Follow the Meme

Yes, I noticed the word "narcissist" plastered all over the place. So now obama is a muslim socialist narcissist? Every new day the Reps give us a new reason to turn our backs on them. I am getting so sick and tired of the Republican party and their every attempt to insult and illegitimize Obama. They top this behavior off by trying to force Glenn Beck down our throats. Oh yeah, I also forgot that Obama is a racist. I really can't keep their attacks straight anymore.

I read both the Will and Benen articles earlier, and listened to both MO's and BO's speeches yesterday. I think this is a situation where both sides have some merit. George Will seemed really nitpicky and he went out of his way to find things to complain about. I didn't think BO's speech was that bad although I think he could have talked more directly about what Chicago had to offer instead of the "One World" stuff.

Michelle Obama's speech on the other hand was terrible. Her delivery was reminiscent of Al Gore's lecturing tone, and the content really didn't make sense. She essentially was saying there should be an Olympics in Chicago because she used to live there and it's what her father would want. Her father taught her to throw a ball and a mean right hook? Who cares?

I don't think the Obamas had much to do with Chicago's failing to get the games but they didn't do much to help their chances either.

I guess that you haven't read TNR very much. There are not too many 'Reps' over there but, that wouldn't fit the narrative.

I just made my first visit...saw the editors and bailed.

Yes, I am sure the Left would have been respectful and expressed heartfelt grief and sympathy for George Bush had he flown at the last second to shill for Dallas to be the host city of the Olympics, only to have them be the first city eliminated. They would have credited him for a game effort and for doing his best, and certainly would not have mocked him or made any snide remarks at his expense.

Ahh...kindergarten logic, except the "well he did it too!" is more of a "well he would have done it too!". Yes, I am sure a fringe on the left would have been happy....but seeing how the far left hates America, it wouldn't be as hypocritical as the far right celebrating like they did....in real life...not hypothetical land

What a strange way to frame the discussion, AR. Between "expressing heartfelt grief and sympathy" and plastering "He Lost! He Lost! Cheers erupt in the Weekly Standard office!" on the front page of a leading conservative publication, there is a difference roughly as deep as the Marianas Trench.

No, no, no. Elrod made the 'they did it, too' defense legit again, so by inference, the 'they would have done it too' is in play as well.

Make me laugh more by pretending the Left wouldn't have been just as bad. the difference is it would have happened in the lead stories of NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, the LA Times, the NYT, Time, Newsweek, ad nauseum.

It's OK. I think Olympic athletes and fans get it. Republicans take glee in America failing. Take a look at the comments here before Chicago lost. On the right it was all about "Obama should stay at his desk" "Chicago is corrupt" and "the games are a big money loser."

Republicans stood up and shrieked against America hosting the games. Way to go.

Note, I'm not bitter about it. I take glee with every demographic the GOP alienates. This is as easy as fishing in a barrel for Obama. He does something that most Americans would like, or a significant number of them, the GOP predictably falls all over itself trashing the effort.

Go ahead and laugh, then. Split your sides laughing. You're excusing the right's celebration, which happened and is still happening, by saying the left "would have done" the same thing? If the left actually HAD done the same thing at some point in the past, that would be one thing. But you're telling me I'm pretending that something wouldn't have happened when in reality it didn't happen? I mean, how could I even do that, even if I wanted to? How do you pretend that something that didn't happen wouldn't have happened? I mean, what is THAT about?

Your position here is illogical, irrational, untruthful, and indefensible.

You're delusional Kathy if you believe what you write.

Austin,
You really have one thing that you repeat over and over and over.
When you believe that someone on the Right has been accused (in so many, usually polite words) of being an idiot, your standard response is "someone on the Left is an idiot too."
This is not an argument.
Kathy has nailed you on this, but you refuse to get it. Perhaps you are simply incapable of understanding. Sorry.
Let's give you another chance.
Can you explain why SO many right wingers are delighted that our country failed in it's bid for the 2016 Olympics?

For all the folks who want more discussion on the "who hates America more" theme,
take a looky here:

"Erik Erickson, son of Erik Embarrassedofson, is totally getting last tags on this 'hating America' thing because liberals got to hate America during the Bush years so it's his turn to go "ha ha!" when Americans suffer or die and stuff."

http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2009/10/05/erik-er...

Can you explain why SO many right wingers are delighted that our country failed in it's bid for the 2016 Olympics?

I cannot answer that. Nor have you seen one post from me with negative comments about Obama going, or reveling in the fact that Chicago did not get the Olympics.

You and Kathy and shannonlee simply assumed that because I called out the Left and your comments for implying that only the Right would have needled Obama, and acting as if you and Left would not do the EXACTLY same, that I was also reveling in or criticizing Obama. I was not. I was simply calling all of you hypocrites. Which you are.

The only comment I have made directly about his trip was before he went, and I quote myself, "It is a good idea, IMHO. I cannot see what is wrong with the President trying to help secure a prestigious, world-wide event for the US."

I think it is too bad Chicago didn't get it, but I also feel that it was indeed time for South America to be represented as a host country of the Olympics, and that in the end the right decision for the Olympics was made.

I also think Obama and Michelle each handled their respective parts of the the pitch unartfully, but that too is different than "reveling in their failure". I also had not stated that previously.

So quit reading your own words into mine, and learn to comment on not what you wish I said, as to make me an easy target, but what I do say.

@@Can you explain why SO many right wingers are delighted that our country failed in it's bid for the 2016 Olympics?@@

What's a fair definition of SO many, Mr. Hyperbole?........a thousand, five hundred, one hundred? Tell you what, type out the names of 15. Your bluff's been called.

As our Dearest Leader, Ronald Reagan once said,
"there you go again."

Do your own googling, I haven't the time. If you haven't seen it and heard it from the Right, you are blind and deaf.
Matt Drudge: "The ego has landed."

Sorry Joe, am I confusing you with facts?

"You and Kathy and shannonlee simply assumed that because I called out the Left and your comments for implying that only the Right would have needled Obama, and acting as if you and Left would not do the EXACTLY same, that I was also reveling in or criticizing Obama. I was not. I was simply calling all of you hypocrites. Which you are."

Symptoms of paranoid schizophrenia:

Anger
Indifference to the opinions of others
A tendency to argue
A conviction that you are better than others, or that people are out to get you.

We're all out to get you Austin.
Get help.

Do you get all your quotes from Salon?

I haven't quoted Salon.

I've quoted:
(FireDogLake)
http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2009/10/05/erik-er...

and:
(Paranoid Schizophrenia)
http://www.healthsquare.com/mc/fgmc2415.htm

good night and good luck.
(Edward R. Murrow)

joe -

You drinking or doing drugs??

Who said anything about anger? I simply called you a hypocrite (calmly).
Who argued? I told you facts that showed your assumptions were wrong.
Where did I say I was better than you? You took my comments to mean that, simply because I showed your your ignorance in your replies.

I never said anyone was out to get me.

Are you familiar with the concept of projection? Psychological projection

Anyway, enough of replying to your silly and childish BS. Sorry you are unable to accept the fact that I didn't say anything negative about your savior, just you.

I'm trying to decide whether it's more funny or just plain sad that political pundits and partisans have found yet another excuse to make yet another political tempest out of a non-issue. This incident was a one-day story at most, and here we are talking about it four days later.

People who had their hopes up for having the Olympics come to Chicago ought to be considering the bigger picture. The United States has hosted the Olympics EIGHT TIMES (4 summer & 4 winter)! EIGHT! There are some countries out there who haven't hosted the Olympics even ONE time.

I don't see why we have to see the Olympic Committee's decision as America's loss. Why can't we see it as Brazil's gain? They've never hosted the Olympics before! In fact, not a single country in South America has ever hosted the Olympics before!

I think the amount of time and effort that Obama invested in this was unwarranted. We have more pressing matters here at home than to deal with where the Olympics will be hosted in 2016.

Having said that, all these efforts by conservatives to turn this into a political issue is just silly. I mean, really? We're starting a political controversy over the Olympics? Do political columnists and pundits have nothing better to talk about?

No, shannon. Obama is not a muslim socialist narcissist.
He'a a narcissistic socialist who was a Muslim as a child. That's not an insult. Based upon what he shows us......Narcisistic because of the way he presents himself (the columns, flags, and podiums come to mind), and socialist becuase of his platform. But he is not a muslim, we can agree on that.

You guys want to penalize success, reward mediocraty, and redistribute wealth. If you guys would just come clean and say outright that you want socialism instead of dancing around it, wouldn't that be more honorable?

Yes, AR, I'm delusional --I actually believe that the Republicans never tried to get Dallas for the Olympics, therefore the Democrats never partied and rejoiced when the Republicans tried to get Dallas for the Olympics because they didn't ever try to get Dallas for the Olympics. And even more delusional: I believe that it's irrational and unseemly to excuse the very real rejoicing Republicans did over Obama's failing to get the Olympics for Chicago by saying that the Democrats would have done the very same thing if the Republicans had tried to get the Olympics for Dallas when the Republicans never actually did that very same thing and there is no actual, factual, real precedent in Democrats' behavior to support an argument that they would do the very same thing -- because they never have.

Hmmm. Re-reading this, I think maybe you're the one who's delusional.

There you go again, proclaiming that (all) Republicans take glee in America failing.

You strike me as an honest guy, and I respect many of your posts.

But to shout out partisan comments is below you.

I don't hate the GOP like you do. I despise partisans and what they have done to both parties.
There was a time not so long ago, when honor was still present in Washington. Both parties had two constants: God and love for America - they just disagreed on the scope of centralized power.
Both parties are corrupt. There are standouts in each party: Ron Paul on the GOP side and Dennis Kucinich on the Democrat side. Both are strange men, but they hold to their convictions no matter what kind of pressure the other side or their OWN party puts on them.
I can respect THAT.

The whole "Obama the Narcissist" or "Obama is full of himself" (or however you want to phrase it) is not a new meme -- it has been a popular topic among the extremist right wing for a while now - these are the same people who like to belittle Obama by referring to him as "The One" or "The Messiah" or some other such nonsense. This new Olympic twist is just the latest twist on that same theme, nothing new.

I recall a news article on the Fox website a week or two ago where someone actually went through and counted the number of times that Obama said "I" or "me" during all of his speeches since January, using that as a prime example of his extreme narcissism. I don't recall the exact number, but it was several hundred self-references -- and as you might expect the anti-Obama crowd on the Fox website crowed excitedly. Of course, the commentator failed to provide other examples of other speakers (such as past presidents) who gave a similar number of speeches for comparison - hard to tell whether it was more or less than usual if you don't provide anything to compare it to.

The whole "Obama is full of himself" meme has been around since before the election, and has continued to be a popular pissing point on the right, and will undoubtedly continue to be one for the next seven years. Just another example of trying to delegitimize the President, similar to other similar memes on the right that have bobbled around for months. Nothing new here. And still as ineffective as ever.

Let's set aside for a moment what the far left would or would not have done under similar circumstances. Do you feel that the delight shown by some was appropriate? Were you bothered, shocked, pissed off or depressed by those who responded that way?

Hold on there, buddy. I never said "all Republicans". I didn't even say or imply "most". But you have to admit, the extreme Obama-haters are the most vocal of that party, and the perception of Republicans is that they celebrate America failing, just like that was the perception of Muslims because a very few celebrated 9/11. The GOP is now characterized by a fuming, snarling, hateful, angry and extreme shrillness.

And I love it that way.

elZaga - if you read an earlier post in this thread, you would know that I do not think it was appropriate.

But was I shocked, pissed off or depressed by those who responded that way? No. Because that is the nature of politics.

It is not a current phenomenon; it is the way it has always been. I just find it amusing that the Left is shocked, pissed off or depressed by those who responded that way, which was my whole point, as they too would have reacted the same way in the opposite.

That is the hypocrisy I keep referring to.

Kathy - No, you are being delusional, as you do not seem to be able to distinguish a hypothetical from reality.

That is a clear example of delusional behavior.

And where oh where did I "excuse the very real rejoicing Republicans did over Obama's failing to get the Olympics for Chicago"? I did no such thing. I merely pointed out the hypocrisy of the Left (and you) trying to put yourself on some pedestal as if you and your type (the Left) would not have done the exact same thing. I stand by that comment all the way.

Sorry you are intellectually incapable of distinguishing that difference, which is unusual, given that the Left loves to brag about their ability to deal with nuance.

And if you want an example of the meanspirtedness the Left is also very capable of showing, simple go read Patrick's post about the Left's reaction to Delay developing stress fractures.

AR
FYI
"No, you are being delusional, as you do not seem to be able to distinguish a hypothetical from reality. "

Basing your comparative assessment of lefty hypocrisy upon a fact on one side and a hypothetical on the other is logically invalid. The comparison must be fact to fact or hypo to hypo; but you can't cross-match.

It would be equivalent to saying today's Republicans are racists because they would have been against integration in the fifties.

Hypotheticals are made up, facts are not.

HemmD -

So, would you take the position in that hypothetical that the Left would have been respectful and understanding to Bush's attempt, and not made political hay from it?

AR

I was only taking an analytical position. But you asked, so here goes.

I see a false equivalency between the current GOP tactics and those of the Left under Bush. You may think I'm biased, but the left hammering bush for the several unconstitutional end runs he did and the right hammering obama for going to get the Olympics are even close.

The left attacked torture, the right has made up crap about death panels.

Hacks on both ends certainly attack on a continuous basis, but those aren't the people I'm talking about; nor were they the ones you were referring to in the comments earlier.

The ingenuous nature of the Republican attacks, killing grandma, socialist, radical subversive, etc, demonstrate hatred based upon what? Myths, lies, and innuendo. Additionally, those lies were spread equally by "grass roots" and Washington politicians. If Dems senators had started publicly charging bush for blowing up the towers, your equivalency would hold true.

For my part, I never hammered bush for "instigating 9-11" - I just hammered him for shredding the bill of rights, lying to congress, and the Valerie plame affair. These turned out largely or partially true. Therein lies a very real difference.

[sigh] The dishonesty from the Left continues. This never was about "rooting against the USA." The Olympic effort was never about the USA, but about Obama (Me, Myself, and I -- personally lobbying in the office of the Presidency, an all-new low) and about his Chicago clique (Daley city crowd), and a Blue Nation trying to reinject some long-lost glory (it's well behind not only Los Angeles, obviously, but also, for example, Atlanta and many smaller Sunbelt metros in relative importance in this country).

Hmmm. Interesting.

So, the Left didn't make up false documents about Bush's service; have a field day with the shoe thrower; made fun of his reading lists and implied he must have the picture book editions; attacked him for how much he spent on his inaugurations (much less than Obama, but again he isn't a Savior); made fun of his open embrace of religion (again, Obama is given a pass); Bush's malapropisms; etc.

The point is I don't see any real difference in the Right's making fun of Obama for his missteps and the Left towards Bush. But man, the left sure doesn't like to be called out for their hypocrisy (that word really seems to sting.)

AustinRoth,

Curious, you speak so passionately about “THE LEFT" being angry about this. Many of us however are quite moderate. In fact, as a personal reference, I was a registered Republican until a few years ago. Not that I voted block Republican, but I certainly have some views which tend to be on that side of the median.

The point I’m getting at is: much of this anger at some conservatives' gleeful celebration of an American---not liberal or Democrat or lefty---but an American city losing the Olympics is not a partisan or ideological issue, not to me nor anyone I know, left or right. I’m angry as an American. But I guess that makes me “quaint” thinking is such antediluvian terms. Silly me.

Thank you, HemmD. Now I don't have to address that point again.

Now come on, Green.
"Republicans take glee in America failing."
"Republicans stood up and shrieked against America hosting the games."

Can you imagine the fallout if someone were to put a race in place of the word Republicans?
They would be all over you. It does, indeed, imply "all" when you do not denote otherwise.

As for the rest of your cliff's notes on the party, you're right. They are falling all over themselves, much like Howard Dean and the gang appeared in 1996.

I just hope you are NOT one of those who vote straight ticket. I actually heard a staunch democrat here (locally) say, "If Christ was a Republican, and Satan were a Democrat - I'd vote democrat." There are good folks in both parties. And blatant labeling is dangerous.

I am not sure why anyone should be angry Chicago didn't get the Olympics. It truly was time for it to go to South America. Sometimes it is not that your side lost, it is that the other side won. I think this is the case.

HemmD has effectively addressed most of what you wrote above. As for your last sentence, I haven't read Patrick's post yet, but I can tell you that mean-spiritedness is not equivalent to rooting and cheering for America to lose -- even in relatively small matters such as the Olympics.

mean-spiritedness is not equivalent to rooting and cheering for America to lose

Oh, you mean like these?

Pelosi calls Iraq a 'failure'

I agree. But I’m not upset it went to South America, per se. In fact, good for them. But that’s not what most people are angry about. From everything I've seen, those celebrations were based on American/Chicago's defeat, not Brazilian victory. And I don’t think anyone with a straight face can assert otherwise in view of the ancillary comments.

It was just another example of party before country.

Let's be honest (as I have tried to be on this). Very few of the comments a cheering a 'defeat for America'. They are taking Obama to task. There is a difference. Not that I think that is fair either, but as I have said repeatedly, if the shoe was on the other foot, the other side would do the same. It is simply the nature of politics.

Oh, you mean like these?

"Pelosi calls Iraq a 'failure'

AR, how is a statement that Iraq is a failure the same as being happy about that failure?

"how is a statement that Iraq is a failure the same as being happy about that failure?"

That's easy. The statement from Pelosi, just as the "cheering" from the right-wing hacks, was interpreted as wanting America to fail. In the case of Iraq, putting a "failure" statement could actually cause American deaths. With the Olympics, no one dies. Pelosi's comment, therefore, is much worse than the cheering of an olympics hosting loss.

Although the cheering was wrong, I agree.

AR

" So, the Left didn't make up false documents about Bush's service......."

Name the Democratic rep or senator who spoke about ant items on the list below. Can't do it because much of that blather came from the talking heads on the TeeVee.

The difference is important as there are no talking heads who are also in government. Beside, every single example you cite has some element of truth behind it. What's the proof of Obama's intent to kill Grandma? Death panels? WTF, there's no comparison.

Did Bush try to get out of Viet Nam service? Actually, yes.

Your turn

Name the rep or senator that said 'Yeh! I am glad Chicago didn't win the Olympics.'

AR

I didn't know that I had said anything about the Olympics. But I believe Boehner and Steele certainly came out against the trip.

What's your point? Did my comparison of charges from both sides seem unfair, out of bounds, or inaccurate?