Barack Obama

Obamanation to Welch: You Lie, Boy!

|

Been a good while since I got any fun hate mail, and no one else seems to be blogging today, so let's see what some of our friends out there thought about my Obama=liar post from yesterday (the first one, I mean). The names have been withheld to protect the guilty:

Subject: No, you lie!

So the president is lying when he:

Uses the word "report" instead of "projects"  (Can't one report on ones projections?)

Uses the phrase "reducing the deficit" instead of "cutting spending"  (if you cut spending and do nothing else, aren't you reducing the deficit?)

I dunno, I GUESS there's a vague resemblance

Refers to the CBO projections (which in your view is a lie because what's in the bill might not actually happen.  Couldn't that be said of all bills?)

Do you realize how petty you look?  You're the one playing word games.  And to call the guy a liar based on your dissatisfaction with his phraseology is truly pathetic.

But at least with you, you can tell a book by its cover.  You look like a damn 50s throw-back, a hard-core nerd in serious need of a pocket protector.  Which is exactly what the conservative "movement" is – a bunch of losers stuck in the past.

*

Subject: Show The President some RESPECT

I promise to be more respectful next time

Of course you are entitled to your opinion of President Obama's handling of the current health care crisis.  Call it stating the facts.  Call it whatever you want.  But the 'facts' can be laid out without the inclusion of ridiculous illustrations and without the disrespectful name calling.  You are splitting hairs when you take issue with the use of the word 'reports' as opposed to 'projects.'

How misguided that you would expect every American to study Peter Suderman's commentary before listening to 'a word The President says.'  I feel sorry for those of you who are so closed minded to this president you actually would encourage the American public not to listen to him.  God forbid we should have an informed electorate.  You're missing the boat and history will prove it.

*

Subject: David harney

You lie!

  I don't know who/what "David harney" is, either.

Advertisement

NEXT: Markets, Not Mandates

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Since that is a completely dumb ass e-mail, let me highjack the thread by saying that Tom Petty is the most underappreciated figure in rock and roll history. If music critics had any taste and were not dominated by boomer yuppie obsessed with Bruce Sprinsteen’s faux populism, Tom Petty would be reverred and Springsteen would be considered what he is; Bon Jovi without the good looks and maddeningly catchy tunes.

    1. Tom Petty is underappreciated, and DESERVES to be underappreciated.

      /snark

      Seriously, I like Tom Petty’s one song. The problem is all his songs sound the same, just different (albeit intelligent and interesting) lyrics.

      1. I don’t think they do. But there is no accounting for taste. Even if he is not your favorite, you have to admit he is really everything the critics claim Bruce Springsteen is.

        1. Will give you that Petty is better than Springsteen, who is seriously overrated IMO

        2. Agree — Petty > Springsteen

          1. Totally a Tom Petty fan here too. Though my favorite have to be the Traveling Wilburys. Great music there. Tweeter and the Monkey Man speaks to me about the futility of the War on Drugs.

            1. Tom Petty is pretty good. I think of him as Bob Dylan lite.

              1. Petty doesn’t look too good for a 25 year-old.

        3. The comparison of Petty to Springsteen here makes no sense. Tom Petty writes great, melodic jangle-pop in the spirit of the Byrds. They’re great, fun songs, but they don’t mean much lyrically, and I don’t think he intends them to.
          Springsteen has tried throughout his career to tackle lots of major issues – even if you think he’s failed, he’s going for something totally different than Petty. His music has connected to people’s lives (just because you don’t agree with his liberal politics doesn’t mean that connection is “faux” populism) in a way that Petty hasn’t even striven for. So it’s really not fair to say that Petty is “everything the critics” say Bruce is, because they’re very different. I love listening to them both, and for very different reasons.

      2. His Mudcrutch project was pretty good, but he was intentionally sidelining himself then.

    2. I’ve never owned any Petty, but I can’t say that I entirely disagree with you. Come to think of it, I’ve never owned any Springsteen or Bon Jovi, either. In terms of record sales, concert revenue, and the artists who have chosen to collaborate with Petty, tho, I’m not sure he’s too unappreciated.

      Anyway, I think that John Fogerty is the most unappreciated figure in Rock. I don’t care how appreciated he is, it ain’t enough. He belongs up there with Chuck Berry, Buddy Holly, Little Richard…

      1. Fogerty is pretty high on the list. Certainly CCR is the most underrated band of the 1960s. Another good example of music critic idiocy. Think about the fawning treatment that Crosby Stills Nash and Young recieved. Yet, in retrospect CSNY isn’t fit to tune Fogerty’s guitar. But CSNY wrote liberal pap that the critics wanted to hear. Where Fogerty wrote real music that went beyond pap. “Fortuenate Son” is the best anti-war song ever written. But, it also points the finger at the rich kids who got deferements many of whom later became music critics.

      2. Little Richard ain’t “up there” any more than Jerry Lee Lewis is.

        Under appreciated? Robbie Robertson, Leon Russell, Roy Orbison.

        1. It will take a generation to pass before we grasp Miley Cyrus’ musical genius.

          1. It’s not her musical genius that I want to grasp!

              1. EEEWWW! That skank is ugly!

            1. I wonder if she likes cigars…

              1. WillIAM!!! William Harcourt Fenton Mudd Clinton!!! GET your worthless pudgy gray-haired ass back home RIGHT THIS FUCKING INSTANT!!!

                1. A good Star Trek reference.

        2. Robertson gravy trained off of Levon Helm, Garth Hudson, Richard Manuel and Rick Danko. The Band records they did in the 80s and 90s without Robertson were really good. Better than any of Robertson’s solo work. I am definitely in the Levon Helm camp on the whole “who made The Band great” debate.

        3. The problem with arguments about who is the most “underrated” or “under-appreciated” musician out there is that you can never reach a consensus or even a general majority agreement. If everybody concluded that an artist is “underrated”, then they no longer are, by definition.

          Tom Petty is a creative songwriter whose music is not particularly accessible to some people, mostly because his voice is kind of annoying and his style is a bit more mellow and safe than what most people want out of their rock-and-roll these days. End of story.

          1. “his style is a bit more mellow and safe than what most people want out of their rock-and-roll these days”

            I am not sure what “mellow and safe” mean. But I think it involves knowing how to play your insturment in the proper key.

          2. The real problem is that everyone else is always wrong to some extent or another.

          3. The problem with arguments about who is the most “underrated” or “under-appreciated” musician out there is that you can never reach a consensus or even a general majority agreement.

            No the problem with arguments about the most unappreciated or underrated musician is that by definition none of us would have heard of the most underrated or unappreciated musician.

            1. Indeed. It is better to have been underrated than never to have been rated at all.

        4. J sub,
          I love you like my brother. And I’d say that even if I wasn’t an only child. But Jerry Lee Lewis was a god on the keyboard.

        5. John Prine. By far, one of the most underrated musical gems in the lot.

      3. I’ve never owned any Springsteen or Bon Jovi

        Ok now that is pure funny. To compare Jovi with Springsteen is not only completely fair and accurate but also contradicts the critical acclaim that has been showered on the undeserving Bruce.

    3. The one song I really liked by him is ‘love is a long road’. But most of his stuff for some strange reason reminds me of Bob Dylan, not even the music really, but something about Petty…

    4. I like Tom Petty, but he became a multizillionaire selling his music. I’m not sure what it means to be under appreciated when you make more money from your music than any ten regular people make in a life time.

    5. That was a truly impressive thread jack, right out of the gate too.

    6. Maybe if Tom Petty could write a song that wasn’t about Marijuana, you’d have a point.

  2. That Daffy Duck mutant thing is awesome. Very well suited to an animated gif too.

  3. That’s “Har-NAY” not “Har-NEE”

  4. But at least with you, you can tell a book by its cover. You look like a damn 50s throw-back, a hard-core nerd in serious need of a pocket protector. Which is exactly what the conservative “movement” is ? a bunch of losers stuck in the past.

    To be fair, Matt DOES like a bit like a 50s nerd with those glasses, though I’m guessing he’s going with either ironic or “hip to be square” with that look — but he sure as fuck doesn’t SOUND like a 50s conservative.

    The book is nothing like the cover might suggest in this case.

  5. That history-will-erase-you theme is quite the fixture with Obama and his Youth, innit?

    Good days ahead.

  6. I’m sympathetic to those that say Matt’s critique was petty and, in the end, small potatoes. It was. While the bill isn’t everything a southpaw’s wet dream would be, it’s clearly enough to lay the groundwork for an eventual federal annexation of the entire health care industry. That’s the maguffin here.

  7. “Refers to the CBO projections (which in your view is a lie because what’s in the bill might not actually happen. Couldn’t that be said of all bills?)”

    Ah No. Some bills actually do things and make the cuts in spending or increases in spending they claim to make right now. Other bills live in out years, which is another way of saying, we will get to it some day.

    I guess they don’t teach basic civics in schools these days. What an amazingly stupid statement. Don’t all bills assume magical cuts in future spending?

  8. LEAVE BARACK ALONE! he’ trying his hardest…

  9. My all-time favorite piece of hate mail came after I’d written a story about working on a phone sex line and getting fired my first night; a few days after the story was published I got a handwritten letter from a woman who insisted I was a liar, on the grounds that nobody who worked for my horrible sleazy publication could POSSIBLY be incompetent at phone sex or any other brand of whoredom. In the margins she’d scrawled a bunch of comments like “WOW! CAN’T FAKE IT!!!” and “YOUR PAPER HIRES PERVOS!” and she signed the letter “Anonymous” although she wrote her real name and return address on the envelope.

    I wanted to send her a thank-you note but my boss wouldn’t let me, so I contented myself with a dramatic newsroom reading of the letter, complete with sweeping gestures and different voices for different insults. My colleagues loved it. And I still have that letter today.

    1. Honestly, I don’t find the proposition that a journalist is by definition an effective whore to be that out of line.

      1. Her actual complaint had to do with the sexually explicit personal ads the paper ran; I seriously think she thought the staff acted out every act described in those ads before they went to print. You know, “TO DO TODAY: Harass state attorney general; get copy of last year’s municipal budget; have three-way with two same-sex farm animals, ten feet of garden hose and a potato peeler, to make sure the specific act described is biologically plausible.”

        How the hell we had time to get the actual damn paper out remains a mystery.

        1. But of course she read the paper often enough to not only know about the ads but also read your article on being a phone sex operator. I mean if she were really that appalled by the whole thing, she might want to try you know not reading the paper much less all those ads.

          1. And if she really wanted to remain anonymous, she should’ve tried NOT writing her name and address on the envelope. However, I suspect her problems went FAR beyond indignation over my alleged dishonesty in writing that working the phone sex line was not something I felt “comfortable” doing.

            1. I don’t know how anyone could be a phone sex operator. How could you do that without busting out laughing?

              1. A few times I DID burst out laughing, like the time the guy wanted to hear me being spanked and all I could think to do was draw my (denim-clad) knee up near the phone receiver and start smacking the hell out of it. I actually felt bad about that, though. Seriously: how horrible must it be for a guy to call a phone sex line with a fairly standard request, and have the phone sex operator start laughing at him?

                Poor guy.

                1. Never understood throwing money away to a stranger over the phone when there is a perfectly good nudie bar down the street to throw money away and at the very least get a face full of titty.

                  1. Because you’re not allowed to whack off in a strip club. As someone who worked as a stripper to pay for college, I of all people know THAT.

                    1. And phone sex is a lot cheaper. Stripers do not come cheap. Table dances add up quick.

                    2. As do the peppermint candies the stripers produce.

                    3. Who the fuck leaves the house for porn anymore? I mean, besides Germans.

                    4. You vant to touch my monkey? TOUCH IT!

                    5. Well, you obviously worked in ones more upscale than I patronized.

        2. Potato peeler? Ohhh you naughty girl! 😉

    2. Got a link to that story, Jennifer? Sounds like a hilarious read.

      1. It’s not online at the original paper, because in those days the policy was to take stuff down after two months. I archived it on my blog, however:

        http://feralgenius.blogspot.co…..chive.html

  10. I love how the same people who ran around screaming “chimpy mcbushitler” for 8 years now are appalled at the “disrespectful name calling of our President”. I mean Jesus Christ, can these people be more unself aware?

    1. Hypocrisy knows no bounds.

      1. It’s okay if WE do it. You fuckers one cunt-hair right-of-center, though, don’t get those privileges.

    2. I know. Their narcissism seemingly knows no bounds. It’s frightening. Come next November the rage coming from the left is gonna be a sight to behold. Getcha popcorn ready!

      1. Getcha popcorn ready!

        I will!

        1. What up, T.O.? You were pretty quiet this season. Where you playin’ next year?

  11. “you actually would encourage the American public not to listen to him. God forbid we should have an informed electorate”

    I would definitely encourage people to not listen to him, unless they are well aware already that everything that comes out of his mouth is some form of double speak or a blatant lie.
    However I would encourage all to pay attention to what he ‘is doing’.

    I agree that we have a great need for an informed electorate. When we get that, we will no longer have to worry about listening to buffoons like Obama and Pelosi in public office, they will all be voted out.

    1. It’s not that the electorate is uninformed — though they are — it’s that they’re fucking stupid. No amount of informing them is going to get rid of the inherent problems of democracy. The only solution is finding a way to limit the power of those the idiots elect.

      1. “The only solution is finding a way to limit the power of those the idiots elect.”

        We tried that. It didn’t work. Remember, it’s just a damn piece of paper.

        1. “But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain ? that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.” -~ Lysander Spooner

          1. Sort of illogical, since it’s comparing a state that is known (and which has problems) to an unknown state which could be better or worse. It’s entirely possible that we would be much worse off without the Constitution.

            1. Every news headline that comes out of Britain in the past several years pretty much makes the case for your argument.

      2. “The only solution is finding a way to limit the power of those the idiots elect”

        I think the only way we can do that is to make them afraid of us, and the only way to do that is to get most of the voters informed enough that they start to realize just how much they are being screwed over, and then angry enough to do something about it. I don’t think that it is that most of the people are stupid, although there are many that are. I think the problem with the majority is that they don’t care. They are too busy worrying about how many new HD cable channels they can get, their kids next soccer game, what new I-POD is coming out, what new reality show is on TV, to care, until one day: HR suddenly informs them that their pay check will be much smaller next week. Then they are like, WTF? what new tax increase?, for what? I didn’t want that, how did this happen?

      3. Well, some of the electorate is stupid, but a lot of it is informed, but have starting premises that result in the health care bill.

        Specifically, at least 60 Senators appear to have the premise that “the purpose of government is to do good things, so let’s have them run health care”.

        If your starting premise is “the purpose of government is to prevent the initiation of force”, then a whole different set of actions and outcomes seems desirable.

      4. The founders weren’t big fans pure democracy, that’s why they opted for a constitutional republican form of government. They implemented the solution and for the reasons you write of. Since the original solution didn’t work, because we didn’t hold them to account, are you suggesting a new approach?

        If so I’d like to suggest shock collars of the type used to keep dogs from wandering off. Sensors and small microprocessors can be used to determine each action the politician engages in, those not constitutional would result in a nice healthy shock.

        Dogs are smarter than politicians so it may take them a little longer to learn, but once they’re conditioned to associate the unpleasant jolt with their criminal behavior, it should be possible to take the collars off from time to time and let them run around a bit.

  12. All I have to say is if there is one thing I miss about writing opinion pieces, it’s the hate mail. The though of its authors hunched over their keyboards, red in the face and sputtering with inchoate rage warms my heart in a way that I haven’t been able to replicate with any means short of a combination of valium, hot cocoa spiked with peppermint schnapps, and half a dozen playful kittens.

  13. God forbid we should have an informed electorate.

    Yo! Dipshit!

    Having an informed electorate means that you get your information from *more* than one source, specifically being outside the official story given to you by your masters. Try it sometime whydoncha?

  14. Matt and his pocket protector leading the charge in the conservative movement. Maybe someone needs to glance at the book’s cover before rushing to judge the book to avoid looking like a dildo.

  15. By the way, what ever happened to the comedic stylings of Lefiti?

    I actually miss him and his impersonator(s).

    1. He calls himself Morriss now. He changes his handle every few months so that people will read his stuff instead of skipping over it.

      1. You are all libertard right-wing nitwits blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

        Get that out the way now.

  16. It’s comforting to know that hate mail you get from writing about presidential politics differs little from hate mail you get regarding a phone sex job or hate mail you get regarding things you say about pitching statistics.

    1. Voros, did anyone ever call you a DIPShit? Because I just thought of it, and man, I think that’s really clever!

      Also — I’ll be doing a week in Arizona again this March, if you’re still around & up for a game or two.

      1. Sure, but we need to get better organized this time around. I realize “organization” isn’t exactly a hallmark strength of us libertarian types, but let’s push the envelope. 🙂

        1. And I can’t recall anyone ever using that phrase. I got compared to Rasputin once and accused of being Aaron Sele another time.

      2. Somehow I think there is a history behind these remarks.

        1. Google me, I’m like crazy famous!!

          🙂

          1. Matt’s joke explained here.

  17. A quick Google search is inconclusive as to whether “David harney” is a Steve Smith alias, a rough translation of rape in Steve’s native tongue, or simply his next target. None of the image search results were horrifying enough to be any of the above, so maybe it will be a merry Christmas after all, Matt.

    1. If I am not mistaken “rape” in Steve Smith’s native tongue is “leffiti”

    2. Possibly a reference to David Harsanyi?

  18. And to call the guy a liar based on your dissatisfaction with his phraseology is truly pathetic.

    Hmmm- if the “phraseology” in question contradicts the truth, I’m pretty sure that makes it a textbook example of a lie.

  19. You look like a damn 50s throw-back, a hard-core nerd in serious need of a pocket protector. Which is exactly what the conservative “movement” is ? a bunch of losers stuck in the past.

    Yeah what is up with your wardrobe and choice of eye-ware?

    I really think Matt’s Archie wardrobe is by far the most unappreciated of the Reason Staff. It is always about Nicks black leather jacket and rock t-shirt. What sort of imagination does that take? Matt has to work to get that look.

  20. we need to get better organized this time around.

    I hear Twitter is quite useful for organizing spontaneous events.

  21. Matt is Richie Cunningham to Nick’s Arthur Fonzarelli

    1. Nick’s even got the cool jacket

  22. FWIW:

    http://www.salon.com/news/opin…..index.html

    Good points made, I think. Please reply without ad hominem attacks. Please?

    Patrick Meighan
    Culver City, CA

  23. The critics who are taking you to task are not “Obamanation”. Glenn Greenwald, for one, has spent thousands of words criticizing Obama for continuing Bush’s detention policies. But Greenwald is also a critic of yellow journalism, which you clearly exhibited yesterday:
    ___________________________________

    just five months ago, the very same Matt Welch — who yesterday accused Obama of telling a “lie” all because he cited a CBO “report” as authoritative — himself praised the “expert feedback” of the “nonpartisan” CBO to warn that Obama’s health care plan would increase deficits

    http://www.salon.com/news/heal…../24/reason
    _______________________________

    By doubling down instead of admitting your error, you simply demonstrate that you are quite comfortable playing the blind partisan.

    Again, you have to wonder about the state of this nation when the Editor-in-Chief of “Reason” magazine is himself a master of doublethink.

  24. I’m not good at judging the quality of journalism, but I’m frankly saddened and unsurprised by the nature of that letter. Whenever a particular group gets in power, after many years of being out of power, the become vicious to anyone who dares criticize them. Democrats felt the lash of Republicans when the latter were in power, now it is vice versa. The interesting thing is that libertarians are now included as part of their “enemy camp”. It’s just typical primate stuff: “My Tribe is better than yours.”

    I myself, as a libertarian, am going to wait a year or two for things to chill out; by then we can have a sane discussion with the Democrats. Until then, I yield the spotlight out of political convenience. I myself doubt whether the bill will lower costs in any sustainable way, but I’ll wait. I’ll watch. Just observe how it all plays out.

    Meanwhile, I’ll plot my antiwar activities.

  25. i love how a message that says nothing stronger than that you “missed the boat” qualifies as “hate mail.” you poor boy.

  26. Tristan, you persecution narrative may get you through yet another cold, lonely night, but it makes little sense.

    Liberals don’t care about Libertarians. They don’t think that they are in any way relevant, or threatening. They generally think that they’re insecure, Conservative minded fan-boys who have little use for the Religious Right. Welch doesn’t help this cause, particularly when he opposes Universal Health Care, but goes onto to debunk Conservative objections to it, and leeched off of the French system because he thinks it’s better. I can’t believe that he even wrote a post admitting to all of that as the editor of a Libertarian rag.

    Such thinking effectively makes him a joke to Liberals, Conservatives and Libertarians. However, he seems to want it that way. It probably makes him feel rebellious, which is what most of this is about.

    You only have to look at how vein he is. He’s all style, and no substance.

    Welch comes across as confused, and so desperate to be liked that he ends up trying to play all sides from all sides. It has failed. He has lost any integrity that he imagined he had because of that cognitive dissonance.

    Any Libertarian that cares about furthering their cause has to realize that Welch is not helping you reach that goal. In my more cynical moments I wonder if Matt is a plant sent to neuter Libertarian talking points. It’s difficult to imagine why he would be so clumsy otherwise.

    So, while it is convenient for you to reduce every objection to your putrid political philosophy as some kind viscous attempt at suppressing dissent, you’re really just feeling sorry for yourself.

    The objections to Welch’s comments were because he was practicing shoddy, yellow journalism. No one came to him looking for a fight.

    But this kind of rhetoric is what we’ve come to expect from disgruntled Libertarians. The more visible you make yourselves, the east liked you are. Do you see a pattern?

    If any of you want to be taken seriously, then you have to clean your own house. No one wants to hear advice from ideological pundits who don’t even adhere to their own principles, and you can’t cry abuse when you abuse others to get attention.

    Yes, poor Libertarians. No one wants to play with them. Obviously, you don’t understand why, and will likely never understand why.

  27. “You only have to look at how vein he is”
    ——-
    Anyone interested in a good ol’ tow?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.