John Edwards reveals himself to be just another trust fund scumbag who's backing Barack Obama for president.
« Carbon Tax and Spend | Main | Remembering Richard Rorty »
What Will Petey Do?
14 May 2008 07:40 pm
Comments (112)
Tarnation, I was hoping for an Yglesias Edwards thread so we could all point at Petey and laugh, and then Yglesias has to go and spoil it by kicking off the Petey-bashing personally.
Well, to steal someone else's meme:
This is EXCELLENT News!!! for Petey!!!!
I wish I were just another trust fund scumbag.
Warren Terra:
You didn't think Yglesias was going to let a chance to take a shot go by, did you? ;-)
John Edwards (confident, manly voice): I endorse... Barack Obama!
Petey (shrill warble from the peanut gallery): You have betrayed John Edwards! You trustfund scumbag!
John Edwards(amused): I am John Edwards, little man!
Petey (falling off perch completely): Noooooo.....!
Now this is pure page view trolling. Well played Mr. Yglesias. I can hear the sounds of thousands of people pressing F5....
That's gotta sting.
Not an ambulance chasing scumbag? Edwards's kids will be trust fund scumbags. Maybe they'll find a home in the D.C. blogosophere, if they haven't pulled up the draw bridge by then.
Well, to be honest, all that ending poverty stuff that Edwards was always talking about on the campaign trail did seem awfully arugula, if you know what I mean. I bet he's a terrible bowler, too.
I'm my Petey and I cry if I want to, cry if I want to...
I heard about the endorsement on the way home, and I laughed so hard my daughter asked me what was so funny.
Now, now. Revenge is something which is only alluring when it is impossible to achieve. Once it is found at hand, it loses its luster.
Add one more name to the Enemies List.
John Edwards: Aggressively opposed to universal healthcare, a hater of the democratic party electorate and enemy of the working class.
Who didn't see that coming?
Chris D, that's a fucking thing of beauty!
El Cid, that was a valiant attempt to win the moral high ground, but I fear the fall of Petey will provide jubilation and laughter in many households tonight. I just hope the poor, silly little soul doesn't sleep with the fishes after a last, horrendous Intrade folly. Mind you, as I type, he's probably speed-dialing the Edwards residence using his magical decoder ring....
OMFG YES.
Can you do the same to Al and Fred? Or are they relatives? I've suspected that.
I wonder what Edwards will do with his incoming check from GE?
I mean, aside from aggressively opposing universal health care, hating democrats and building concentration camps for the working class.
He should still have some GE $$ left over after that.
This is a little OT, but with all the talk about Obama's troubles with the hillfolk of Appalachia, does anyone think a Webb VP is in the cards? I don't know if I'd necessarily want to him as POTUS (say compared to Feingold or Dodd) but he'd make a mean attack dog and could make a strong, honest appeal to the Appalachians.
Tahnk you John, Thank you John!!
Hillary - Put your guns down and come out with your hands up right now!! You're completely surrounded and it's time for you to surrender.
Probably the greatest thing in the Edwards endorsement tonight is the Timing. This is strategic planning in the part of Obama, caught HRC flat footed as usual, so much for the 3.00am red phone
I think Petey is currently refounding the People's Front of Judaea. Or is it the Judaean Popular Front? I can never remember which one is his current loyalty. Anyway, if you see a small, paranoid figure selling ocelot spleens and otters' noses, just be kind - and for God's sake don't mention what the Romans have done for us. He sees the aqueduct as some sort of shell game, and he refuses to use the new road because it's obviously a trap. As for the bathhouse....
this seemed so clearly inevitable from the time that edwards dropped out (and i say that as one who moved from edwards to obama after it became obvious in late january that edwards was not going to win) that i thought for the longest time that the raving manic posting as petey could not possible be the same person who made thoughtful, pertinent posts in support of edwards. HRC was business as usual; that business cannot continue as usual was edwards theme, and one that obama made his too. it could not be that edwards would endorse HRC, so it could not be that this manic was the person who posted for edwards as petey. but, petey insisted, convicningly to me, that it was him. too bad for him. good day for us
. . . caught HRC flat footed as usual, so much for the 3.00am red phone
So thats why she was staying up late, waiting for the phone to ring, dressed in her finest pearls and pantsuit.
I wonder if Paul Krugman's head is exploding.
Edwards has proved himself to be without any guts whatsoever. If he had any, he would have endorsed someone long ago. Instead, he waited until the outcome was long since decided to endorse the nominee. He (and every gutless superdelegate yet to endorse) were just hoping the race would be decided so they wouldn't have to put their necks on the line. They deserve no respect. None whatsoever.
"What Will Petey Do?"
I appreciate that Edwards held out as long as he did. It would've been far better for him personally to have endorsed Obama two months ago.
I'd have preferred him to wait until 6/4, but I understand why he chose to do it now, and I fully respect that.
After all, it's not his fault that the Clinton campaign botched the IA/NC election day as badly as they did. They pretty much pooched their ultimate chances by acting like they thought they could win NC. If the generals are incompetent, I understand why the troops would desert.
-----
Y'know, some of my favorite folks in the Democratic Party chose Obama over Clinton. I still think folks like Andy Stern and John Edwards and Neil the Ethical Werewolf are the cat's meow.
My problem has been with folks like Matt Yglesias and Josh Marshall who have proven willing to lie and smear Clinton to see their faction win.
And, of course, the lowest circle of hell is reserved for Ezra Klein, a "progressive healthcare blogger" who made his name by arguing for the Edwards/Clinton universal healthcare plan, only to endorse the candidate bashing the Edwards/Clinton plan back when the outcome of the race was still very much in doubt.
-----
I'd still vote Clinton if I lived in Oregon, but viva John Edwards and viva the Democratic Nominee!
Petey, there is a story about Bob Dole talking to Bill Clinton about his Mediscare ads after the 1996 election that comes to mind ...
Well, the nice thing about Petey (in the primary context) is that his allegiences and principles are relatively fluid.
this seemed so clearly inevitable from the time that edwards dropped out (and i say that as one who moved from edwards to obama after it became obvious in late january that edwards was not going to win) that i thought for the longest time that the raving manic posting as petey could not possible be the same person who made thoughtful, pertinent posts in support of edwards.
Ha! Brilliant. The blindness that some people had about how ridiculously awful Petey was until he started disagreeing with them remains amusing to me. Petey has always been like this. He's a ridiculous person, and his posts over the last few months have been completely consistent with his earlier comments.
I'd still vote Clinton if I lived in Oregon, but viva John Edwards and viva the Democratic Nominee!
I take it that Petey's plan of voting for Nader is no longer operative. This was quicker than I expected.
viva the Democratic Nominee!
I think we have another endorsement, folks. Start notifying the press.
Funny, Petey, because I remember a few lies and smears from you, and you were awfully sanctimonious about it as well. Have the invitations to fuck off somehow gone astray in the mail, you lying, worm-ridden vessel of dung? If so, I hereby officially invite you, yes you, Petey the troll, to FUCK OFF! Now, was that clear enough, troll-spawn, or must we ram a copy of Lying History where the sun don't shine?
Petey, Ralph Nader says he still loves you and there're always be a spot for you on his campaign.
Along with the other guy.
Chris D: teh most awesome. One America, Petey, even the trust funders.
Ok, everyone lay off Petey now. His concession speech was made with style and (a certain amount of) grace. Show a little high road, please.
Funny, Petey, because I remember a few lies and smears from you, and you were awfully sanctimonious about it as well. Have the invitations to fuck off somehow gone astray in the mail, you lying, worm-ridden vessel of dung? If so, I hereby officially invite you, yes you, Petey the troll, to FUCK OFF! Now, was that clear enough, troll-spawn, or must we ram a copy of Lying History where the sun don't shine?
Funny, Petey, because I remember a few lies and smears from you, and you were awfully sanctimonious about it as well. Have the invitations to fuck off somehow gone astray in the mail, you lying, worm-ridden vessel of dung? If so, I hereby officially invite you, yes you, Petey the troll, to FUCK OFF! Now, was that clear enough, troll-spawn, or must we ram a copy of Lying History where the sun don't shine?
Chris D: teh most awesome. One America, Petey, even the trust funders.
I wonder if Paul Krugman's head is exploding.Posted by Micheline | May 14, 2008 8:26 PM
Oh jeez. Krugman is not Petey. If there's one place I had hoped people understood that Krugman rants about the policies of candidates and elected politicians in order to get those politicians to change their policy towards ones he approves of, it would be this blog. But nooo.
He's a "lobbyist" for the policies he believes in, not a political partisan according to a favorite candidate. This time he happened to want to push the Clinton and Edwards health plans, and Clinton economic advisors over some of the people on Obama's team. If John McCain comes up with some idea about campaign finance (or whatever) that he favors, I guarantee he'll write favorably about it, too, regardless of whether it hurts the Democratic candidate. That's because he's a policy pundit, that's his job, not a partisan political pundit. He wants to get all the candidates to change their platforms according to Krugman "wisdom," get it? The ones that have the policies he is interested in and agrees with get a nod for that. That's how you should read him. He's not on any political side, he's on Krugman's side. He's not interested in being a cheerleader for any policy he doesn't agree with just because the candidate is overall good or decent, or bad on other issues.
Shorter Petey: "Yes, it's true. I have no principles at all, aside from devotion to acting like a spoiled prick."
Petey,
What's your response to the point that the Edwards (and not Clinton) health care plan had no chance of passing either house? Why is the incremental step that Obama proposes such a betrayal for you? Don't you believe (as I do) that any such improvement in coverage and cost controls will reveal itself as the better system--the quality of care and level of coverage, let alone the reduction of waste--that it might foster support for more widespread reform? Also, do you just not care about foreign policy at all? Or do you honestly believe that Hillary and her team of Iran-threatening LieberDems would be better than the Powers-style change of course that Obama proposes? Especially when that change doesn't have to pass Congress (apart from maybe a couple senate confirmations) and will happen on day one?
dear Matt,
It would have been more productive to spend less time making reference to trolls in the comments section (I acknowlege that I can be included in that class) and spend more time on thoughtful analysis. Like: does this mean that Edward's delegates will vote for Obama, what does this do to Barak's total delegate count, and does this totally shut down Clinton altogether?
Thank you,
Freddie Mac
Internet troll
i dont think this is really Petey
p.s. to my last:
I guarantee Krugman's head is not exploding and not only that, he is going to continue to bitch that Obama should have a health care proposal more like Clinton or Edwards, right up until the time he does, even after being elected. He's not interested in horse race, he cares about affecting policy, and letting the political results from that fall where they may. That's actually intellectual honesty in a pundit, as opposed to censoring yourself because you don't want to hurt a candidate's chances. Wish we had more of him, tired of pundit's aligning behind candidates like p.r. hacks and presenting them as perfect in every way.
Reasonably classy post, Petey. You have robbed the Peteyfreude of sweetness.
In any event, why is it news that Edwards endorsed the Democratic nominee?
Aw, come on, Petey.
Don't drink the Kool Aid just because John Edwards is chuggin it down. I've seen Hari Krishnas with more independence of thought.
Come on. Say it. You know you want to.
"SUCK MY COCK, YOU TRUST FUND SCUMBAGS!!"
There. Doesn't that feel better?
And, of course, the lowest circle of hell is reserved for Ezra Klein,
Wow.
Who knew? Not Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc... but Ezra Klein.
Ok.
So Ezra Klein, Ryan Secrest, and who else?
I guarantee Krugman's head is not exploding and not only that, he is going to continue to bitch that Obama should have a health care proposal more like Clinton or Edwards, right up until the time he does, even after being elected.
I'll take that bet and I bet you never hear Krugman say a damn thing about mandates ever again.
"Who knew? Not Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc... but Ezra Klein."
Apostasy is always worse than the mere banality of evil.
Hey y'all. I'm the diehard Edwards supporter who twice walked the wickedly cold towns of Iowa and was twice a caucus manager there. I still, STILL, think that Edwards would have been the best overall candidate we could have fielded against McCain in the general. But, having gotten that off my chest, I was very glad to see Edwards endorse Obama today. I hope he gets out there and does everything possible to get Obama elected, because Americans need dependable universal healthcare, they need a sound energy policy, and they need someone (maybe two someones?) who will begin to get us out of this miserable war. Roll with it Petey. Suck it up. To quote Pink, "Let's get this party (the democratic party in this case) started. No discredit to Hillary and her supporters. Like me, they have worked hard, but came up a bit short.
Well, look here now Petey,
Well, see what you done -
Slandered these poor trust funders
And then you come around,
I'm glad she's gone,
I'm glad she's gone.
If y'all didn't see K.O. just now - could he be VP ?? He's workin' hard.
Re Petey's comment "Apostasy is always worse than the mere banality of evil."
----------
By the strangest coincidence, the Islamofascists agree with you , Petey.
Apostasy is always worse than the mere banality of evil.
Ok, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
Amazing how John Edwards escapes the eternal hellfire considering he aggressively opposes universal health care, has nothing but disdain for the democratic party electorate, hates the working class and, I hear, just called you a racist.
How did this particular trust fund scumbag luck out?
Petey, I posted my comment without following through the entire thread. See you had already 'sucked it up.' level-headed and serious. Let's get the best policies we can at this point. That's what this is about.
"Who knew? Not Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc... but Ezra Klein."Apostasy is always worse than the mere banality of evil.
Instead of quoting Voltaire in French, as is my want, I'll ask you whether it's worth it to get stuck with the status quo or to pass Obama's plan?
If you think the Edward's/Clinton plan can pass, then let's see you illustrate the legislative path so we can start moving forward to make it work.
I love how a Bush supporter like Fred finds it offensive that Edwards made his money defending human beings from corporations. It's almost as if he doesn't realize that Bush made his money by abusing eminent domain. That and being a fucking trust fund scumbag whose elite schooling started with Andover.
The pinheads next door look down on Fred.
"If you think the Edward's/Clinton plan can pass, then let's see you illustrate the legislative path so we can start moving forward to make it work."
Obama would just need to get onboard with the plan prior to the election. That's all that's necessary to get to cloture.
We've got a free shot or two coming in the '09 - '10 Congress. It's going to be an environment favorable to passing legislation that only comes along once in a generation.
Dammit, Yglesias, I made this joke before you did!
Gotta say, I thought you'd take the high road, though, and let us peasants do the hit job.
The answer is obvious to anyone who has paid attention to Petey; when his trolling no longer becomes tenable, he apes some half hearted rational for his months long trolljob, basically acknowledges that everything he wrote for the past few months was insincere, and says hey, let bygones be bygones
...then looks for a new angle for trolling.
Shockingly, that's exactly what happened.
The schadenfreude is enjoyable, but it's flabbergasting that so many people don't understand what a troll is.
Speaking of infantile trolling, it's good to see that the King Rube Paul Krugman still has loyal subjects that don't hesitate to genuflect to the crown.
"Apostasy is always worse than the mere banality of evil."
I agree. This is why few things deserve my scorn more than those who due to some combination of cowardce, idoicy, and being bought off by the insurance companies try to derive political benefit by pretending that a universal mandate is the same thing as universal healthcare. The only thing worse than them are the tools who serve them (third rate internet trolls are a subset of this group).
Memory lane. Right after Edwards drops out, Ezra publishes an entry saying one of the nicest things about Edwards' run besides his influence on the issues, was the wonderful breed of commenters he inspired and Ezra to single out Petey as a particularly wonderful and insightful one.
And Petey to be grateful for the shout-out.
Fun times.
Finally, I can find Petey bearable.
I'd mock and crow and so on, but...Actually, it feels pretty good. :)
Obama would just need to get onboard with the plan prior to the election. That's all that's necessary to get to cloture.,/i>
Uh huh.
You've run away from this for months, but Clinton's strongest states are ones where the Dems can run up House seats, while Obama's are ones with Senate contests. Frankly, the Dems don't need too many more House seats. They need more Senators, and this year is a good one to get them. That's how the calendar shakes out.
I'm pragmatic about this, in that Obama's Senate coattails produce a better plan out of Congress than the one he's campaigned on. Contrariwise, the GOP would do their damndest to sink another Clinton plan, and squeeze a smaller Dem Senate caucus, regardless of how many additional seats she brings to the House. Ezra's pragmatic about it too, regardless of your slander.
You, on the other hand, just bullshitted and smeared and googlebombed. So, a hearty fuck you.
Thanks for the love, Petey. I have to tell you, one of the many reasons I've been looking forward to the end of this primary is that I'll get to see your comments on a wider range of issues.
But let me say what I've been saying in so many comments over on the red blog: you've got to go easier on Ezra. The dude isn't obligated to support the candidate who's best for health care, if he thinks that candidate is worse on a bunch of other issues. He's a journalist, not a special interest group.
His responsibility as a health care blogger is just to give us an honest and clear picture of the various candidates' approaches to health care. He never stopped doing that. To this day, he's been saying that Hillary's plan is better. If he wants to then support Obama for foreign policy reasons or whatever, that's fine.
There is only one unified revolutionary proletarian struggle, and it is the job of loyal TruRevolutionaries to remain stalwart defenders of the TruRevolutionary line as determined by the Central Committee.
That line will change as revolutionary and counter-revolutionary conditions themselves change, but the TruRevolutionary will subjugate his bourgeois search for intellectual consistency and empirically based arguments for those carefully chosen words which will advance the one, true, yet ever changing TruRevolutionary agenda.
Mandates weren't the only thing that upset Krugman. He was also upset at the "party of ideas" comments, or any suggestion that the triangulations of the 90s weren't necessary, any suggestion there was anything wrong with having the Republicans take Congress that decade. He's pissed that the young kid thinks he could have done better than his elders. I don't expect that resentment to go away, even after Clinton's candidacy ends.
For both Krugman and Clinton, that was the whole point of the Mandate War--to turn the tables on someone attacking you from the left by attacking them from the "left"--by taking a narrow technocratic point and defining it to be the be-all-end-all of progressivism. (Other well-meaning folks like Petey or Ezra Klein just got taken along for the ride).
If, indeed, Krugman did the same thing for McCain on campaign finance reform or something, I should hope that we would all see how reprehensible that would be. The problem is not that he pointed out a disagreement with Obama's policy, the point is that the exagerrated the scope of the disagreement and from then on distorted every other policy proposal or statement that came from Obama. Sure, Krugman only needs to please Krugman, but you'd think the truth would come into play at some point.
The schadenfreude is enjoyable, but it's flabbergasting that so many people don't understand what a troll is.
Well I think my comment showed the proper understanding.
But I agree that it is hilarious that people see Petey's comments in this thread as some sort of evidence of him returning to sanity, that these comments make him somehow more "bearable." As opposed to seeing the comments for what they are, further evidence that Petey is a loathsome troll with fewer morals that Timothy McVeigh.
I like that: trust fund scumbag! I hope it sticks.
Cheer up, everyone. Even if Petey's spirit is broken, we still have Sean Penn.
------------
”I don't have a candidate I'm supporting and I'm certainly interested and excited by the hope that Barack Obama is inspiring,” he said, but went on to accuse him of a “phenomenally inhuman and unconstitutional” voting record.
”I hope that he will understand, if he is the nominee, the degree of disillusionment that will happen if he doesn't become a greater man than he will ever be,” Penn said.
---------
I tried to parse that last sentence but I'm afraid I don't have the right
pharmaceuticals .
I'd find artappraiser's view of Krugman easier to embrace if I hadn't seen Krugman's willingness to abandon his economic principles and pronounce the gas tax holiday no big deal just because Hillary decided to pick it up as club to beat Obama.
'Matthew Petey'
anagrams to
'Ahem! Wet petty.'
If The Atlantic had any sense, they'd drop either Andrew or Matt, and bring in Petey.
My problem has been with folks like Matt Yglesias and Josh Marshall who have proven willing to lie and smear Clinton to see their faction win.
Hmm, smearing Clinton....I seem to remember someone else doing that. In praise of hlah:
Petey: Sure a Hillary administration will screw over organized labor, but I'm sure if she's elected, she'll make sure to take care of the leaders who've endorsed her, even if those leaders' rank and file get screwed.
Petey: But her (Clinton's) Presidential candidacy is a disaster in the making for both progressives and for the Democratic Party in general.
Petey: Senator Clinton needs to be politically slaughtered with extreme malice. I think we all agree about that.
Petey: The Clintons seem to feel the Democratic Party is a wholly owned corporation of theirs, and that they are allowed to blatantly sleaze and slime other Democrats
Those and many more can be found through our good friend Google.
I can't believe the people who think Petey was at all "classy" in his "concession": he literally damns Ezra Klein--a level-headed, non-vitriolic guy if there ever was one--to the lowest circle of hell, over the issue of whether or not the implementation of universal health care should use mandates or not?
Petey is a not a nice guy. He never has been. He never will be. He has only one internal organ: a spleen. And all he can do is vent it.
I'm with Neil: I'm just glad that Petey will be able to return to his previous incarnation as a very smart, very engaging, very witty blog commenter. His one-trick pony act of these past few months meant there was one less interesting voice to read in the comments sections of several of my favorite blogs. So: welcome back, Petey. And thanks for handling your reentry with grace.
I, on the other hand, am with John at 8:35, with a bit of LarryM and Philly. Can the Petey lovers link to some of these smart, engaging, witty comments? Are you sure they were made by the same Petey? He was an unpleasant, over-the-top vitriolic commenter long before Edwards dropped out.
Hey, I have a bunch of crow here to deliver. The order form says it's for some guy named Petey, c/o a trust-fund scumbag.
I think this is just a pathetic, job-seeking move on Edwards's part, and that it's too late to make any difference. And I really have no clue how these two morons think they're going to cut poverty in half in ten years. What are they going to do, bring back welfare?
I don't have anything really dramatic for you, KCinDC, but here's just a few fairly good old Petey comments.
This Eric Alterman column ends by quoting him.
You can find more by googling. The majority of the Petey corpus is reasonably good. And I'm not even getting into the basketball stuff.
"The dude isn't obligated to support the candidate who's best for health care"
Quite true.
He didn't have to assume the pro-Clinton stance of Paul Krugman or Elizabeth Edwards.
He could've instead assumed the neutral stance of Jon Cohn or John Edwards.
Cohn was a perfect example of how a "progressive healthcare blogger" who wasn't otherwise enamored of the Clinton campaign could honorably behave.
Cohn was a perfect example of how a "progressive healthcare blogger" who wasn't otherwise enamored of the Clinton campaign could honorably behave.
As opposed to Petey, who was a perfect example of someone whose stated justification for supporting Clinton -- healthcare -- was accompanied by support of a campaign that, by its conduct, undermined the chance of having the Senate pass a half-decent healthcare bill. But he can never ever admit that. Or even acknowledge it.
Gotta love that definition of intellectual honesty: a belief in the magic cloture fairy. Thus, fuck Petey, with bells on. He needs treatment, not pats on the back, and I'm willing to chip in for a 50-minute therapy hour.
So, Neil, your examples of Petey's great insight are:
1) "Lack of balls" is, in terms of gender politics, a problematic phrase.
2) Peretz is crazy, and TNR sometimes publishes good things.
3) He predicted a victory for the candidate who was polling better at the time.
Wow, that's really fucking impressive. Where o where will we see incisiveness of such profundity ever again?
I never said they were great insights, PTS, they're just things on the first couple pages that came up. You can dig for more if you're so minded. And the general point is -- they're worlds different from the nasty Petey of the last few months.
As far as I'm concerned anyone who calls Yglesias a "Peretz pool boy" has abdicated the right to ever be taken seriously again. Ad hominem snark is all well and good but anyone who resorts to that kind of absurd nanny-nanny-boo-boo-ism clearly has nothing of substance to contribute.
Its kind of disappointing, really, because Petey's prior MO was to throw in more pointed, more relevant and generally higher quality ad hominems only after making at least a good run at presenting a coherent argument.
Petey, if the guy thinks Obama is the better candidate overall, why shouldn't he come out and say that? Saying that Hillary is better on health care but that Obama is better overall seems like the correct way to give the full picture of the situation. It is the full picture of the situation.
OT, but as I type this, the heavy winds started blowing the Texas hail into the glass window. It was an incredibly loud noise, and I ran out of the room. When I came back, the window had broken, with glass strewn across the floor of the grad student lounge.
Petey just shows how when somebody is confident for no reason and acts like an asshole, other people will try to get their approval. Petey wasn't particularly smart, just an arrogant jerk. Rewarding such behavior is simply wrong.
Apostasy IS worse than the banality of evil... I realized that myself just a short time ago, that shit is deep.
There will always be crazy extremist paranoid hardliners, you don't waste your effort trying to convince Cheney or John Bolton of anything, you bust your ass to make sure numbnuts like Peter Beinart and Thomas Friedman don't fucking enable them!
Obviously Petey was effective if his goal was to get in your heads. Even MY who has been attacked by professionals with much bigger sticks must have been somewhat stung since he uses 'trust fund scumbag' to kick off the much deserved 'eat it Petey' post.
Petey stuck out around here because he was a anti-Obama hack in a room full of Obama hacks. We have probably all seen worse anti-Edwards and anti-Clinton tools in various comment sections but Petey struck some type of nerve. There are probably 50 different readers commenting on what is essentially a take down of a person who writes three sentences on a somewhat popular blog.
Petey: "My problem has been with folks like Matt Yglesias and Josh Marshall who have proven willing to lie and smear Clinton to see their faction win."
I'm reminded of Ann Coulter being asked about the lies of George Bush. She replied, "There are no Bush lies."
Well, there are no Clinton lies from her critics, either. Everything she's been accused of she's done - and worse.
Right now, she's playing the extortion game: "Make me VP so I can screw over Obama for the next four years in preparation for my run in 2012 - or I'll screw over the Democratic nomination process with lawsuits and prevent Obama from being President." Typical Clinton attitude.
Fuck her.
I appreciate the sheer ludicrous gall which allows one of the resident Matt Yglesias neurotics to suddenly posit themselves as a beacon of what style and tone reasoned bloggers should take.
And the fact that "trust fund scumbag" entered the Matt Yglesias Pantheon of Tics as much as "Hama Rules" or the inchoate neo-Confederate Jew-fearing rants of Chris Ford or Sailer's IQ & race merry-go-round or (for a time at least) Haim Saban the super-evil founder of the Power Rangers or 'soon we cybernetic humans will defeat you all' is not something to be particularly proud of.
Man, some of you people are a really forgiving bunch - kinda reminds me of those battered wives who don't press charges against their abusive husbands after a ten minute kiss and make up session.
PS... all this tym i hat yu fuld thinkin problemz wuz Bark Obamma but now i no reel enmi iz Ezra Klein KTHXBAI.
Haha, that's really big of Edwards to endorse the winner after the fact. Is there anyone who cares?
Could someone explain to me who "Petey" is and why anyone should give a fuck. Does he have some life apart from commenting on blogs that anyone would care to know about, or that would explain the seemingly disproportionate attention being given to him?
Haha, that's really big of Edwards to endorse the winner after the fact. Is there anyone who cares?
Edwards' endorsement was timed so as to provide the maximum benefit to John Edwards (of course). But it certainly didn't hurt Obama, either. It depends on how you look at it. As endorsements go, his is a significant one, but these things usually serve to influence the media narrative more than changing to people's actual votes. At best, it's a signal to superdelegates to wrap things up. Ironically, Edwards is apparently not a super.
Chris, these people are paying homage to the sheer genius of an Internet troll. Rather than spewing formulaic rants (like "Al"), "Petey" was a rounded character, with well-known motivations. The true genius, however, was in the long periods used to set up "Petey's" alleged meltdown. Even now, many of his dupes look forward to the return of the "Petey" character, thus setting themselves up for another bout of trolling later on (probably from September to December).
I suspect we'll see more of this as other Internet trolls imitate "Petey." I've seen signs of this from "Al," for instance.
I still don't understand how mandating everyone, including vegan hippy organic farmers living off-the-grid, to buy private insurance from private corporations is somehow seen as the epitome of leftist righteousness by so many people.
If Petey had been propagandizing and demonizing for something more obviously righteous all this time, people around here would have a lot more respect for him. Unfortunately, Hillary-care as currently constituted is a more ambiguous pile of bleh that doesn't deserve quite that much passion. Hating Obama for lack of mandates was sort of like a Baptist hating a Methodist for some tiny theological difference...it wasn't just petty, it was crazy.
It is interesting to ask why Petey had uncommon success for a poster with such tendencies. I got here well after the start of his saga, and I never saw much reason to treat him differently from any other such poster. But I gather that up until Iowa, people thought that maybe his very confident predictions were in fact based on something substantial.
I imagine that, after doing all that heavy lifting for Clinton Petey must have strained something. Presumably, he is now a truss fund scumbag. Thus, the desperation for mandated health-care. Those trusses can be awfully expensive...
@minderbender: FAIL. Linking to that VH1 pop-up vid version is not teh Rickroll.
UR DUING IT RONG.
"http://petey.justgotowned.com
Posted by Chris D"
I laughed so damn hard I think I'm hemorrhaging ...
Well done, sir. Well. Done.
Presumably, he is now a truss fund scumbag.
HA HA HA!
"The dude isn't obligated to support the candidate who's best for health care"
Petey:
Quite true.
He didn't have to assume the pro-Clinton stance of Paul Krugman or Elizabeth Edwards.
He could've instead assumed the neutral stance of Jon Cohn or John Edwards.
Cohn was a perfect example of how a "progressive healthcare blogger" who wasn't otherwise enamored of the Clinton campaign could honorably behave.
Seeing as how much of what you've written in the past few months has proven wrong - not to mention you were pretty rude in your wrongness - you really shouldn't proclaim on who behaves honorably. You've been a perfect example of dishonorable behavior and have disgraced your "cause" of universal health care. It will be funny to see what Krugman has to say about Edwards's endorsement. He's been pretty rude to Obama and his supporters also. Unfortunately I don't expect much better from him than Petey who has apparently sunk into dementia.
"John Edwards" has endorsed Barack Obama? That's a good one. One thing I learned growing up as the son of a mill worker is, never underestimate the gullibility of rich kids and high-falutin' city folks. Everyone knows that I died the night of the Iowa Caucuses, and that my corpse has been moldering in this great state ever since. In fact, I've literally left a piece of myself in every one of Iowa's 99 counties.
Anyway, just wanted to pop in to say how concerned I am about this guy claiming to be "John Edwards." Now, listen, Petey, I need your help now more than ever. We still have a shot at this thing. First, you need to kill this guy pretending to be me and put his heart on ice. Then you need to find my head, which I think is in a drainage ditch by Old Highway 75.
Once you have that the rest of the reanimation ritual is pretty straightfor--WHAT? VIVA THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE??? YOU SAID I WAS GOING TO BE THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE, AND NOW THERE ARE PIECES OF MY ROTTING CORPSE STREWN ALL ACROSS THIS GOD-FORSAKEN STATE! YOU LURED ME HERE TO DIE--YOU CAN'T JUST LEAVE ME LIKE THIS! WE HAD A DEAL! YOU'RE WORSE THAN EVIL--YOU'RE AN APOSTATE!!!
Oh, God, I'm sorry y'all had to hear that. (sob) Don't worry about me, I'll be just fine. It's Petey who has to watch his back. The hideous, sentient, decomposing remains of this son of a mill worker never forget a betrayal.
At best, it's a signal to superdelegates to wrap things up. Ironically, Edwards is apparently not a super.
IF Obama gets all of Edwards delegates, the endorsement will be pretty huge because it will mean that the results of the Florida primary become almost even and Obama will be able to wrap up the election by May 20th.
El Cid: "'soon we cybernetic humans will defeat you all' is not something to be particularly proud of."
Yeah, but my obsession is true. Everybody else's isn't.
Well, Don's is true, too - Saban IS a Zionist freak who contributes millions to Israel supporting scumbag politicians.
The main thing is, I'm not a one issue guy like Petey or SLC or Ford or Sailer or Mixner (you left out Mixner, the torture freak). My focus is on foreign policy and national security - and "Terminator" and the Corrs. Petey's is on "trust fund scumbag" and "national health care" - or getting his Intrade money back, I don't know which.
Give credit where credit is due.
"The main thing is, I'm not a one issue guy like Petey ... My focus is on foreign policy and national security"
And my focus tends to be on the social welfare state, though I'm not unconcerned with foreign policy.
Y'know, spending on healthcare, pensions, and education is more than half the federal budget. And we still have an utterly pathetic social welfare state compared to every single other wealthy nation on the planet.
Providing a respectable level of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to the American people hardly seems like a "one issue guy" kinda topic to me.
And FWIW, if you based a left-center electoral coalition on stuff like that, you'd end up with a political environment that produced a long-term foreign policy far more to your liking than the one you're actually going to get, just as a bonus.
"Petey, if the guy thinks Obama is the better candidate overall, why shouldn't he come out and say that?"
It's OK for you to say that. It's OK for Matthew to say that.
But it's not OK for Ezra to say that. He's in a different position than you or Matthew. When you own an issue, sometimes the issue ends up owning you.
My guess is that Jon Cohn felt similar to Ezra about the nomination race, but Cohn correctly understood he couldn't go any further than neutrality, given the way the issue owns him. And that gave him an honorable path to be true to himself and his work.
Ezra chose what seemed to him like an easier path, and lost his honor in the process.
Comments closed May 28, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!
I've been waiting for this!
Posted by Richard Steven Hack | May 14, 2008 7:47 PM