. You've seen it. Stop being disingenious.

I forgot who I was talking to.

So fucking transparent.

Nicely done. :crazy:

...the more desperate it appears.

I've never heard Rahm call the right wingers 'fuckin' retards or anything close to that. He runs away from their comments, he caved on the Shirley Sherrod story because they ran the clips (sure it was Vilsack but they knew what was going on), and then their was ACORN, we know what happened there. They give in to their criticisms over and over.
If they had any real respect for the left Rahm should have been fired immediately.

And no, its not a valid question. This administration has accused Republicans of wanting to take the entire country backward for political gain. Thats a far harsher criticism than anything they've said about the vocal minority of serial agonizers on the left.

not just moveon.org and since I have been a member of moveon since its inception back when they were defending President Clinton I as well of most of us take it personally.
He jumps when the right complains, and waters down his goals in legislation to suit them.

...calling for the healthcare bill to be killed. It was nothing more than that and saying as such is a complete lie. If you are going to criticize someone over something they said, tell the truth about what they said instead of changing the facts to mix with your criticism.

I'm a member of both so that means me. WTF is hard to understand about that?

So go imagine that I meant you personally. It will give you some more "woah is me" in your life, God knows you need tons more off that.

the rw media hasn't/won't post every negative comment this administration has said about them...and somehow you equate that with the sum total of everything ever said?

Ahhhhh, it clearly demonstrates that for those that insiste on having everything placed before them in well numbered stacks, clearly labelled stacks, the propoganda has worked well.

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

Also, a quick refresh on the difference between its and it's is probably called for.

Telling people they should be "drug-tested" if they think Obama's the same as Bush? Virulent?

Even if Gibbs DID say that to my face, I'd laugh. That's hardly a comment that ought to break anyone - or in this case - any sub-segment of the blogosphere - with an iota of mental toughness.

Maybe if he'd said he "despises" the Left. But wait, that's not so bad. It's just the way some people speak, so no problemo!

Why is that?

Ever think that the WH criticism of the media's left (professional left) might just be because they care more about what they say?

I think they have more regard for the media on the left than some silly fool that talks like they've been on an all night bender and someone has just pissed in their cornflakes.

There are those on the left that need to be smacked up along side the head because they are in a downward spiral into doing nothing but pissing and moaning about absolutely everything this WH does. They sound like the far right media as far as the level of gossip, speculation and spin they dish out.

If they want to advocate causes for the left, then they need to find a better why of doing it besides sounding like a group of gossiping buffoons playing the telephone game. Where the hell is their call to action? What do they do to motivate the left to rally and get more progressive candidates elected? What good are they now that they have the world's attention?

They need to use the format they have in a more constructive way than constantly putting out "woe is me, it's useless, they're all the same and liars, let's all roll up in a fetal position, we're doomed" stories constantly.

here and elsewhere....

Calling this President a Wimp, not a leader, not change to believe in,
and on and on and on.

So now, someone criticizes them, and they fall apart, become indignant,
and swear never to forget.

It's amazing how entitled some feel to be able to dish it out,
but obviously are agast that they'd have to take some of what
they throw out there every fucking day.

If you're tired of being called a wimp, maybe sending out your press secretary to call the waaahmbulance isn't the best way to counter it.

Most Powerful Man in the World. You'd think he'd choose his words a little more carefully than us drug-addled retards.

and those they *speak back* to also have the right to leave a big old dump for them to clean up in November. :rofl:

Nobody I know has advanced the argument that the White House has no "right" to respond to critics.

build that strawman all up again *shaking ornery fist* :D

Why tell those of us who SUPPORTED him to get a drug test? Why not hit the right wing teabagging monstrosities instead of democrats. Hummm?

I have never heard them say Rush needs a drug test and in reality he is the one who does.

And come on. I know you know they have done as much. There is no way you could be a DUer and not know that the President and others in the White House have talked shit about Fox News, Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, people that spread crazy birther rumors and the people who have a small government mindset. And thats all aside from the stuff they have said about Republicans in general.

I'm a democrat. Oh and I'm not on drugs so why do I need a drug test?

and there are several things he has done that I feel he should have stomped his feet over.
from the article http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/113431-white-house-unloads-on-professional-left

The press secretary dismissed the “professional left” in terms very similar to those used by their opponents on the ideological right, saying, “They will be satisfied when we have Canadian health care and we’ve eliminated the Pentagon. That’s not reality.”


Of those who complain that Obama caved to centrists on issues such as health care reform, Gibbs said: “They wouldn’t be satisfied if Dennis Kucinich was president.”

So do I need a drug test now or not since I seem to fit in as the "professional left?" I am one of those people who would push for Canadian health care and reduce the size of the military industrial complex and I would probably be just fine with Dennis but if I wasn't I'd say so. When I see things pulling farther to the right I have every right to be upset and Gibbs et al should allow me that without turning into a whiner.

That was the only category of people that Gibbs said need to be drug tested. In other words, they are divorced from reality, as is the widely popular understanding of the figure of speech he used. He was addressing many criticisms that he was ASKED about by the interviewer (he wasn't just volunterring to "whine").

All President's can have policy similarities in certain areas, but Obama is nothing like Bush when you look at this governing approach as a whole, not even remotely close.

:hi:

You would have to lie to say that you don't.

See how that works? :dunce:

You can't deny that the President and others in the WH have talked smack about Fox News, Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, the Bush administration, Republicans in general and all the people who spread crazy birth certificate rumors. You don't need me to give you links for that and I'm not wasting my time doing it. You know I'm right, you just want to demand links because it allows you to stall my point and make it about something petty. Fuck that. I don't play those games.

You make the claim, you provide the support.
http://www.iep.utm.edu/argument/
http://www.umt.edu/writingcenter/pdfs/MicrosoftWord-ThreeWaystoSupport.pdf

Until then, the Earth remains flat, as I have claimed. To ask me to support this claim is simply playing games, being petty, and stalling. "You know I'm right," as you say.

Therefore, I won't do it. I don't care if you like it. I don't care if you want to pretend it somehow renders my argument invalid (everyone knows that it doesn't). There is no law that says I have to provide a link if I don't feel I need. So I don't. You will live and you will like it. =)

I am not a smart man, Jenny, but I know what fallacies are.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=argumentum+ad+populum&l=1

Or perhaps a link to one of my posts where I denied...well, whatever it is you're yargle-blargling?

Pro-tip: We're not laughing with you when you use logical fallacies. :hi:

:dunce:

perhaps you're asking for one to learn? --What am I saying?! :rofl:

let them do their own homework. Of course, short term memory is what the right banks on.

I specifically remember a couple of great Palin zingers :)

What, you don't believe that wild assertion? I guess you'll have to do your own homework, then.

Perish the thought that the one making the claim should have to support it! That's not "how it works," after all!

interesting.

take the opportunity to look stuff up.

and fwiw...that's how it works

Brevity might be the soul of wit, but incomprehensibility is certainly not. :shrug:

If you look at my post, it tells you that I'm replying to post #67...your post as it turns out.

In your post #67 you said, "The earth is flat. I don't need to give you a link.
See how that works?"

Your oh so witty, but no so clever remark, was based on your repeated attempts to get others to do your homework for you, by demanding a link for stuff you are easily able to look up.

So then in my post I responded to your post #67 with, "we could go and look that stuff up....right?
take the opportunity to look stuff up.

and fwiw...that's how it works

I don't think it's that difficult to follow. Shrugging right back at ya.

When was the last time you submitted a research paper with "Look it up your own damn self!" as the Sources Cited page?

:shrug:

That might be "how it works" at Bumblefuck Technical Institute, but in the evidence-driven world, the onus for supporting a claim falls squarely upon the claimant.

So when I say "the Earth is flat," someone should challenge that claim and ask me to provide support. And that holds true regardless of whether you consider yourself a Flat Earth "hater" or "cheerleader."


Oh no! Me no so clever. :( Make sadface now.

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

Because you don't deserve that kind of effort.

Thanks, phleshdef

rights we gave them to represent us and put them where they are!

We own our government, Politicans du jour do not.

Never forget that..most Americans won't!

Just because you are a voter doesn't mean you get to be a fucking bully.

That's probably how all this started. Obama, after reading DU no doubt, was poking at his mashed potatoes and Gibbs walked in and, after gentle urgings, got Obama to tell him what was bothering him. So he ran to the Hill and unleashed a righteous defense of his bullied child, er, employer.

I don't hold the most powerful position in the World , do you?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bully

Noun:
Main Entry: 1bul·ly
Pronunciation: \ˈbu̇-lē, ˈbə-\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural bullies
Etymology: probably from Middle Dutch boele lover; akin to Middle Low German bōle lover, Middle High German buole
Date: 1538
1 archaic a : sweetheart b : a fine chap
2 a : a blustering browbeating person; especially : one habitually cruel to others who are weaker b : pimp
3 : a hired ruffian



Verb:

Main Entry: 3bully
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): bul·lied; bul·ly·ing
Date: 1693
transitive verb 1 : to treat abusively
2 : to affect by means of force or coercionintransitive verb : to use browbeating language or behavior : bluster

synonyms see intimidate

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

The man is hurling insults to me and many fellow democrats , right and left , attacking the very people who put him where he is , From the most powerful platform on Planet earth ..and I am supposed to consider him as the Victim?

Give me a fucking break..

We as Democrats are supposed to feel shame at the automobiles we drive in and are called Professional Liberals with sneers and jeers, while his wife vacations in the 3rd most expensive resort in the World, and gardens in $1,000.00 Jimmy Choo Boots, and you don't find the hypocracy of that stunningly appalling ?

Then there is no reasoning with you, you obviously don't have the capacity for it.

You can say whatever nasty thing you want about others, but how dare they say anything in return, how DARE they.

Grow some friggin skin.

How do people plan to walk the walk when it comes to fighting for things when they can't even handle some criticism about their political corner that 1)was NOT all that harsh, not compared to the things said about the President; and 2) wasn't even directed at them individually?

Not so much, apparently.

and it's against the rules to follow someone around.

If I've replied to one of your posts in another thread, I'm afraid I don't recall doing so.

with your own inability to answer those legitimate concerns of the not so fringe stakeholders.

now taking the comment as a personal affront?

and tying themselves in knots to rewrite the sentence that they are fugly retards. Ahhhh the martyrs are all around

:applause: kick and recommend :kick:

I don't trash the administration - I simply point out the truth and you THINK I'm trashing the administration.

Is Gitmo closed? Has DADT been repealed? Have renditions been stopped? Would any of these be impossible to a president who was elected with the greatest mandate since Reagan?

He gets to choose his battles. Unfortunately, the WH chooses to battle with the liberal left and bend to centrist/conservatives.

The criticism the WH has received from the left has been warranted and earned. Had they not had such disdain and flippancy towards the left, the critics wouldn't have much to go on. This is just another failure of leadership, par for the course.

Its clear where this Administration has its guns aimed at. And its not the conservatives that he keeps capitulating to.

:kick:

yessssssssssssssssssss!

Here is John Kerry, speaking yesterday at Grinnell College in Iowa. (this was in the 2003-4 time period)


Dismissing dissent is not only wrong, but dangerous when America's leadership is unwilling to admit mistakes, unwilling to engage in honest discussion, and unwilling to hold itself accountable for the consequences of decisions made without genuine disclosure, or genuine debate. As Thomas Jefferson said, "dissent is the highest form of patriotism."



Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.

- Harry S Truman



"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."
Theodore Roosevelt



Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.

~Albert Einstein



The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing.

~Albert Einstein



A state of war only serves as an excuse for domestic tyranny.

~Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn





Those who stand for nothing fall for anything.

~Alexander Hamilton

Nor from so called fellow democrats. And is not missed by anyone watching and with a brain!

The arrows pointing at those of us who have worked our ASSES off for the democratic party to now be called druggies? ..

Perhaps you have the same delusions?

Never touched a drug in my life dear..not when I protested the Vietnam war , nor the criminal wars now.

And attacks on my professionalism??? and those of other "liberals Professionalism", would perhaps be better duplicated by this White House and those who want to attack the very people who brung them! Perhaps those squealing about people taking offence ,should take a serious look in the mirror, and perhaps a little professionalism from the likes of those attacking Liberals, would do themselves a favor trying to become professional in running our government!

My professionalism saved lives when I worked for 33 years as a flight crew of a major airline.

I would hope if you ever needed a professional , you would find someone just as responsible as I, and those I worked with for 33 years have been! You would be a very wealthy person, if that were the case!

And I would hope, that you would attempt to live with the highest standards nessesary to be " A professional Liberal" sometime in your life!

Your life, Your call..

A little growing up might help you come to those values and principles all on your own!

But I somehow doubt that.

...contrived, cliche bullshit.

If the idea is that some of Obama's critics from the left go too far, he might have simply said that, instead of sweeping up the entire "professional left" and targeting it for mischaracterization and contempt. This was like the old man who's tired of teenagers leaving flaming bags of poo on his porch shooting blindly through the window at the next kid who walks by.

He also managed to both insult a very reasonable, mainstream liberal desire -- national healthcare, which the rest of the world regards as normal, rather than some extremist idiocy, and to throw out a cheap strawman argument about liberals wanting to "eliminate the Pentagon."

For good measure, he threw in a rightwing cliche insult of liberals as needing "drug testing." Nice.

Gibbs came across as thin-skinned and defensive, which is a sign of weakness and therefore never wise politically, and managed to insult, not a sliver of drug-addled extremists, but the only group of people who support the administration.

It was a dishonest attack, because the bulk of criticism from "the professional left" is not crazed name-calling extremism, but honest critique from people who are, in fact, supporters of the administration, and it's best and only chance of re-election. Instead of mischaracterizing the left and dismissing it with contempt, Mr. Gibbs might have taken the time to distinguish between fair and unfair criticism, and acknowledged the administration can do more for the people who elected it.

there would be no need to attack a tiny, meaningless minority making a mindless "Obama is Bush" argument. The bulk of the criticism from "the professional left" is neither crazy, nor drug-addled, nor having to do with "eliminating the Pentagon."

The response to name-calling from the executive branch of the United States Government should be to ignore it. The response to reasoned criticism should be to address it. Neither his attempt to characterize all criticism from the left as irrational, all-or-nothing and the equivalent of name calling, nor those of people here is going to stick.

That was crystal clear. The vast majority of self identified liberals approve of the President and aren't expecting him to be able to ram through single payer and don't think he is like George Bush. It was directed at people who are unrealistic about the current political climate.

If you are going to insist that it was broad brush, then your entire argument fails right then and there because it was not, no matter how much one may try to spin it as such.

happy?" By definition, there will always be some, but neither your nor Mr. Gibb's definition of which critics are mindless complainers is dispositve, correct? As there really isn't any one calling for "the elimination of the Pentagon," I think it's fair to say he was mischaracterizing the critics dishonestly.

Gibbs addressed "the professional left," which by and large is not slinging mindless "Obama is Bush" criticism. Instead of trying to dismiss critics on the left as drug-addled crazies, Mr. Gibbs might acknowledge that "the professional left" has made a lot of reasoned, intelligent criticisms that should be addressed.

In trying to dismiss them, Mr. Gibbs transparently acknowledged that criticism from the left is neither mindless, nor the the result of a tiny minority that wants "to eliminate the Pentagon." He simply set up a strawman and knocked it down.

...do not fit any of the criteria mentioned by Gibbs when describing the people he was referring to and the criticisms that they throw out there.

The vast majority of self identified liberals approve of this administration. A small, vocal minority of consistently negative individuals make up the sect of the left he was referring to. Not a broad brush.

Or has time to individually message well under 1% of the population.

Defending the indefensible.

", campaigned, raised money and ultimately voted for Obama.

Progressives, Gibbs said, are the liberals outside of Washington “in America,” and they are grateful for what Obama has accomplished in a shattered economy with uniform Republican opposition and a short amount of time."

From the same interview that all this fuss is about.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/113431-white-house-unloads-on-professional-left

So he even specifies who he doesn't mean by the term "professional left" in this same interview and specifically excludes the grass roots supporters that got the President elected.

opinions to gratitude? It's hardly just Washington "professionals" criticizing the administration. A lot of Those "grass roots supporters"(while grateful where appropriate) also have some very uncrazed, drug-free bones to pick that don't deserve to be shouted down. Acknowledging that would have made this comment sound a lot less like a broadside aimed at the very lefty "crazies" who put his boss in the White House.

but they, nor anybody, should be surprised when Liberal money, time and votes no longer come their way.

& if you can call rebelling against policies identical or worse than the previous administrations (which everyone here was against) 'trashing'
then I feel sorry for you

imagine what we could accomplish. The right wing doesn't have to do anything but try and divide us, which is so easy to do within our party.

Especially right before a midterm.

But, hey, they have every right to shoot themselves in the foot.

Then they can stare in horror at the results.

And, by the way, arguing that the WH has the right is debating a strawman.

Further, I am livid at the guy for saying such a disgusting, but dumb, thing.

The Op writes,
"The Whitehouse has the right to speak back to those that constantly trash it."

Really? You mean like Rush Limbaugh, FOX News, Glenn Beck and the rest of the army of hate in our media?

No, it would seem with this latest attack by Obama's people concerning the "professional left" that most of their anger is for liberals, unions, progressives, minorities and the poor.

repigs think of our admin. Those rightwing pundits get paid to hate Obama. The hard slog of Washington must taste bitter when your own team is kicking dirt on you every time you turn around.

got em in the cabinet, appointed to key ambassador posts, threw ACORN in the trash, bailed on Jones, were do eager to miss getting the business from Glenn fuckwit Beck that a great lady had to pull over and resign.

Sure gives a crap what Reich wing economists have to say. Certainly about made Olympia Shower Snowe co-President despite 60 votes. Endorsed the gang of sev...err six. Makes sure to include Republican bullshit votes or no. Appointments to the catfood commission and on and on.

The only people that give a fuck what pukes think in this party are the "sensible centrists" and "pragmatic" "liberals".

He should not have trashed his own party - not PUBLICLY. If they want to piss and moan about the so called professional left in the confines of their offices, then go for it....but not out in public.

Go after Beck and Limpdick, but not the ones that voted for Obama.

in their criticisms of the administration's decisions, Gibbs's comments do his cause no favors. Eliminate the Pentagon? He sounds like Spiro Agnew railing against the naddering nabobs of negativism. Beating up "leftist" strawmen does Obama no favors in a midterm election year when base turnout matters and the enthusiasm gap looks to be strongly in favor of the 'pugs.

They are NOTHING more than EMPLOYEES of the PEOPLE.

They are not royalty. They are not "our bosses". They are NOT people who should be constantly held up to praise regardless of what the masses think.

Harsh? Ever heard the cliche that includes heat, and kitchen?

What should be understood by EVERYONE isn't the notion that whoever occupies the First Bedroom is above criticism, it's that who occupies that position is supposed to weather that criticism NO MATTER WHAT THAT CRITICISM MIGHT BE.

Fuck Gibbs. He's a paid mouthpiece. He's a political whore. He's given his marching orders, and expected to go out and disseminate them to the public. He's not paid to give personal opinions on ANYTHING. If he wanted to speak publicly about things important to him, he should resign his position and start a fucking blog.

When Bill Clinton said that politics is a contact sport, HE MEANT THE OTHER SIDE!!!! (Dumbshits.)

They have also attacked Republicans....but the currently outraged Progressives don't
really give a fuck when that happens, cause so many are so self absorbed they don't
even notice. That's why they only take humbrage of what is said about Professionals (which I guess they wannnabee) Lefties. In fact, those whining now actually love what Gibbs said, as they will be throwing it in the President's face starting now and going on forever. It's an excuse, at they were getting nervous that they would need one. Wish granted!

Examples of WH taking on Republicans:

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/01/gibbs-calls-robertson-limbaugh-remarks-stupid.php

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/07/29/gibbs-takes-on-rush-limbaugh/

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/12/white-house-says-comments-from-gop-leader-boehner-are-crazy.html

http://theblogprof.blogspot.com/2010/07/robert-gibbs-hey-i-bet-rush-limbaugh.html

http://mediamatters.org/research/201004190025

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/09/gibbs-on-fox-news-critici_n_280309.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/09/gibbs-mocks-palin-reads-g_n_455430.html

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/05/23/2010-05-23_white_houses_robert_gibbs_delivers_political_punch_to_sarah_palin_over_oil_accus.html

There's more.....

Nearly every day, you will see at least one remark by the President about something the GOP has done. So, I'm not sure how you can "see things differently" if you actually try to see things at all.

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

You'll catch more bees with honey than with vinegar...

I don't.

This is one of them.

(At some risk--) Learn how to own your feelings not dump them. It'll improve your interpersonal relations/communications.

Perhaps you should learn to own your emotions and come to grips with the fact that it's okay to not like someone, and it's equally okay to not be liked by someone. It'll improve your stress levels and your emotional maturity.

Enjoy life!

We now see we 'regular folks' are held in contempt because we are insufficiently grateful for a continuation of Bush's general policies.

The GOP has been pissing on Obama's shoes and Axelrod keeps convincing him that it's raining!

If they were actually slamming and calling out Republican's I would be ok with it.

You are too busy imagining that the WH Press secretary is talking to you when he is calling out well known bloggers and mouth tv personalities.

I do think it's funny that people are saying Obama/Gibbs have a thin skin when these relatively mild comments are sending people into a quasi-murderous rage.

trashing them back when the left was still fighting for them every single day.

Boy wouldn't that have been nice. Instead we got a bunch of cowardly whimpering about bipartisanship and appeasing the right.
Now they haul out the big guns like they want a fight with the left. Good for them. It'll cost them.

what they don't get and start being positive about what they did get accomplished, we could all fight the republicans. Gibbs was right. And the shittiest part is that the "professional left" is living up to the accusation.

Gibbs is now a political liability.

He needs to resign.

I totally agree.

hold my feet to the fire or "make me do it" he was just bullshitting us.

He just said that a few months ago.

You can't have it both ways.

Would unrec if I could.