Patterico's Pontifications

7/2/2008

Greenwald Decries Obama Flip-Flop

Filed under: 2008 Election,General — Patterico @ 5:39 pm



One Glenn Greenwald is livid about Obama’s latest flip-flop:

In the past, Obama has opposed the type of warrantless eavesdropping which those PAA orders authorize. He’s repeatedly said that the FISA court works and there’s no need to authorize eavesdropping without individual warrants. None of that can be reconciled with his current claim that he supports this FISA “compromise” because National Security requires that those PAA orders not expire and that there be massive changes to FISA. It’s just as simple as that.

It’s bad enough that Obama is supporting a new warrantless eavesdropping scheme. They should just candidly admit that he changed his position rather than feeding incoherent and insultingly false rationalizations to the public — whereby they throw around the terms “National Security” and “balance” enough times and hope that nobody notices or cares that what they’re saying makes no sense.

Heh. I’ve rarely so enjoyed reading Greenwald.

In unrelated news, the Orlando Sentinel complains that popcorn is too often stale nowadays.

So, quit whining and make a fresh batch.

61 Responses to “Greenwald Decries Obama Flip-Flop”

  1. One Glenn Greenwald is livid about Obama’s latest flip-flop:

    Just one?

    We aren’t counting his sock-puppets?

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  2. WOW. I’ve been staring at this computer too long. I read that last part as “quit whining you f*ing snatch”

    TLove (4a03a6)

  3. We have an ongoing popcorn joke here, TLove, and I predict it will continue until sometime in November. Maybe even longer, if election history repeats itself.

    DRJ (a0ba79)

  4. If election history repeats itself, some of us not-so-conservative types may end up crazy – Big Brown loving, federal clerk conspiracy touting, riding in the short boat crazy.

    TLove (4a03a6)

  5. riding in the short boat crazy

    Horse. Short horse

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  6. Heh. I think we’ll all go crazy if it happens again.

    DRJ (a0ba79)

  7. no…I said riding IN….

    TLove (4a03a6)

  8. I predict that by november, Obama would have transformed into a hybrid of two extreme view points that it would be difficult to oppose or support him. Just like his skin color, he will be all of that. A black-white, republican, democrat who opposes and defends the war. He will be a pro gun, anti gun righter who favors and opposes the death penalty and supports and fights pro-lifers. A diplomatic and peace loving warmonger who hates to sit down and talk, even though he supports it. He would have completely transformed into everything we want him to be. Obama has something for everyone y’all. This is why you cant but support and oppose him. Whatever your political persuasion, Obama agrees with you. A vote for Obama is a vote for/against yourself. Vote for change we can expect. Obama’08 (or there about…)

    love2008 (1b037c)

  9. I’m waiting for what Ellersberg thinks.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  10. Love2008,

    I think you’re right, and that was very well-stated. The scary thing is that it may work.

    DRJ (a0ba79)

  11. The article links a disillusioned blogger Greenwald describes as a hardcore Obama supporter:

    “As someone who volunteered to the campaign many, many hours and money I could ill afford to give up, all because I trusted that Barack Obama was the one true candidate who was different from all the rest, it is heartbreaking to see that he is indeed just like all the rest. The only change I see coming from Barack Obama now is a change in his attitude towards those of us who worked so hard to help him win the Democratic nomination. It is painfully clear to me that we were used up and are now being hung out to dry.

    I can no longer volunteer my support, nor donate any more of my time or money to Obama’s campaign. I cannot in good conscience support any candidate who could be so cravenly dishonest on such an important matter.”

    Time heals so this supporter may ultimately forgive Obama, but it doesn’t help when he change positions on core Democratic issues.

    DRJ (a0ba79)

  12. #11
    DRJ. That is why I now dont support him anymore even though I used to. Well that was after I didnt before I did. And who knows by tomorrow, I just might. It’s all so confusing…I know. :)

    love2008 (1b037c)

  13. I’ll predict right here where this is going to kill Obama — the under-35 demographic is completely in the tank for him, but they have the worst history in terms of actually showing up at the polls among all age demographics.

    They are also the biggest idealists — and its the idealism that is going to be lost as Obama reveals himself to be a conventional liberal politician who is going to rely on standard campaign tactics to try and win a general election.

    What “good” has happened to Obama since April 1? His campaign was pretty much stagnant against Clinton from April to June, and he pretty much ran out the clock on her with a four-corners offense — losing several primaries along the way.

    The first 4 weeks of the general election campaign have been marked by a variety of position shifts, all of which alienate voters he needs, while enamoring no one in particular — other than the press who are completely in the tank and think elections are all about process.

    FISA — a huge hit to his netroots support. Greenwald and Markos are clear proof of it.

    Gay Marriage — once his flip-flop gains more attention, evangelicals will turn away regardless of his personal piety.

    July 4th may be the “high water” mark of the Obama campaign. Today’s Gallup 3-day rolling tracking poll shows a sudden narrowing to 46-44 — thank you Wesley Clark.

    That mean’s Obama is underperforming the generic ballot by 9 points.

    And the good news for him is what? Andrew Sullivan still thinks he’s brillant?

    wls (c87c04)

  14. “Heh. I’ve rarely so enjoyed reading Greenwald.”

    I’ve always liked reading Greenwald and I agree with him again. And I’ve taken heat for it, here.

    Might very well be a moment of truth for Obama. Let’s hope he makes the right choice.

    No immunity.

    jharp (00ec6a)

  15. And I’ve taken heat for it, here.

    Here? You mean, here? Right here? On the site that was directly responsible for exposing Glenrick Ellersbergenwald as the lying sockpuppet he is, people dare to give you crap for defending that proven liar?

    Say it isn’t so! *back of hand to forehead*

    Why, next they’ll be calling you a moron for defending a talking suit with no legislative, executive or military experience as your personal choice for the most powerful post on the planet….

    (Wait, what?)

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  16. And I’ve taken heat for it, here.

    Here? You mean, here? Right here? On the site that was directly responsible for exposing Glenrick Ellersbergenwald as the lying sockpuppet he is, people dare to give you crap for defending that proven liar?

    I’ve never seen what you refer to.

    Please post a link.

    jharp (00ec6a)

  17. *faloooooosh*gurglumph*

    Dearly beloved, we gather here to say goodbye to what little remnant of credibility harpie had, which he has just flushed.

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  18. How shocking it is if and when some of the idolators wake up to the empty suit. Sure seems like the paultards exhibit more loyalty to the only man who can save America. Haven’t heard much of that crew lately, even though some were still of a mind that nor luap might get the GOP nomination. I wonder how many switched over to Urkel.
    Ok so Obama is moving to the right to win over people out of the far left orbit. You know the far left won’t be voting for McCain. I don’t doubt that Barry will woo some people who watch debates and see youth vs. old geezer. Recall how TV helped the tanned and apparently healthy JFK beat Nixon and his five o’clock shadow. Ok, so the first Richard Daley helped with phantom Chicago votes. Perhaps the son will be likewise helpful to Obama as far as overall voting margins so that if McCain wins electoral college, the dems can complain that Obama whipped McCain vote wise.

    madmax333 (4bbddc)

  19. For comparison … My xecond favorite blog post of all time:

    The Smoking Memo

    aunursa (09c81f)

  20. When Greenwald writes the sequal to his book “Great American Hypocrites” he can use this article as his lead.

    I think he either is coming to the realization that he bought a bill of goods with Obama or he really wanted HillShrillSwallowTheBitterPillary to take the nomination. But then I don’t read him that much; I usually only hit Salon on Sunday so I can check out Opus.

    Icy Truth (e3ea36)

  21. To truly appreciate “The Facts Behind the Greenwald Sock-Puppetry”, you have to read it twice. The first time read it through to the very, very end. And the second time, just read the dialogue of the various sock-puppets.

    aunursa (09c81f)

  22. the dems can complain that Obama whipped McCain vote wise.

    You mean like Hillary whipped Obama?

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  23. Harpster, you are kidding, right?

    Gleen was exposed right on this blog (along with the help of others). I believe there were at least 3 other personas he used to masquerade at the time.

    Of course, now that he’s a popular blogger for the Democrat Party, all is forgiven. It’s only lying if people think they’re lies.

    steve miller (e5eca4)

  24. steve,

    no i m not kidding.

    please share. i’d like to know

    jharp (00ec6a)

  25. Harpie – aunursa posted alink to get you started above.

    daleyrocks (1cc55d)

  26. It’s at my Comment #19

    aunursa (09c81f)

  27. Yes, it’s part of the historic Patterico.

    Gleen is well-known as a sock puppet in the blogosphere.

    steve miller (724340)

  28. no i m not kidding.

    please share. i’d like to know

    No, you wouldn’t. You are deliberately avoiding the link which proves you(r hero) a liar, which is repeated here, just to prove the point. That link is the precise link you have repeatedly lied about by saying you have never seen it.

    That would be THIS LINK RIGHT HERE that you are pretending doesn’t exist, and the fact that you are utterly ignoring THIS LINK after having it shoved up your nose proves that you are either yet another of the sockpuppets (most of which are identified in this link that you are ignoring) or deliberately lying by saying that you have never seen the link that proves Glenn Greenwald is a liar.

    Still pretending to ignorance of this link RIGHT HERE? That says more about your own (utter lack of) credibility than you would care to reveal.

    Say it again, liar. Say you have never seen this link that proves Gigi is a liar. Just for the record.

    Drumwaster (5ccf59)

  29. I think jharp is taking us for a ride because we had the same discussion about Greenwald’s sockpuppets last week on WLS’s thread about John Dean.

    Start with comment 101 and keep reading until you reach comment 119, which includes jharp’s interesting disclaimer.

    DRJ (a0ba79)

  30. I’ve often wondered — after the sockpuppet allegations hit the blogosphere — why Ellers, Ellensburg, Ellison, Ryan, and Wilson never stepped up to the plate to defend Greenwald against the attacks.

    In fact, none of his sockpuppets were ever heard from again.

    aunursa (09c81f)

  31. #23 Drumwaster-
    Yes, Hill did ok with actual votes, but Urkel was better in caucuses (cauci?) and has those “Super” delegates/party elite behind him. Yes, let every vote count, indeed. And now everyone is all united again. Dude sure fadely badly near the end, but I suppose those racists in Pa. and W. Va. just don’t appreciate the incredible Lightworker and fact that 1/16 Black is so beautiful. Hope! Change! Fresh fruit on the table for the Obama brood. Competitive home financing terms!

    madmax333 (8adf34)

  32. How dare you insult Glen Greenwald. Didn’t you know that he is a NY Times best-selling author, and that his writing inspired the NY Times to divulge national security secrets, and his works have been read into the Senate record?

    Good day, sir.

    Thomas Ellers McEllerson (75f5c3)

  33. Isn’t his new book Great American Hypocrites an autobiography?

    daleyrocks (1cc55d)

  34. How shocking it is if and when some of the idolators wake up to the empty suit

    Obama has been catching all sorts of hell for this. The largest group on his networking website, that literally sprang up overnight, is pleading with him to go back and adopt his earlier position. I have a friend that works for his campaign locally and she says they’ve never received so many phone calls, and all of them are angry, upset, or disappointed. Liberal bloggers like Greenwald and Kos aren’t defending him, they’re criticizing him.

    This is the difference between people that vote for Republicans and people that vote for Democrats. George Bush can start torturing people, and all of a sudden torture is okay by the Republican base. Same thing with warrantless wiretaps. Same thing with leading the country into a mind-numbingly stupid war. Same thing with out-of-control spending and government expansion. When a Republican politician does something, no matter what it is, the base scurries to incorporate that into the platform.

    I cannot understand why Obama would do this. I am thoroughly pissed off at him for it and my enthusiasm for his campaign has been entirely extinguished. That doesn’t mean that Republicans were right about Obama all along, far from it. You’ve all been jumping up and down over non-issues, flag pins and reverends and wives and such, none of which have made any sort of sense or mattered in the slightest. Even so far in this thread, you aren’t criticizing him for his total reversal on the issue, nor for his betrayal of his base, you’re just making fun of Glenn Greenwald. So let’s save all of the ‘I told you so’s,’ because you weren’t right about him and you still aren’t. Liberals are good at recognizing when a Democrat turns into a scoundrel, Republicans don’t know what the difference between liberals and Democrats is.

    Because all of you are stupid.

    Levi (74ca1f)

  35. 34, Levi, Democrats and Liberals still support scoundrels once identified. Obama being the latest in a long line of corrupt Democrats from the Daley Machine.

    PCD (5c49b0)

  36. 34, Levi, Democrats and Liberals still support scoundrels once identified. Obama being the latest in a long line of corrupt Democrats from the Daley Machine.

    What would you have us do, vote for McCain?

    Levi (74ca1f)

  37. “When a Republican politician does something, no matter what it is, the base scurries to incorporate that into the platform.”

    Levi – Does you even remember the grass roots revolt against Bush and McCain’s comprehensive immigration reform from last summer? That’s a perfect recent example which disproves your ridiculous frothings.

    daleyrocks (1cc55d)

  38. “Republicans don’t know what the difference between liberals and Democrats is.”

    Please inform us boy genius, because we are stupid, we is.

    daleyrocks (1cc55d)

  39. Because all of you are stupid.

    I must run to my room and cry. Oh, the horror.

    JD (75f5c3)

  40. “Liberals are good at recognizing when a Democrat turns into a scoundrel”

    You might be right because they get so much practice. The problem is that after recognizing someone has turned into a scoundrel, they become just another run of the mill liberal politician.

    daleyrocks (1cc55d)

  41. “What would you have us do, vote for McCain?”

    If you feel so compelled by Obama’s betrayals and flip flops, feel free. It still is a free country, in spite of your rantings to the contrary.

    daleyrocks (1cc55d)

  42. Levi – Does you even remember the grass roots revolt against Bush and McCain’s comprehensive immigration reform from last summer? That’s a perfect recent example which disproves your ridiculous frothings.

    Oh yeah, that’s right. You guys broke with Bush on exactly two things: Immigration and Harriet Miers. My apologies.

    Now why don’t we see what you have accommodated and enthusiastically incorporated into your platform? Torture? Check. Unprecedented fiscal irresponsibility? Check. Not catching bin Laden? Check. Invading the wrong country? Check. Not planning for an occupation or resistance and getting thousands of Americans and innocent Iraqis killed? Check. Allowing gas prices to sky-rocket? Check. Warrantless wiretaps? Check. Recklessly expanding the size and power of the federal government? Check. Violating laws and the Constitution? Check.

    Yeah that immigration spat really stands out between all of those!

    Levi (74ca1f)

  43. If you feel so compelled by Obama’s betrayals and flip flops, feel free. It still is a free country, in spite of your rantings to the contrary.

    Yeah, no thanks. Obama might have reversed himself on this one issue, but John McCain can’t even keep it consistent from week to week.

    Levi (74ca1f)

  44. Amusing how many of the complete myths you’ve already had your butt spanked on, you keep repeating there, Levi.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  45. “…Obama might have reversed himself on this one issue …” and with that you show just how dishonest you are, Levi.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  46. Now why don’t we see what you have accommodated and enthusiastically incorporated into your platform? Torture? Check. Unprecedented fiscal irresponsibility? Check. Not catching bin Laden? Check. Invading the wrong country? Check. Not planning for an occupation or resistance and getting thousands of Americans and innocent Iraqis killed? Check. Allowing gas prices to sky-rocket? Check. Warrantless wiretaps? Check. Recklessly expanding the size and power of the federal government? Check. Violating laws and the Constitution? Check.

    Levi – Why don’t you tell evebody which one of the above were put to a vote of the people or Congress and which ones the Dems were on boad for out of honesty – or is honesty too painful for you? Full meme ahead!!!!!

    daleyrocks (1cc55d)

  47. 36, Levi, what would I have YOU do? YOU I would leave on a non-functioning farm in Zimbabwe. The rest of the Obama supporters I would demand they be honest and vote for Karl Marx in a write in.

    You Democrats vote for the dead. Why not vote for a Dead guy you all revere?

    PCD (5c49b0)

  48. You guys broke with Bush on exactly two things

    Care to back that up? Those are the only things we have ever disagreed with Chimpy McHitlerburton on?

    Torture? Check. Unprecedented fiscal irresponsibility? Check. Not catching bin Laden? Check. Invading the wrong country? Check. Not planning for an occupation or resistance and getting thousands of Americans and innocent Iraqis killed? Check. Allowing gas prices to sky-rocket? Check. Warrantless wiretaps? Check. Recklessly expanding the size and power of the federal government? Check. Violating laws and the Constitution? Check.

    Do you never tire of telling overt and intentional lies?

    Baracky reversed himself on just one issue? One?! You sure about that? How about same sex marriage? Iraq? His church? His mentor? His grandma? Jeffrey Johnson? NAFTA? Guns? Good Allah, the list practically writes itself.

    JD (75f5c3)

  49. Joe Lieberman consistently takes the liberal side of political issues. He’s “pro-choice”, supports affirmative action, supports embryonic stem-cell research, supports measures to fight global warming, opposes a same-sex marriage ban, and his voting record received an “F” from the NRA. But he dared to disagree with the Left on the Iraq war and was run out of the Democratic Party. I don’t think the left side of the political spectrum is in position to criticize Republicans or conservative for political allegience.

    aunursa (09c81f)

  50. Let’s stay focused on the flip-flops of Baracky. He’s the one that touts himself as smarter than the rest of us. Someone that smart sure must know enough to take a consistent position. If he keeps changing his mind, over and over again, because he gets new information – doesn’t that say something about his inability to recognize that he doesn’t have all the facts & must withhold from taking a position? Someone who takes a position in ignorance over and over again doesn’t come across as smart. That comes across as “I’m much smarter than you.”

    Baracky makes John Kerry the Rock of Gibraltar of consistency.

    “Baracky: Change you can believe in, because I change my mind daily. Or oftener, if it polls well.”

    steve miller (0fb51f)

  51. Including that pesky flag pin, which he lowered himself to wear for his Fortune cover.

    Baracky reversed himself on just one issue? One?! You sure about that? How about same sex marriage? Iraq? His church? His mentor? His grandma? Jeffrey Johnson? NAFTA? Guns? Good Allah, the list practically writes itself.

    Also, aren’t we supposed to avoid discussing his obnoxious better half? IIR, Barry issued an order not to discuss the little fireball.

    Vermont Neighbor (31ccb6)

  52. Baracky “I support whatever makes me look good” Obama: Change you can believe in – until he changes his mind. Again.

    steve miller (0fb51f)

  53. From “Change We Can Believe In”* to “Change Nobody Could Possibly Believe” to “Change? Got Any Spare Change? I Ran For President Once Ya Know.”

    That’s okay though. He’s now secured a future career as the singer for a J. Geils Band cover band (“Do the flip, do the flop; piss on the wall”).

    *(has anyone in the media ever dinged him for ending that phrase with a preposition?)

    Icy Truth (f5c7ef)

  54. Predictable as hell. Every time Greenwald nails our idiot president and his drooling yet obedient little right wing monkeys to the wall with facts, they can do little but yell “Sockpuppet”, as if their fantasy surrounding that is some kind of defense or counterargument.

    Right wingers – they just aren’t very bright.

    That, and they are so afraid of the Muslim boogeyman that they are all getting in line to embrace an America where an individuals expectation of privacy is taken as having “something to hide”.

    Wow, what colossal chickenshits!

    But don’t worry, the dirty f’n hippies are here to save you and what is left of the constitution.

    Pontificoot (17c6d7)

  55. Pontificoot, more predictable are the absence of intelligent discussion instead of a stream of incoherent insults from the Greenwald cultists.

    By the way, can you recite the Four Pillars of Greatness?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  56. GG-” …The very people who are doing this and justifying it are the same ones who spent the last seven years either meekly submitting to or actively enabling the whole radical litany of Bush war-making and law-breaking. Despite that, these people — the same ones who cheered on the most unpopular President in modern American history and one of the most disastrous, hated wars and the whole range of radical, un-American measures of the last seven years — are insisting that they are the mainstream “centrists,” and that that those who merely favor the preservation of this long-standing FISA framework to protect our core constitutional liberties are the “radicals” — Far Leftist radicals who believe in such extremist and discredited doctrines as the Fourth Amendment, judicial warrants, and the rule of law. Those are the rotted premises that have produced the political climate of the last seven years and which have led us to the Senate vote next week.”

    Fits the fuckhead right-wingers on this thread to a TEE.

    Pontificoot (17c6d7)

  57. So you can recite the Four Pillars of Greatness? Certainly you show the other characteristics of a Greenwald sockpuppet.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  58. Did Gleen write that himself, or did someone write it for him? He has a history of faking support for himself; I wouldn’t be surprised if someone else wrote those words for him.

    steve miller (724340)

  59. It’s common knowledge that Gleen hides behind sockpuppets.

    steve miller (724340)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3818 secs.