The Kook Left Raises its Banner

From the Washington Times:

President Obama’s smooth path to the Democratic nomination may have gotten rockier Monday, after a group of liberal leaders, including former presidential candidate Ralph Nader, announced plans to challenge the incumbent in primaries next year.

The group said the goal is to offer up a handful of candidates from various fields and areas where the president either has failed to stake out a “progressive” position or where he has “drifted toward the corporatist right.”

“Without debates by challengers inside the Democratic Party’s presidential primaries, the liberal/majoritarian agenda will be muted and ignored,” Mr. Nader said in a news release. “The one-man Democratic primaries will be dull, repetitive, and draining of both voter enthusiasm and real bright lines between the two parties that excite voters.”…

For some, this is just a chance to be extra-pure liberals…Obama hasn’t toed an entirely socialist line (ie, he hasn’t instituted a dictatorship and simply enforced socialism, law and constitution be hanged), and so they are going to prove to themselves that they are true blue.  On the other hand, there are cynics who know that if there is a kook left challenger to Obama it will allow Obama to shift right and still hold the base.

Unless someone like Hillary breaks ranks, none of this will amount to much.  The Democrat machine will ensure overwhelming Obama victories in the primaries and caucuses but the fact of kookism on the march will allow Obama to position himself in what he (and his MSM sycophants) will call the center…able to point right and left and say, “I’m the one who has a reasonable, balanced approach”.

It won’t work, of course…the kook left won’t be able to gain traction and neither will Obama ever appear reasonable.  People have tuned him out – no one is terribly interested in what he has to say.  We’ve got a long, miserable road to travel to get rid of Obama…all through it will seem as though Obama is doing this, that or the other thing.  But, in the end, the race will resolve itself upon the Reagan Question:  are you better off than you were four years ago?  If the answer is “no” for a majority, then Obama will be beaten.  Kook left challenges and attempts to appear centrist won’t matter at all, in the end.


28 thoughts on “The Kook Left Raises its Banner

  1. Amazona September 19, 2011 / 6:11 pm

    Just curious about what, exactly, is a “liberal/majoritarian agenda”.

    The Rabidly Radical Left is notoriously vague and nonspecific about its terms and definitions, but perhaps this one can be explained in a little more detail. What happens when the majority is conservative?

    Of course when a movement’s members are as ignorant of their own definitions and terms as they are about their opponents, it’s hard to get specific about much of anything.

    On another post, Bodie has gone into raptures over alleged “right-wing lunacy” and “right-wing bilge” but when pressed to explain or define terms he and watson do nothing but squeal about the irrelevance of having an actual understood political philosophy. I think they are probably pretty typical of much of the RRL, ignorant but not allowing ignorance to interfere with hatred and bigotry. I’m betting that Bodie cannot come up with a single actual “right-wing” policy that he can accurately define and then explain as either “bilge” or “lunacy”.

    • Mark Edward Noonan September 19, 2011 / 6:22 pm


      Nader is convinced that his brand of liberalism is supported by the majority – all Obama has to do is enact the Kook Left agenda (by law or by fiat, regardless) and the majority will back him against all comers. Nader is nuts, but that doesn’t alter the facts of what he believes. In a certain sense, he is at least honest and sincere about this…and my bet is that he’s being used by others in a cynical ploy to help Obama. Nader also, I believe, doesn’t suspect the moral depravity you’ll find among people who hold there is no absolute truth.

      • David September 19, 2011 / 8:43 pm

        Moral depravity? What are you talking about?

    • Bodie September 19, 2011 / 8:16 pm

      You believe that Obama is a hardcore socialist who is enamored of Marxism, do you not, Amazona?

      You believe that anybody who disagrees with any aspect of conservatism is a “de facto socialist,” do you not, Amazona?

      Man, I hope you never gain self-awareness. Thankfully, the chances of you doing so are so low as to be functionally nonexistent, so your hysterical, overwrought screech of response will bring the usual heapin’ helpin’ of unintentional comedy.

      This is the latest in a series of threads where it has been obvious that Bodie has no intention of participating in a discussion but is interested only in posting hostile and insulting comments. From this point on such posts will be deleted. The intent of this blog is to provide a forum for political discussion. // Moderator

      • Amazona September 19, 2011 / 11:51 pm

        And there goes Bodie on yet another tangent unrelated to reality.

        I believe that Obama has repeatedly used Marxist terminology to explain his personal beliefs. There is no way to know if he speaks the truth when he does so.

        As you clearly have no idea whatsoever of what “conservatism” IS, there is no way to answer your question, as you could be using the word as inaccurately as you have in the past. You can’t even define Liberalism, the political model you apparently admire and support through your mindless attacks on its opposition.

        Why don’t you define the terms for us, so there is some way to know what you are talking about?

        As for “comedy”, your high-pitched titters have often echoed throughout the blog, but as yet no one but you has been able to find anything funny in your delusions of humor and importance.

        BTW, do you intend to ever offer an idea or are you quite content with just being a snotty little insult machine?

      • Bodie September 20, 2011 / 10:48 am

        You asked, Amazona. Don’t ask questions if you don’t want to hear the answers.

      • Amazona September 20, 2011 / 6:51 pm

        Yes, I did ask, and no, I never did get an answer. You are either too cowardly to admit to a seriously held belief, or you have no seriously held belief beyond that of finding yourself and your snarls quite amusing.

        Not that the two are mutually exclusive……based on your posts you are quite capable of being a moral and intellectual coward who has no real political compass other than enjoying mindless attacks on invented Others.

      • Bodie September 20, 2011 / 8:23 pm

        You asked for examples of the ridiculous right-wing bilge in which you are steeped; I provided two of the most obvious ones–one of which you agreed was accurate (the other of which you didn’t even bother denying). Do you really not understand this? Are you turning into tiredoflibbs or something?

    • Amazona September 19, 2011 / 11:53 pm

      I’m betting that Bodie cannot come up with a single actual “right-wing” policy that he can accurately define and then explain as either “bilge” or “lunacy”.

      The bet is still on, with the odds in my favor mounting with each Bodie post which refuses to address the questions.

  2. casper September 19, 2011 / 7:46 pm

    Nader doesn’t have credibility with anyone these days. No one serious is going to primary Obama.

    • neocon1 September 19, 2011 / 7:50 pm

      wanna bet?

    • Mark Edward Noonan September 20, 2011 / 12:07 am


      Not on Nader’s say so…but there is a growing sentiment for a primary challenge to Obama. If we tip over in to full scale recession, who can say what will happen? But this is just Nader being Nader…and, as I suspect, be used by people who want a far left contrast to Obama heading in to 2012.

  3. David September 19, 2011 / 9:19 pm

    Your arguments might get more traction if you didn’t call people “kooks” or suggest that they want the US to be a dictatorship.

    • Amazona September 19, 2011 / 11:55 pm

      And your arguments might get more traction if they are not based on blatant lies, such as your claim that poor Tim DeChristopher was merely “participating in a land auction” when in fact he was sabotaging it, after filing false statements.

      • David September 20, 2011 / 12:01 am

        I think we’ll have to agree to disagree on that one.

      • Amazona September 20, 2011 / 6:57 pm

        Well, “disagree” all you like, deChristopher was found guilty on two counts of federal crimes and you misstated his actions as mere “participation” in a lease auction. Deny that all you want, “disagree” all you want, but three things are indisputable.

        1. He admitted to the crimes
        2. You lied when you said he merely “participated” when in fact he sabotaged the auction
        3. You defend his actions, which means you find it acceptable to break the law if it is in pursuit of something you find desirable.

        Much as Mrs. Bill Ayers did, as only one example, when she set bombs that killed people. It’s all just Moral Relativity, in which some people set themselves above the law and announce that they have the only authority to determine right and wrong. I guess someone like you would characterize Ms. Dorhn-Ayers as merely “participating” in an action, or some such weasel-worded nonsense.

      • David September 20, 2011 / 8:56 pm

        1. Did I say he didn’t?

        2. As I understand it, he went into the auction and bid on government parcels of land. Isn’t that how one participates in an auction?

        3. Have I defended him? I believe said Obama cracked down on whistleblowers and activists, meaning he got an exceptionally harsh prison term for his crimes. It was 10 years if I’m not mistaken. According to Wikipedia, that’s 1.8 years shy of the average rapist’s sentence.

        Regarding setting off bombs… I’ve never endorsed violence of any kind. I’m not sure where you’re coming from with that.

    • Mark Edward Noonan September 20, 2011 / 12:06 am


      I call ’em as I see ’em…

      • David September 20, 2011 / 12:14 am

        Fair enough 🙂

        But I think you might be exaggerating in this case.

      • neocon1 September 20, 2011 / 7:55 am

        Moral depravity? What are you talking about?

        bwany fwank, slic willy, janet reno, hillary…and half the donk party including barry and larry.

      • neocon1 September 20, 2011 / 8:16 am

        In 1778 Thomas Jefferson wrote a law in Virginia which contained a punishment of castration for men who engage in sodomy,[1] however, what was intended by Jefferson as a liberalization of the sodomy laws in Virginia at that time was rejected by the Virginia Legislature, which continued to prescribe death as the maximum penalty for the crime of sodomy in that state.[2]

        Prior to 1962, sodomy was a felony in every state, punished by a lengthy term of imprisonment and/or hard labor. In that year, the Model Penal Code (MPC) — developed by the American Law Institute to promote uniformity among the states as they modernized their statutes — struck a compromise that removed consensual sodomy from its criminal code while making it a crime to solicit for sodomy.

  4. Rightlane September 20, 2011 / 9:28 am

    We’ve got a long, miserable road to travel to get rid of Obama…

    No, just a little over 16 months and a two block drive to vote! 🙂

  5. Sunny September 20, 2011 / 10:04 am

    “For some, this is just a chance to be extra-pure liberals…Obama hasn’t toed an entirely socialist line (ie, he hasn’t instituted a dictatorship and simply enforced socialism, law and constitution be hanged), . . .” Mark Edward Noonan

    Really Mark? Instituted a dictatorship and simply enforced socialist bla bla bla???? That is one of more inane statement you have posted, and believe me, you have posted some truly inane statements about President Obama. I never cease to be amazed that for a reasonably intelligent man, who does read, who has a strong Christian faith and yet writes something so far out there that one has to question your dedication to the real truth. It is one thing to dislike the political policies of a president, but the constant degregation of a person based on what appears to be just pure hatred. You are not Neo – and I for one expect more honesty on your part. He is a true bigot and not too bright, so no one is ever surprised by his constant spewing of hate. Please stop – it makes you look desperate and weak.

    • Luckee September 20, 2011 / 11:13 am

      Sunny, Mark said Obama did NOT institute a dictatorship. You might be right about him if he said Obama instituted a dictatorship but since that is not what he said I don’t know what you are talking about.

      I do not see any personal animosity toward the president in Mark’s posts, he always talks about policy and actions and never about personality or hatred. You say yourself it is OK to dislike the political policies of a president but when someone does this you claim it is personal hatred and not just policies. But when you talk about Obama you talk about personal feelings about him, about him being a good father and so on. I think maybe you are the one putting emotion into things and not Mark.

    • Mark Edward Noonan September 20, 2011 / 1:04 pm


      Its not Obama trying to impose a dictatorship, but the not-so-secret wish of the far left is that he would. All that bit about law and the Constitution and the rights of the people…so tiresome, you know? And, anyways, since liberalism is true and beautiful, why not just impose it by fiat? Do those knuckle-dragging, flat-earth, bitter-clingers some good, wouldn’t it? Part of the disappointment of the far left is that Obama hasn’t done more…that he hasn’t fought hard enough. But given the absolute control the Democrats has over the process from January of 2009 until January of 2011, what more could they have done? Only by dictatorship…

      • Bodie September 21, 2011 / 11:14 am

        “the not-so-secret wish of the far left is that he would.”

        And your proof of this is…?

    • neocon1 September 20, 2011 / 2:38 pm


      I hare murder
      I hate abortion
      I hate theft
      I hate rape
      I hate adultry
      I hate sloth
      I hate sodomy
      I hate sin
      I hate marxism
      I hate the murderous cult of islam
      since most of those are covered in the ten commandments and the rest in the Christian bible I stand firmly by my beliefs.
      If you stand for them then you are my enemy.
      Obama and you donks stand for 99% of my list.

      • neocon1 September 20, 2011 / 4:10 pm

        Yup Kooks….yet smart ones NO KKKoran ripping.

        Calif. Atheists Rip Up Bible Verses During Anti-Christian Beach Protest

Comments are closed.