The Presidential Planner

you do not choose to describe the author and driving force of the Great Society legislation and the civil rights acts of the 1960's as a Liberal,"

That you deny Johnson's complex leanings and changes of heart over the years is not surprising. Right wingers prefer black and white thinking.

Johnson is one of the more interesting pols of the 20th century.

He was brought in to shore up Kennedy right flank, the back slapping Texan who was a legislative force. He saw the country thru the mourning of Kennedy, escalated our involvement in Vietnam, oversaw the passage ofthe Civil Rights Act, authored the Great Society legislation and helped hold the country together in the wake of the assasinations of King and RFK..

"I'll say it again: if I am posting something said or written by a person with whom I disagree, I will identify that person. If I post something I agree with, I take it that every last reader will instantly recognize whether the prose is my own or is taken from another source."

So you assume someone randomly stopping by this blog would know you prose?

Seriously the regular posters here represent a small fraction of the readership.

To claim everyone should instantly know your writing prose is narcissism personified.

"If it were permissible to link to it here, I would do so, but I understand that it is not allowed."

Which is why you should post the source so people can look for it.

An article title and author is usually enough for folks to google.

But thanks for admitting you represent other's work as your own and do not credit them.

I know that probably took alot.

I will stand on the historical understanding and the record as to the political classification of the people I have identified. But if, for example, you do not choose to describe the author and driving force of the Great Society legislation and the civil rights acts of the 1960's as a Liberal, that is fine with me. You don't seem to understand much anyway, and devote a great deal of time and energy to finding labels for a variety of people instead of addressing the thoughts that they convey and the acts through which they have defined themselves.

I'll say it again: if I am posting something said or written by a person with whom I disagree, I will identify that person. If I post something I agree with, I take it that every last reader will instantly recognize whether the prose is my own or is taken from another source. If it were permissible to link to it here, I would do so, but I understand that it is not allowed.

I consider the source relevant only to those who are incapable of responding to the ideas presented, and thus are content to level personal insults about the author, thinking that this practice constitutes adequate rebuttal.

And mostly I do it because I have discovered one fellow whom I can vex, annoy and infuriate every single time, without fail, and his reaction sets me to cackling out loud without fail.

"I do not deny anyone credit,"

When the fake Obama thesis popped up not long ago, an excerpt was posted here giving full credit to Barack Obama. Too bad that comment disappeared so quickly.

"I would describe JFK, LBJ, Scoop Jackson, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Adlai Stevenson, and untold thousands of others as liberals, as indeed they would describe themselves"

ROFLMAO!

JFK was a liberal....in 1960.

LBJ was a right wing Democrat when he came into office though he did preside of the passage of the Civil Rights amendment and the creation of the Great Society.

Scoop Jackson was staunch civil rights advocate but he was also a hawk on foreign policy and a vehement anti communist. Neocons tend to cite him as a big influence.

Bill and Hillary Clinton formed the DLC because they disagreed with the liberal faction of the Democratic party.

"So why deny the person credit?

"Hell even post an article title so interested people can look it up and read the whole articles versus passages."

I do not deny anyone credit, and I have neither a commercial nor an academic purpose in posting their words.

And as we have repeatedly seen, even an abject fool is quite capable of looking up any article from which I lift an excerpt. Those who wish to do so are invited to do just that, but my obvious purpose in these posts is to engender a discussion of the issues addressed in them. It seems that today I have come to the wrong place.

He is indeed a liberal, and a brutally honest one. Your childish and uninformed classification of his views is risible."

He's a DLC Democrat.

Nothing risible about that. The Democrats are a big tent with several strong factions versus the right wing nuttery that dominates the Republicans.

"He would describe himself to you (and anyone else) as a liberal,"

He calls himself a neoliberal....IOW a DLC Democrat.

Your pathological dishonesty in describing someone who's a hawk on foreign policy, dislikes unions and is a firm believer in ending welfare is somehow a liberal is just pathetic.

"Thanks for proving he is no liberal like you claimed."

He is indeed a liberal, and a brutally honest one. Your childish and uninformed classification of his views is risible.

He would describe himself to you (and anyone else) as a liberal, and in fact if you called him a Marxist he would not be offended. He would be happy to discuss the subject with any adult.

I" am not passing it off in any respect whatsoever, and it is not used for any commercial purpose."

Yes why do the morally right thing and give someone credit for their work when you are under no legal obligation to do so.

You're like a walking stereotype of a lawyer which is odd since most lawyers I know are not like that.

Posted by: Fascist Hyena | Nov 5, 2009 2:41:56 PM

***

Not to pick on you or anything but you also didn't mention that the post about Blue Dogs being cautious and focused on keeping their jobs was a direct lift from Politico. I read it earlier today.

And just FYI, kinda earth to Fascist, it's no secret to most on the left, and all Dems, that moderate Dems, blue dogs, centrists, et. get nervous about passing reform measures. The reax following the election are highly predictable-- many of these folks were looking for an excuse to waffle and drag their feet. They often need a little push. Activists have been on it. Just sayin'. I don't really get why you're acting like its a newsflash.

"So you are stealing someone else's work and passing it off on [sic] your own.

"Pathological dishonesty strikes again!"

You seem unable to read and comprehend. I am not passing it off in any respect whatsoever, and it is not used for any commercial purpose. I am simply posting an idea that I endorse. Ideas give you a great deal of difficulty, as you have a truly bizarre record of declining resolutely to address them.

"Fascist hyena does not want you to know the source for some odd reason.

"Its one thing not to think for yourself fascist but to not give credit to the one's thinking for you is kind of pathetic."

As I have stated, if I use material from another source without attribution, that means I am endorsing the facts and argument in that passage as my own. The identity of the source is relevant only to those who fear to respond on the merits, and instead believe it is sufficient to attack the person from whom the message comes instead of responding on the merits.

And I love to send dolts out scurrying for the source.

He was and is my friend. Sorry if you can't come to grips with that. Harvard Law School 1976.

Posted by: Fascist Hyena | Nov 5, 2009 2:46:36 PM

Out of curiosity, Fascist, how do you define "liberal" as a I suspect you'd likely have and extremely broad definition given who you've called "socialists" ? You don't seem to use a lot of the terms in accordance with their actual definitions.

"During the 2004 U.S. presidential election, the blog displayed a strong and consistent distaste for John Kerry, despite the fact that Kaus endorsed Kerry and contributed to his campaign...

"During the 2008 presidential campaign, Kaus endorsed Hillary Clinton for president, while criticizing other Democrats including Barack Obama. On immigration policy, Kaus is consistently a restrictionist who does not favor amnesty for illegal immigrants in the United States. He is also skeptical of affirmative action, labor unions (particularly automotive workers' unions and teachers' unions), and gerrymandering of congressional districts. In the 2006 U.S. Midterm Elections Kaus wrote that he hoped the Democrats would fail to take over the U.S. House of Representatives but take the Senate. He called the election "perverse" because he saw a Democratic victory as not impeding Bush's Iraq policy but helping his immigration policy. Nevertheless, Kaus still voted for Democrat Jane Harman."

He was and is my friend. Sorry if you can't come to grips with that. Harvard Law School 1976.

"OMG. The idiocy. Is there videotape? i have a feeling there are going to be many gagreels after this event-- just one ridiculous moment after another."

Think Progress has it.

Apparently it was broadcast live on FoxNews.

More than a few Democrats in Congress are perplexed and worried that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is insisting on ramming through a 1,900-page health care bill on Saturday, just days after her party took heavy losses"

This passage was broguht to you by Wall Street Journal opinion column writer John Fund.

John Fund on election day claimed that Hispanic voter were being given pre filled out absentee ballots based on pure speculation and no evidence other than citing an article from 93 about the practice happening in Philadelphia...the author of that article? the same John Fund, right wing liar.

Fascist hyena does not want you to know the source for some odd reason.

Its one thing not to think for yourself fascist but to not give credit to the one's thinking for you is kind of pathetic.

Election Day losses in Virginia and New Jersey have congressional Democrats focused like never before on jobs — their own.

While the White House and party leaders are urging calm, Democratic incumbents from red states and Republican-leaning districts are anything but; Tuesday's statehouse defeats have left them acutely aware that their votes on health care reform and other major Obama initiatives could be career-enders in 2010 or beyond.

However, when it came time to actually recite the Pledge, he was so excited about that one phrase that he forgot to say “indivisible” before “with liberty, and justice for all.” The crowd seemed to remember the actual words though, which threw Akin a bit off track"

ROFLMAO!

Posted by: Ryan C | Nov 5, 2009 2:23:47 PM

OMG. The idiocy. Is there videotape? i have a feeling there are going to be many gagreels after this event-- just one ridiculous moment after another.

"Awaiting the response on the merits... "

Psssst there are not merits to pushing talking points.

Fascist desperately pushing the Dems divided line.

The AARP and AMA endorsement of health care reform must have stung.