I'm Not Going to Disneyland!

New York magazine has asked a bunch of political bloggers what they're going to do with their time once the election is over. I'm in there along with Markos Moulitsas, Markos Steynos, Ta-Nehisi Coates, Ben Smith, Rachel Sklar, Jim Treacher, Ken Layne, Marc Ambinder, and others.

If this goofy little feature is any guide, don't count on victorious lefties to be your source of humor for the next four years. As Talking Points Memo's Greg Sargent put it, "Whatever short post-election respite there is will quickly be overtaken by the Obama presidency, should he win. This election is just one chapter in a much bigger story — the creation of a true and enduring 21st-century American politics, domestic and international — and I'm looking forward to focusing the site on that." I dare you to tear your eyes off that page!

Adds the Daily Kosser: "But while I may be able to scale back from sixteen-hour workdays, the election won't be the culmination of our efforts, just a waypoint. We have a big year ahead of us, and will likely scale back up in short order in support of the Obama agenda." Looks like somebody's about to finally get that hammer!

Comments

[Episiarch]

We have a big year ahead of us, and will likely scale back up in short order in support of the Obama agenda.

I have decided that I want McCain to win solely for the head-exploding, gnashing of teeth, and rending of garments that will explode forth from the left like the Alien from John Hurt's chest.

[Warren]

This is the shit that drives me nuts. Now of course these people are moonbat insane. Just like the Bush backers of 2000. But here's the part that braids my pubes, why do they keep standing by their guy even as he sells them out issue by issue. You watch, these people will be still waving their Yes We Can flags even as the Obama administration starts dropping bombs.

[Todd]

Look on the bright side, Epislarch. The Daily Show and Countdown and Real Time with Bill Maher will either have to be canceled or have new hosts. I mean Jon Stewart is going to sound like an real prick when he spends his days mocking Mitch McConnell and some random congress-critter from Idaho.

[Pro Libertate]

To quote myself: "Mandate! Mandate! Festivaaaaaal of spending and equitable redistribution!"

[Episiarch]

Look on the bright side, Episiarch

Well, I am. Because if Obama wins, we will see a more slow-motion head-explosion trend as he proceeds to betray his devotees again and again.

So I guess, even though both candidates are losers, no matter who gets elected, I still get a comedy win.

[John-David]

I'm with you, Epi. Although I really would love a McCain victory just to count the number of people who spontaneously combust afterward.

[robc]

he spends his days mocking Mitch McConnell

He may not even have that. Lunsford is doing surprisingly well, considering his baggage (the fact that Elaine Chao (Mrs McConnell) was on the board of directors when some of his corporate baggage occurred probably is a factor).

[Episiarch]

A McCain victory much like the 2000 election would be incredible. Such potential for violence.

[Reinmoose]

Usually it's mildly endearing when people expose their man-crushes - but in this case
*RALPH*

[hamilton]

While I agree with the above posits on likely course of action once Obama is elected, I really just wanted to say that I have added "braids my pubes" to my lexicon.

Thanks Warren!

[joe]

I wonder what it is about Barack Obama that makes his detractors see him as more and more moderate as his elections becomes more and more likely?

[Guy Montag]

New York magazine has asked a bunch of political bloggers what they're going to do with their time once the election is over.

I don't care what they are doing, I am leaving the country.

[Guy Montag]

Sorry for the bad closing tag.

[joe]

Bye! We'll miss you!

[Bingo]

joe:

Probably the same thing that makes some of his supporters see him as the second coming. Blank sheet of paper.

[Todd]

Joe: That's a simple question to answer. Barack is probably the coolest (as in the least emotional) politician of this generation, if not ever. People don't expect mellow, rational-sounding types to be ideologues. Whether that's true or not is up to debate, but we can see that much.

[Guy Montag]

I'm with you, Epi. Although I really would love a McCain victory just to count the number of people who spontaneously combust afterward.

Add me to that list, sort of. I still want the guy I voted for to win, but I am fully aware that it is not going to happen.

[joe]

Bingo,

But why would people project an increasingly moderate image onto that "blank sheet of paper?"

Good answer, Todd: the conflation of ideological moderation with a pleasant demeanor, and extremism with meanness. You see this all the time.

[BDB]

Really Joe? I thought a lot of people on the right are seeing him as the coming Fuherer of LiberalFascism.

That seems to be the line of "thought" John, TallDave, and OLS are taking.

[db]

Well, I am. Because if Obama wins, we will see a more slow-motion head-explosion trend as he proceeds to betray his devotees again and again.

Nah. That's frog-in-a-pot stuff, there. IF it happens slowly enough, you'd see these guys support an invasion of Venezuela if Obama suggested it. It's a matter of subtle changes over time.

[Boston]

I second BDB, i mean have you heard John lately? From what i gather the Senate and House are all going to be marching lockstep with Obama to a glorious workers paradise. Kid is going to get the vapors and have to call off the cotillion

[BDB]

Did anyone else know the word "liberal" has ceased to be used as the scare word for people on the left now?

[John]

BDB,

I do not think he is the coming fuherer. I think he would be flat out dangerous if he goes to war. No question the guy is a con man. The question is is he conning the country or the crazy liberals in his personality cult. I think he is probably conning the the country. The people who will pay a price for that, besides of course the country who will get stuck with higher taxes, a return to the 1970s welfare state and so forth, will be the Democrats in Congress who are running in red districts claiming to be moderates.

The sad fact is that he could easily get away with being a moderate. Repilians like Kos and Sergent really don't have any principles or beliefs beyond power so I seriously doubt they would turn against him under any conditions.

[Mo]

Coates sounds like the most reasonable partisan of the bunch. The hard-core wingers on both sides sound downright scary.

[BDB]

I doubt anyone is going to advocate wage and price controls or gas rationing, John. Some things have just plain been learned since the 1970s.

That said I think he will raise taxes on everyone back to 1990s rates when it is all said and done.

[John]

And remember BDB, the harder Obama fucks you, the more you are showing those Republicans.

[BDB]

The Republicans fucked the country already, may as well let the Democrats have a turn.

But put that stamp of approval on the Bush years John. Don't vote for Barr! Vote "yes" on the last eight years. That'll make them take you seriously!

[BDB]

Don't you live in Maryland? Hell, why NOT vote for Barr then? It's not like McCain is within striking distance in MD.

[joe]

Did anyone else know the word "liberal" has ceased to be used as the scare word for people on the left now?

Progressive didn't work.

Liberal didn't work.

Socialist didn't work.

Now they're up to Marxist. Still not working.

By my count, that leaves communist, Bolshevik, Stalinist, and Maoist.

[joe]

BDB,

John is one of my favorite examples. He spent months telling us that Obama would surrender to terrorists, only to reverse himself and assure us that Obama would continue the Iraq War indefinitely, wanted to launch Operation Pakistani Freedom, and is virtually indistinguishable from Bush and McCain, really.

[BDB]

Tom DeLay used "communist" the other night to describe Obama, joe.

That's right. The guy who gave us the biggest federal government entitlement expansion since the 1960s is warning us of Communism.

[John]

"I doubt anyone is going to advocate wage and price controls or gas rationing, John. Some things have just plain been learned since the 1970s."

That is an interesting question. IF he wins, he will inherit a huge budget deficit and a contracting economy. There just isn't any money to do very much. He can raise taxes all he wants but unless the economy turns around he will run into the Laffer Curve and not get any more money.

They will definitely do card check and do everything they can for the unions. I am not totally convinced that that will do much for the unions. I can't see how gettting rid of secret ballots and letting union thugs go after people to join unions is going to make the unions popular. Yeah, they will certainly screw some people over, but only 9% of the population is unionized. The days of big unions are over and card check isn't bringing them back. The bill will also allow arbitrators to write union contracts and force them on both parties. Again, I don't see how screwing companies won't just cause companies with unions to close down and those without them to do better. If they screw the workers, I don't see how that helps the unions much either. I think card check is nothing but a payoff to a few union bosses and a bad idea but not the end of the economy.

His health plan would be a legit disaster since it would get the government in the business of paying for insurance. Once you start taking money from the government they get control. The end goal is single payer, which they know they can't get, so they will do it step by step. Single payer scares the hell out of me. I do not want the country to end up like the UK.

His appointees will do real mischief in the exectutive department. But that can all be reversed. Ultimately, the problem is that for all the talk of change and hope, none of this shit works. Big government doesn't work and no amount of wishful thinking will change that fact. Further, we already have a 2 trillion dollar government, it is difficult to see how it can get that much bigger. I have said this before but Democratic control of both Congress and the exectutive will quickly devolve into an orgy of looting and infighting of the spoils and likly result in fewer big changes than people think.

[SIV]

IF it happens slowly enough, you'd see these guys support an invasion of Venezuela if Obama suggested it.

Invasion of Venezuela? Naaaa Chavez is getting a taxpayer funded bailout rescue.

[SIV]

If oil prices continue to fall we will get a "price floor" fuel tax.Otherwise there will be no incentive for all that green technology.

[BDB]

Yes John, if only we had the DeLay Congress and the Bush Presidency when spending was controlled and government lived within it's means.

Oh, wait...

Seriously, you're going to vote Republican even though you live in a deep blue state, and given the record of the last eight years? And not vote Barr or stay home?

[joe]

Repilians like Kos and Sergent really don't have any principles or beliefs beyond power...

I don't know what a Repilian is, but I'm pretty sure that supporting insurgent primary challenges to Democrats in the Congressional leadership is the opposite of only being interested in power.

[John]

"John is one of my favorite examples. He spent months telling us that Obama would surrender to terrorists, only to reverse himself and assure us that Obama would continue the Iraq War indefinitely, wanted to launch Operation Pakistani Freedom, and is virtually indistinguishable from Bush and McCain, really."

Joe he can't surrender a war we won. Iraq is over and a nonissue. The Iraqis may ask us to leave in December. That breaks your heart I know. You really wanted it to end in a humiliating defeat, but it is ending in a wimper instead.

Further, I have always said that any President will rise to the responsiblity once in office. Obama changed his mind and voted for FISA because he wants the power. The difference between Obama and McCain is that Obama could actually get a use of force authorization from Congress. McCain would be hard pressed to get one. If Obama did decide to go to war, don't think for a moment you wouldn't be in here singing the national anthem cheering it on. The UN? Fuck the UN we can go anyway. The ironys will be delicous. Will he get us in a war? I don't know but he won't get to decide, the enemy will.

[joe]

BDB | October 31, 2008, 10:49am | #

Tom DeLay used "communist" the other night to describe Obama, joe.

That's right. The guy who gave us the biggest federal government entitlement expansion since the 1960s is warning us of Communism.

You know, Hitler warned about Communism while expanding the size of the state.

You know, the Germans made the Jews wear a certain piece of flair in the 1930s.

[BDB]

Face it, the only thing you have to run on is dark, Biff Tannen-esque "visions" of what you think will be the future. That's your only justification for voting Republican.

[John]

I forgot about all of the giveaways to "renewable energy". That will be a large area of theft. Then of course there is the hairshirt phony religion of global warming. The EPA will declare carbon a pollutant and start regulating everything from how much we drive to when and how we can mow our lawns. That would be radically unpopular and perhaps kill off the religion once and for all.

[BDB]

And the Soviet Union will come back to life and invade us through Mexico.

[joe]

Iraq is over and a nonissue.

There are still 130,000 guys getting shot at ten thousand miles from home. We seem to have a different definition of "nonissue."

Funny how the timing worked out on that - the same conditions that required us to stay in 2004 are just no big deal when the dream of the eternal occupation is dying.

[joe]

If Obama did decide to go to war, don't think for a moment you wouldn't be in here singing the national anthem cheering it on.

That's the difference between us, John: I'd actually have to know more about the situation than the president's party to decide whether of not I supported a war.

[John]

"Face it, the only thing you have to run on is dark, Biff Tannen-esque "visions" of what you think will be the future. That's your only justification for voting Republican."

No. I am old enough to remember the 70s. I also know the kind of goofball anti-terror policy that Clinton had. I don't want people in Justice deciding that the wall between intel and law enforcement should be higher than it has to be. I would rather muddle along with what we have than go further left. The Republicans in Congress pissed me off, but I always supported the war in Iraq and always will and Bush won it for us. He changed tactic on 06 and we won. Beyond that, the war is over. Where do we go from here. Obama offers me absolutely nothing. McCain, at least offers a decent foreign policy and his domestic policy can't be any worse than Obama.

Also, I don't like Obama. He is phony con artist and his supporters give me the creeps. At a personal level I just don't like the guy. McCain is a subborn pig headed jerk, but at least people aren't calling him the mesiah or passing out at his rallies. He is not my first choice but anything is better than that.

[John]

"That's the difference between us, John: I'd actually have to know more about the situation than the president's party to decide whether of not I supported a war."

Bullshit Joe. Kosovo was an illegal war launched on false pretense inserting us into a civil war where we had no interests. It was everything you claim Iraq was, yet you supported it and still do. Of course there were reasons to support Kosovo as there is for every war. You just find those reasons compelling if there is a (D) next to the name of the guy who is making the arguments.

[Liberal Democrat in 1980]

I'm old enough to remember the early 1930s and Herbert Hoover. Ronald Reagan will bring us back to 1932.

[John]

"Funny how the timing worked out on that - the same conditions that required us to stay in 2004 are just no big deal when the dream of the eternal occupation is dying."

Joe, you and I have argued this issue to death. You know that I never supported an eternal occupation and have always beleived that we needed to win and get out, which is exactly what we are doing. If you are going to argue at least be honest. You know good and well I have always said that we should not stay in Iraq perminantly.

[Abdul]

There are still 130,000 guys getting shot at ten thousand miles from home. We seem to have a different definition of "nonissue."

joe, this is hardly fair. The trends in 2004 showed that the violence was ratcheting up. the trends now show that the violence is ratcheting down. Assuming these trends continue, and there's no reason not to, then Iraq really is a non-issue. No one's benefitted from this more than Obama.

[John]

"No one's benefitted from this more than Obama."

That is very true. Surely that makes the left feel somewhat better about not seeing the US defeated.

[P Brooks]

I think he will raise taxes on everyone back to 1990s rates when it is all said and done.

Thereby ushering in a glorious era of prosperity.

And resuscitating, like Lazarus, pets.com.

[J sub D]

Well, I am. Because if Obama wins, we will see a more slow-motion head-explosion trend as he proceeds to betray his devotees again and again.

Usually, the most devoted followers of a national politician are completely ignorant of how difficult implementing substantive change really is. Think 1994 and the Gingrich led takeover of congress by the GOP. Did they ax any departmemts? Did they even send a department execution bill up for a veto? Even with 6 years of a GOP president, they lacked the ability (or desire) to kill the Department of Education.

Bill Clinton promised and half assed accomplished (it was probably the best he could get) ending the prohibition of gays in the military. How's that working out? He also campaigned on fundamental health care reform, tried to deliver with a Dem congressional majority and ushered in the aforementioned Gingrich insurgency win.

This shit ain't as easy as it looks and Barack Changeyguy will soon discover the reality of the situation if he is not already aware of it. His core, most fanatical supporters will feel betrayed because they don't understand that the system was deliberately desingned with sand in the gears.

[joe]

Bullshit Joe. Kosovo was an illegal war launched on false pretense inserting us into a civil war where we had no interests. It was everything you claim Iraq was, yet you supported it and still do.

Oh, Jeebus, are you still yammering about there not being mass graves in Kosovo, even after I've proven you wrong every time you do?

You know what the Kosovo War had that the Iraq War didn't? The authorization of NATO, years of efforts by the president who launched it to solve the problem diplomatically, and a cassus belli that wasn't proven false two months after the bombs started falling.

Now you've proven that YOU will let the party of the president determine how you feel about a war, while I'm still hoping that electing a president who can find his ass with both hands will turn things around in the Afghan War Bush launched.

[P Brooks]

Usually, the most devoted followers of a national politician are completely ignorant of how difficult implementing substantive change really is.

Any body who thinks Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are going to play step'n'fetchit [D'oh!] with President Changelicious is in for an unpleasant surprise.

[J sub D]

I wonder what it is about Barack Obama that makes his detractors see him as more and more moderate as his elections becomes more and more likely?

Every political observer with a three digit IQ knows you run to the left/right extreme in the primaries, sprint to the center in the general election. It involves a lot of misrepresentation but Obama has done less than usual because he has hardly laid out policy proposals (raising the top income tax rate to 41% (massive friggin' "change" there) is pretty much it.

[J sub D]

I don't care what they are doing, I am leaving the country.

Bye! We'll miss you!

What do you mean we? You got a mouse in your pocket?

[joe]

John,

I don't recall what you were saying about the permanent occupation strategy before Malaki made our exit a done deal.

I do recall you making a great deal of noise about how unfair it was for Obama to charge McCain with wanting a 100 year war, on the grounds that he only wanted a 100 year occupation.

And I don't recall you ever once writing favorably about the idea of renouncing permanent bases.

[John]

Joe. I supported the war in Kosovo but strictly speaking it was illegal as hell. The US is still subject to the Kellog Briand Pact which bans war as an insturment of diplomacy. The exceptions to that are contained in the UN charter. They are self defense and actions authorized by the UNSC. Essentially any war that is not in self defense or authorized by the UNSC is illegal technically speaking. There is no legal justification, absent UNSC approval, to invade a sovereign country to stop mass killings, no matter how much you lie about the extent of those killings.

The bombing of Serbia was flat out illegal. Unlike Iraq where you can at least make the colorable argument that the US had authority under the Gulf War I ceasefire resolutions, Kosovo there is no colorable argument that it is legal. You have to say that in some cases the law doesn't apply and organizations like NATO can act any way. The Kosovo war may have been moral, although I am not really sure how bombing the Serbians until they were so miserable they overthrew their government to end the war and allowing the KLA to engage in revenge killings for a solid week before you get ground forces there is exactly that moral, but it was not legal.

[joe]

No, J sub, I'm just happy to see you.

Any body who thinks Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are going to play step'n'fetchit [D'oh!] with President Changelicious is in for an unpleasant surprise.

Obama doesn't seem to be much of a my-way-or-the-highway kind of president, like Carter was, to such bad effect.

I think we're going to see Obama signing a House Democrat health care plan, for example.

[John]

Joe,

We have had any number of discussions on here where I agreed that McCain was nuts to say that we would be in Iraq for 50 years and that the worst thing we could do is make it look like we are not going to leave. That has always been my position.

[joe]

Strictly speaking, John, nobody has jurisdiction over internal affairs. "Legal" and "illegal" refer to conventions and traditions. Kellog-Brandt is dead. I've never been much of an "illegal war" kind of guy. When I criticize the crimes of Bush/Cheney, I'm talking about violations of American law, including treaties like Geneva that were adopted by the Senate and therefore have the force of American law.

International "legality" only matters to the extent that it convers legitimacy upon the operation, which is useful in a political sense. Getting NATO authorization and keeping them on board throughout the war performed this function just as well as a UN authorization. Not having a UN authorization for the war, and not being able to get any pre-existing standing body to authorize it, but rather, using the "Coalition of the Willing" to do so (the people who are for it, support it) denied the action that legitimacy, making it easier for other countries, including eventually members of the Coalition itself, to turn against it. Bad idea.

[joe]

Er, nobody has jurisdiction over INTERNATIONAL affairs. Not internal.

[Pro Libertate]

Kellogg-Briand? Or Kellogg's-brand Rice Krispies?

[joe]

I come not to praise Crackle, but to bury him.

[Pro Libertate]

Yes, of the Krispie triumvirate, I'm more of a Snap guy. His leadership qualities are much greater than Crackle's--friggin' tyrant.

[John]

Kellogg-Briand is not dead Joe. It was incorporated into the UN Charter. Under the UN Charter you can't go to war absent self defense or UNSC authorization. That is well settled international law and even the US pays lipservice to it. Do we follow it? No way. Bush I didn't follow it in Panama and Clinton didn't follow it in Kosovo. But that said, if you are willing to admit that the Iraq war was legal, or if it was illegal no more illegal than any of the most of the other wars the US gets into, then you are not being a hypocrite for supporting the Kosovo War. The idea that NATO somehow makes a war more legal though or even legitimate is bunk. Either the war is a just cause or it is not. Do you think the US should refrain from engaging in an otherwise just war that is in its interest simply becaus NATO or some other international body won't agree?

That of course only was an issue for the first year of the war. As of June 2005, Iraq became a sovereign nation and the US was authorized to be there by UNSC resolution. Whatever illegality or illegitamacy there was in that war ended that day.

[joe]

My complaints about Bush's unilateralism have nothing to do with the ephemeral notion of international legality, but with the practical folly of not having a solid foundation of support/legitimacy, and with the folly of ignoring the advice of important close allies (who turned out to be right), and with the damage it does to our interests to be alienated from them.

The idea that NATO somehow makes a war more legal though or even legitimate is bunk. Good thing I didn't argue that NATO made it more legal, then.

Do you think the US should refrain from engaging in an otherwise just war that is in its interest simply becaus NATO or some other international body won't agree? I think we should think very, very hard about the wisdom of untaking an operation under such circumstances. It's probably not going to be the case that we're just a whole lot smarter than our close, democratic allies; and going forward without them reduces the chance of success. We gotta do what we gotta do, but it should at least give us pause.

As of June 2005, Iraq became a sovereign nation and the US was authorized to be there by UNSC resolution.

Two years. We invaded Iraq in the Spring of 2003. Five and a half years already, longer than WW2.

[Mo]

He can raise taxes all he wants but unless the economy turns around he will run into the Laffer Curve and not get any more money.

Quick question, John. Where are the local peaks in the Laffer Curve? Highly knowledgeable economists don't really have a finger on where they are, but apparently you do.

[LGF Fan]

REMEMBER JIMMY CARTER!!one1!!!1!

Oh wait, a lot of people weren't alive or were children then.

Anyway. TEH CARTER!!!

[ChrisO]

REMEMBER JIMMY CARTER!!one1!!!1!

Oh wait, a lot of people weren't alive or were children then.

Which explains probably a lot about Obama's support. This guy really is set up to be this generation's version of the Peanut Farmer from Plains.

Except that, unlike Carter, Obama has never run a damned thing in his life. I predict the Obama White House (should he win the election) will be a chaotic mess. He and Pelosi will be at each other's throats within months. I look forward to four years of high comedy in return for paying higher taxes--and my household income ain't $250,000, either. That number is complete random BS.

[ChrisO]

Mr Kos says: the election won't be the culmination of our efforts, just a waypoint. We have a big year ahead of us, and will likely scale back up in short order in support of the Obama agenda.

I'm trying to resist the Godwin urges. Really, I'm trying. Oh, fuck it. Even Josef Goebbels wasn't that big a toady.

[Jim Treacher]

If this goofy little feature is any guide, don't count on victorious lefties to be your source of humor for the next four years.

Was there ever any danger of that?

[Kolohe]

The mental image of Warren's braided pubes has left me with the inability to finish my lunch.