Hey, Barack: FUCK YOU!

I am so fucking pissed off right now, my eyes are crossing. Alicia at Last Left B4 Hooterville posted a quote from an Obama speech last week to supporters in Austin, Texas:

“Oh, he’s liberal,” he said. “He’s liberal. Let me tell you something. There’s nothing liberal about wanting to reduce money in politics that is common sense. There’s nothing liberal about wanting to make sure [our soldiers] are treated properly when they come home. There’s nothing liberal about wanting to make sure that everybody has healthcare, but we are spending more on healthcare in this country than any other advanced country. We got more uninsured. There’s nothing liberal about saying that doesn’t make sense, and we should do something smarter with our health care system. Don’t let them run that okie doke on you!”

Hey, Barack, you fucking asshole: Those things are liberal. Liberal is good! Liberal is smart! Liberal means treating citizens like goddamn human beings, and not like fucking tools in some wackaloon right-wing imperialist scheme to enrich the rich, kill the poor, and enslave the middle class.

I am beyond enraged (but, sadly, not really surprised) that this shit even needs to be explained to a man who is likely to become the Democratic nominee for President, after decades of conservative destruction of everything that is decent and wholesome in the world. Listen motherfucker: The citizens of this country are sick and tired of conservatism. They want a return to the liberal political principles that this country was founded on.

The United States exists because some really smart courageous motherfuckers back in the late 18th Century had had enough of the conservative policies of King George. No one put it better than Steve Gilliard:

You know, I’ve studied history, I’ve read about America and you know something, if it weren’t for liberals, we’d be living in a dark, evil country, far worse than anything Bush could conjure up. A world where children were told to piss on the side of the road because they weren’t fit to pee in a white outhouse, where women had to get back alley abortions and where rape was a joke, unless the alleged criminal was black, whereupon he was hung from a tree and castrated.

If it weren’t for fighting liberals like Franklin, Washington, Jefferson, Madison, and others, instead of being an independent Constitutional Republic, we’d be fucking Bermuda. (Yeah, I know that’s hyperbolic, but PhysioProf is fucking angry!)

It’s the sick-fuck pathological scum-sucking right-wing demagogues and their toadies who hate this country and the liberal principles it was founded upon who have demonized the word “liberal”, and somehow turned the depraved inhuman concept of “conservatism” into something credible. Conservatism is about pain, fear, poverty, misery, ignorance, suffering, and vice. Liberalism is about joy, courage, comfort, knowledge, and integrity.

Sometimes Obama gets this kind of shit right, like when he told those depraved vicious right-winger pieces of shit who the real patriots are: not those who prance around shoving their made-in-China two-dollar flag pins and yellow ribbons in our faces, but those who work tirelessly to protect our nation from the pathological schemes of rapacious conservative shitmongers.

The right thing for Obama to have done in Austin was to say: “You’re damn fucking right I’m a liberal, and so were Washington, Franklin, Madison, Jefferson. This country was founded on liberal principles, and for good reason, and the right-wing program to smear liberalism must be repudiated for the ahistorical inhuman sewage that it is.” (Hey, Obama! You were talking to people in fucking Austin, not bumfuck Idaho, you dipshit moron!)

Back to Gilliard:

It is time to stop looking for an accomodation with the right. They want none for us. They want to win, at any price. So, you have a choice: be a fighting liberal or sit quietly. I know what I am, what are you?

What is Obama, and who the fuck does he think he is impressing with his “nothing liberal” swill? And does he even give one single flying fuck about the large numbers of liberal-identifying American voters who haven’t drunk the goddamn motherfucking right-wing koolaid?

UPDATE: Alicia gave me a link to a news article in which the Obama quote appears:


  1. says

    PhysioProf – What he was saying is that these things aren’t JUST ONLY liberal because they’re just plain old good common sense… and rather normal. He was doing an in your face mofo to the idjits that call anything that is against george bush “librul” in answer to the pundits and such. Here’s the youtube of it, in context:

    Everything the pundits and the regular idjits call “librul” is anything a hair the left of extreme right conservatism. Even moderates are “filthy libruls” according to them.

    Basically, he’s saying “Librul” is not what Liberals are about. He’s saying its not the dirty word those crazy righties would have them believe it is. Least that’s my take away.

    Oh yes, Nice to see Physiowife here :-) Very nice! And thanks for the Steve dose, that is his best. I AM a fighting liberal!

    Jes my take :-)

  2. says

    In the article:
    “Bill Burton, his national campaign spokesman, suggests that Obama isn’t rejecting liberalism so much as labeling.

    “I think he’s been pretty clear on this, as he’s laid out from his ’04 convention speech until now, that these attempts to divide Americans by these old labels are counterproductive,” he said. “There may be people on the left side of the spectrum and people on the right side of the spectrum, but they all want to change America.”

    I just read that and, to me, the rejection of the labeling is what appeals to so many. I think people are tired of the confines of living only to their assigned labels. Now, if Obama was speechifying or had positions that supported the status quo, I’d feel differently about supporting him.

    We really have to break the insane cycle of bush/clinton/bush/clinton. Have to do it.

  3. says

    OK, so I was writing a fine ol’ rant, got interrupted and now MyrtleJune has summed up the essence of my point. But my rant went a bit further and just for the hell of it I’m gonna leave it be….incomplete….but the moment’s passed now.
    Wow. Hillary completely fucks up for months and all she’s guilty of is “listening to bad advice”. Barack spins/panders what is essentially “nothing exclusively liberal” to “nothing liberal” so as to win in dumbfuck conservative states (not just now, but possibly when he’s running against McCain) and suddenly he’s a fucking traitor? I am not happy about what he said and how he said it, but it is first really apparent fuckup—and that too only to hardcore liberals; and yeah I should fuckin know. How come he doesn’t get any benefit of doubt? I think he’s just playing the game. Hillary’s in it to win it she said. Barack’s seeing it as gotta win it to be in it–not the election but the change he keeps yakking about.
    As I watch 60 minutes right now, Hillary seems to be so graceful and charming and smart…..why the fuck can’t she work the campaign that way? If she let a bunch of consultants (Bobs) fuck up her campaign what’s to say she wont turn into a goddamn Lumbergh if she gets the office?
    I like Hillary and have been pulling desperately for her….but her ineptitude and even crassness have disappointed me so far. And at the same time, I find it troubling that Obama is held to some higher standard. If he drones on in details he’ll be killed like Kerry. If he makes it smart and pithy, he’s just a talker? I mean, when the fuck has Hillary constantly out-detailed him on anything, especially in the public forums that they have shared? What, you guys are gonna fall for the labels too?

  4. says

    I understand exactly what he’s doing. I vehemently disagree with it on principled and pragmatic grounds.

    If he continues with this electoral strategy, wins the nomination, and wins the general election, he is going to owe too much to too many who do not share my values. And I believe that he does not need to tack to the center and be “inclusive” towards those on the right.

    Liberals currently have an opportunity to, rather than just “include” conservatives who can’t close their eyes to the current conservative-born clusterfuck, actually convince them that what is best for them and their families is unabashed liberalism.

    If Reagan is such an inspiration to Obama, then how come he is ignoring the fact that rather than disavow conservatism to “include” Democrats, he rather convinced them that they “liberalism” didn’t represent their values, and conservatism did. This enabled long-term electoral success for Republicans, long beyond Reagan’s presidency.

    Obama has the opportunity to do the same thing in reverse. If he convinces former conservatives that it is liberalism that really represents their values, then he can create electoral advantage for Democrats that lasts a generation. By disavowing “liberalism”–even if he is also disavowing “conservatism”–he is turning this into a referendum on him as a particular individual that will not live beyond his presidency.

    Of course, he may understand all of this, and be doing what he is doing with full knowledge of, and desire for, these possible consequences.

  5. says

    And by the way, what I am saying has nothing to do with Obama versus Clinton. I considered the two of them indistinguishable enough that I didn’t even vote in the primary in my state given the previous demise of any of the candidates I had a true preference for. And believe me, I will vote for whoever the Dem nominee is, even if it’s some dog catcher from Nebraska they pull out at the convention to break a deadlock.

  6. says

    —“If he continues with this electoral strategy, wins the nomination, and wins the general election, he is going to owe too much to too many who do not share my values”—
    Its kinda late for that PP; any serious candidate is raising tens of millions of dollars a month. Each one owes too much to too many. At this point one can only hope that a good guy/gal gets into office and then does the right thing. The ideal path, ‘doing the right thing and getting into office’, is a fantasy today. I think it is impossible to be labeled a hard-core liberal and win. So one has to hope that at the end of the road, the winner turns out to be a hard-core liberal; and that he/she can slowly but surely demonstrate that liberalism is the only way of hope. Beating people over the heads with it—especially conservatives, who don’t think like liberals or at all for that matter—will be counterproductive. Reagan had the advantage that he was ‘converting’ an open-minded section of the populace—one that was willing to consider an alternative point of view. Our liberal candidate does not have that luxury–he/she has to approach it more like educating a stubborn and petulant child.
    So, again, don’t hate the player, hate the game.

  7. says

    And yeah, don’t knock the dog-catcher from Nebraska idea. I have made the acquaintance of a feral-pig-catcher from Nebraska and he’d make a pretty decent president! Actually, come to think of it, given the number of feral pigs in congress, he’d make a freakin great president.

  8. says

    Reagan had the advantage that he was ‘converting’ an open-minded section of the populace—one that was willing to consider an alternative point of view. Our liberal candidate does not have that luxury–he/she has to approach it more like educating a stubborn and petulant child.

    This is a complete load of fucking horseshit. Other than the completely fucking insane 27%ers–who I think we can agree are beyond any possible redemption, will follow their conservative authoritarian leaders into the fires of hell spitting all the while about how Obama is a communist, fascist, Islamic, Hitler, and are not worth engaging at all in electoral politics–many Republican voters are ripe for being convinced that they are actually liberals.

    BTW, I have no idea what a “hard-core liberal” is, other than some fantastical creation of the conservative propaganda machine. The point is that we are living in a uniquely teachable moment, one that has not occurred in a generation, where a Democratic candidate has the opportunity to remind people that all of the values and attributes of the United States that we consider good are liberal.

    BTW, I don’t “hate” Obama. I am disappointed that he seems to be forgoing this once-in-a-generation opportunity. And I am angry that he decided to piss on my leg while doing it.

    You and other apologists who–whenever Democrats piss on their unabashedly liberal base and try to convince right-wingers that Democrats really are just like them–say that this is just the kind of shit that Democrats need to do to get elected, and that progressive Democrats who take umbrage are political naifs, are buying in to anti-progressive right-wing sick-fuck propaganda specifically designed to keep Democrats out of power and to keep Republicans in power.

    Keep it up if you want, but I am going to continue calling it as I see it. The issue is not that I–and others–don’t understand how things work. The issue is that I disagree about what the fuck to do about it.

  9. says

    —“many Republican voters are ripe for being convinced that they are actually liberals”—
    Given what ‘Republican’ has meant for the past 28 years, I have my doubts. But I do hope you are correct, and I will be glad to be proven wrong on that.

    And I take back the ‘hard-core liberal’ crap; I see that it is idiotic. I don’t know how I let such qualifiers seep into my mind when thinking of liberalism. The term liberal is good enough.

  10. says

    I don’t know how I let such qualifiers seep into my mind when thinking of liberalism.

    Sick-fuck Republican scumbags and their craven scrotum-licking sycophants in the mainstream media are extremely good at their political ratfuckery.

  11. the real cmf says

    re: “decades of conservative destruction of everything that is decent and wholesome in the world,”

    I think he is combatting the form of proto-fascist,quasi conservative anti-male liberalism that his opponent Hillaryious has espoused for the last 35 years–you know, that kinder, gentler fascism that funds more police, builds prisons for lower income males, and offers all the jobs to women who put the baby before the bassinet–much to the demise of freedom, and civil liberties, and male votes.

  12. says

    Hey PhysioProf,

    I disagree with Obama’s chant of unity, BUT I’D RATHER SAW OFF MY LEFT ARM THEN VOTE FOR ANYONE WHO ENABLED THE IRAQ WAR. I want blood. And I want everyone who caved in to the Republicans to suffer. It’s time that Dems feared liberals, but right now all they fear is looking “weak”. I want this election to set a precident – cave in to crazy warmongers and you will suffer. Direct your curse at the appropriate target, the one that caused thousands of deaths and trillions of wasted dollars.

  13. says

    um…does somebody need a hug?

    This is bog-standard politics, mate, so I don’t know just what you’re on about. Besides, polarizing rhetoric just leads to more shouting and cursing, and that is the fastest way to turn someone off your message, whatever it is.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *