One and One.

[dwer.livejournal.com]

Comments

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Comic One: The Obama Presidency apparently began sometime in late February of 2009.

Comic Two: Minorities must think a certain way, or else they're "stabbing [their] brothers in the back." Excellent attitude there.

[not-hothead-yet.livejournal.com]

about comic two: they aren't saying he's backstabbing because of his different views, he's backstabbing because he's calling other blacks derogatory things because they don't agree with HIM. Don't you know what "backstabbing" means?!?

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

I do. It's a ridiculous charge.

I do not think that word means what you think it means

[not-hothead-yet.livejournal.com]

"backstabbing" is saying derogatory things about someone you are supposed to be friendly with.

Although I might take issue with the notion that Cain is necessarily "friendly" with the Black community at large (although he certainly likes to tout it when convenient, as does the Republican party and its pundits)he is in fact saying derogatory things about the Black community.

So what about the charge is ridiculous?

Re: I do not think that word means what you think it means

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Mainly that he's backstabbing anyone. If anything, he's being remarkably up front. And that being up front with a group is a betrayal is stunning.

Re: I do not think that word means what you think it means

[not-hothead-yet.livejournal.com]

so you think calling someone "brainwashed" because they disagree with you politically is not derogatory? Gotcha.

boy are you brainwashed.

Re: I do not think that word means what you think it means

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

I never said it wasn't derogatory. I disagree with the claim that it's backstabbing.

Re: I do not think that word means what you think it means

[not-hothead-yet.livejournal.com]

Jeff.... do you just not agree with the accepted definition of the word "backstabbing"? "saying derogatory things about someone you are supposed to be friendly with"

Which part of this is Cain NOT engaging in? He's said Blacks who are democrats are brainwashed. calling someone "brainwashed" we agree is derogatory. So Cain is saying something derogatory about the Black community at large which he has made it a point to include himself in. Being a self-avowed member of the community would mean that he is supposed to be friendly with them. But he's saying something derogatory about them. That's what we already agreed is called "backstabbing"

So where is the problem?

Re: I do not think that word means what you think it means

[dwer.livejournal.com]

It's a political viewpoint he doesn't agree with.

Re: I do not think that word means what you think it means

[not-hothead-yet.livejournal.com]

yeah I get that but that's not what he's saying. He's maintaining that he disagrees with a definition of a word. This stymies me.

Re: I do not think that word means what you think it means

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

Has Cain actually aligned himself as Black, with Black interests and allegiances? BDJs argument makes a lot more sense if we don't consider Cain as having a natural affinity with blacks.

Re: I do not think that word means what you think it means

[not-hothead-yet.livejournal.com]

I did concede that its debateable whether Cain would be considered either a part of hte Black Community or even an ally. I mitigate that by pointing out that the Republican Party has definitely furthered the idea that Cain is in fact A Black Community Leader because of his successful business background.

Re: I do not think that word means what you think it means

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

OK. Saying Cain is accountable for the spin and words of his party is as snesible as saying Fareed Zakaria is responsible for the words of CAIR, or Al-Qaeda for that matter.

I'm all for bashing Cain, but if he doesn't personally court the black caucus, then he's at liberty to call them brainwashed. Just like I don't court the brownhaired caucus.

Re: I do not think that word means what you think it means

[not-hothead-yet.livejournal.com]

Is this good enough? (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0911/64507.html)
or this? (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/10/herman-cain-says-he-could-draw-black-voters-from-obama/)

I honestly think he IS courting the Black Community vote. He's just going from a different direction. If you continue to think Blacks are always and only liberal and Democrats for life, then it wouldn't seem like he's courting the vote. If you admit that there are plenty of conservative and conservative-leaning Blacks then you can see he IS courting the vote.

He's just doing an incredibly bad job of it

Re: I do not think that word means what you think it means

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

Colour me surprized

Re: I do not think that word means what you think it means

[goumindong.livejournal.com]

It is still backstabbing if you aren't friends with the person you stab.

The issue is more that he is saying what he is saying for political gain. Backstabbing implies gain.

Re: I do not think that word means what you think it means

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

If you're not friends with the person you stab, its frontstabbing.

Re: I do not think that word means what you think it means

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

Notice, BDJ did not answer here. Telling.

Re: I do not think that word means what you think it means

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

meh. "derogatory" is not the same thing as "backstabbing". In order for you to backstab, you have to gain, then betray trust. I don't think Cain has worked to gain trust among blacks.

But enough about all that:

My new fave document from the GOP is their bold Jobs plan for America: http://kevinmccarthy.house.gov/images/stories/Forgotten_15.pdf

‎1,2,3,9,11,12,13,14,and 15 are all predicated on the notion that regualtions kill jobs, full stop

4,5,6,7,and 10 are all predicated on the notion that only thing America can make is oil and coal, with help from Canada

8 is maybe sorta OK...

9 is straight up doublespeak, but not out of line with all the other bills.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

re 2: that does seem to be what Cain is saying doesn't it.

[wight1984.livejournal.com]

": Minorities must think a certain way, or else they're "stabbing [their] brothers in the back." Excellent attitude there."

I think the idea that black people ought to think a certain way is the type of attitude being challenged. The idea that the only reason why black people would disagree with Cain is because they're 'brainwashed' is both arrogant and patronising.

It's a generally poor attitude to assume that people who disagree with you in regards to major political divisions only do so because they're stupid/ignorant/gullible and targeting that attitude towards black people as a specific group adds a new problematic layer to it.

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

While I agree with you, I'm afraid the cartoon did not go with that point.

[wight1984.livejournal.com]

How would you describe the point presented by the cartoon?

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

That he is obligated by his blackness to not speak ill of other black people. And that its ironic that his name is the same as the first traitor. This helps the first panel and her response in the last panel to make sense.

[wight1984.livejournal.com]

I don't think I share your reading, at least not as I interpret what you've said.

I don't think the cartoon suggests that he should not ever speak badly of black persons but attacking black people as a group is rather off.

[goumindong.livejournal.com]

I am confused, when do you think the Obama Presidency started?

Because "late February 09" is not significantly different from the real date to make your comment make any sense.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

That's the point. The stimulus was supposedly a jobs bill that occurred right at the start of his Presidency.

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

How do tax cuts differ from a stimulus?

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

I'm referring to "the stimulus," which is generally known as the bill passed at the beginning of Obama's Presidency.

Tax cuts have a different stimulative impact, and one that is not as good as many on the right want to believe.

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

Sure. I wss just making the point that the Bush and Obama stimulus/tax cut policies are not so dissimilar. Both get us deeper into debt, with debatable benefits to the economy.

Of course, Obama is sunsetting wars, while Bush started them. Which is another reason to vote for him in 2012.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Sure. I wss just making the point that the Bush and Obama stimulus/tax cut policies are not so dissimilar. Both get us deeper into debt, with debatable benefits to the economy.

Bush at least made it a point to significantly cut taxes. Obama didn't sign a tax cut until nearly 2 years into his term.

Of course, Obama is sunsetting wars, while Bush started them. Which is another reason to vote for him in 2012.

Surely, we should applaud Obama for sticking with the plan his predecessor signed for him.

*eyeroll*

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

All hagiog(r)aphy and (r)evisionism aside, I'm going to need a citiation on the Bush administration saying this was anything but an epochal war. For every minor administrative quote about a 10 year time line, there are dozens tlaking about the danger of setting timelines for success.

Rumsfeld's unfounded confidence doesn't count, as he was an idiot.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

All hagiog(r)aphy and (r)evisionism aside,

Please point out where that occurred. Thanks.

I'm going to need a citiation on the Bush administration saying this was anything but an epochal war. For every minor administrative quote about a 10 year time line, there are dozens tlaking about the danger of setting timelines for success.

Announced in August 2008 (http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=36d07f1a-ecfc-480f-b10f-9688971b93be), approved by the Iraqis later that year (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/27/world/africa/27iht-27iraq-sofa.18201593.html).

Right about here...

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

we should applaud Obama for sticking with the plan his predecessor signed for him.

August 2008? Good jorb. That was about when Bush was signing 16 trillion dollars to the banks, right?

Re: Right about here...

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

You're a few dollars and a few months off.

Backing off the revisionism/hagiography charge, are we?

Re: Right about here...

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

Nope. I'm not backing off anything. The Cheney admin had no commitment to a closing date nor proposed any specific strategic exit strategy during the vast majority of its time in the White House.

Obama needs to do a better job dismantling the Cheney executive power grab and its crazy reign of fear. That is the worst thing about the Obama administration thus far. I see no evidence that Romney would do any better.

Re: Right about here...

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Nope. I'm not backing off anything. The Cheney admin had no commitment to a closing date nor proposed any specific strategic exit strategy during the vast majority of its time in the White House.

Putting aside your historical revisionism irt the "Cheney admin," that 2008 drawdown agreement proves you wrong.

Re: Right about here...

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

Woo.

Re: Right about here...

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

Nah, the figure is 16 trillion.

Re: Right about here...

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

As I said.

Re: Right about here...

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

http://socialsecurityinstitute.com/news/recent-news/staggering-16-trillion-fed-bank-bailout

Re: Right about here...

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

I wasn't aware Bush ran the Fed from 2007-2010.

Re: Right about here...

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

Who appointed Bernanke and took Greenspan's advice on deficits?

Re: Right about here...

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Absolutely, but Bernanke is not the Hand of Bush.

Re: Right about here...

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

Was Bush the hand of Greenspan?

[lafinjack.livejournal.com]

Two elections in a row, even.